The International Political Significance of China's Rise

China's rise in international politics is prompting various predictions and debates. To what extent will China's rise continue? Will China truly establish itself as the undisputed leading power, surpassing the United States? Specifically, will China pursue a challenge to the U.S.-led world order and seek to alter it? In relation to this, will China pursue a leadership in international politics different from that of the United States? China stands at the center of the debate on the reshaping of the world order. For instance, Martin Jacques, author of the international bestseller When China Rules the World, predicted that China would pursue cultural hegemony and influence, unlike the expansive hegemonic ambitions of Europe and the United States. Conversely, Robert Kelly, former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, focused on China's expansive hegemonic ambitions, foreseeing China's unilateral dominance in East Asia.

Regardless of the perspectives on the questions discussed above, China's rise has a global ripple effect, to the extent that international politics cannot be discussed without considering China. In other words, China exerts immense influence across all domains of international politics, including security, economy, and the environment. Therefore, the core concern regarding China's rise is how it will reshape the world order with its strategic objectives.

In this context, this paper aims to explore the potential international political significance of China's rise through the lens of the challenges facing humanity. While the rise of a great power can hold significant meaning for that nation's history, from an international political perspective, the possibility and nature of reshaping the existing order due to power transitions are as important as who the hegemonic power is. This is why "American hegemony" is as significant in international political history as "Hegemonic America" (Ruggie 1982). Therefore, the international political significance of China's rise is intrinsically linked to what solutions and institutional changes China will offer in response to the global challenges humanity faces.

What, then, are the challenges facing humanity on a global scale? Although debatable, there is an argument that the world is facing an existential threat for the first time in human history. This is because the security dilemma involving life-or-death competition between states, sustainable economic development, and environmental and climate issues threatening the survival of the planet have reached a critical point. In other words, major powers are engaged in intense security competition in regions such as the Middle East, Eastern Europe, the East China Sea, and the South China Sea. The global economy has experienced ups and downs for the past two decades, and a sustainable economic development model has yet to be found. Environmental and climate issues carry the potential for global annihilation. The rapid growth of emerging economies such as China, India, and Brazil has contributed to the amplification and reproduction of these phenomena, regardless of the goodwill of individual nations.

The theory of global annihilation implies that without a fundamental reshaping of the world order, global survival cannot be guaranteed, irrespective of the rise and fall of individual political units, including states. The severity of the security, economic, environmental, and climate crises facing the globe far exceeds the question of "who will become the hegemonic power." This signifies that the existing state-sovereignty system, which has persisted for nearly 400 years, has reached its limits in terms of problem-solving capacity. In other words, while the state-sovereignty system has dealt with the aforementioned security, economic, environmental, and climate issues through bilateral agreements between states and multilateral international organizations, these problem-solving methods are no longer effective in addressing global challenges. The crisis of global annihilation is not merely a policy failure of a specific country but rather a testament to the limitations of the state-sovereignty system, which institutionalizes the pursuit of self-interested national interests by states.

Therefore, the core of the discussion on reshaping the world order in light of China's rise lies in the change and reform of the state-sovereignty system. The reason for focusing on China's role in reshaping the world order is precisely here. In other words, the practical content that can give China's rise historical significance in international politics is whether China has a vision for responding to the call for systemic change, and through what leadership, it will translate that vision into policy.

It is unlikely that the state-sovereignty system will end in the next 10-20 years. Therefore, the key issue will be the change in its operational and functional principles based on the existing state-sovereignty system. Considering three possible scenarios for the reform of the world order's operation and principles, they are as follows. First, a "triumvirate" division of the world among the United States, Europe, and China, based on regions. The second scenario is "legal institutionalization of the world order and establishment of supranational authority." The EU can serve as a close example of this. The EU is a supranational authority that operates through consultation between key states like Germany and its member states. The second scenario envisions the expansion of this EU operational principle to a global level. It is based on operational principles of a multi-layered authority system where states and supranational authorities maintain checks and balances. The core is the establishment of issue-specific supranational authorities.

Finally, there is the "world government theory." In fact, the "world government theory" has recently seen a resurgence. After being actively discussed at the end of World War II and fading after the Cold War (1945-1950), the "world government theory" has been examined from various angles over the past 15 years and is gaining attention as a new alternative order (Cabrera 2010, 2015). Currently, the "world government theory" is discussed not as a single model but across multiple layers. Various competing models of "world government" are being proposed, ranging from a world government holding global political and economic power (Wendt 2003), to a world government with authority solely over the management of weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear weapons (Campbell 2003), a world government in the form of a confederation like the United States (Deudney 2007; Rodrik 2000), and a world government governing through a "Global Parliamentary Assembly" representing global citizenry (Held 2004; Nussbaum 2006).

Which of these three scenarios for reshaping the world order will China pursue in the 21st century? Which scenario can effectively resolve the inherent problems of the state-sovereignty system while sustaining global common prosperity? If China were to pursue the establishment of issue-specific supranational authorities with the United States, Europe, and others, what contributions could China make, and what form of leadership would it create and pursue?

It is uncertain whether China is the right candidate to reform the state-sovereignty system at this juncture, as obstacles and possibilities coexist. As evidenced by China's frequent territorial disputes, China is, in a sense, still sovereignty-oriented. China may be attempting to construct a mirage of full sovereignty in an era of interdependent globalization.

On the other hand, the fact that China did not originate the modern state-sovereignty system implies that its historical attachment to this institution may not be strong. China was incorporated into the state-sovereignty system by European powers in the late 19th century. Since its incorporation into the European international order in the late 19th century, China has undergone numerous significant and minor changes, including the collapse of its dynasty, the emergence and establishment of the communist regime, and the transition to a Chinese-style socialism after its opening up, adapting to, resisting, challenging, and attempting to establish hegemony within the state-sovereignty system. An example of adaptation is the beginning of modern Chinese international relations, marked by the "collapse of the dynastic system and tribute system - recognition of 'one state, one sovereignty.'" Resistance and challenges include China's non-alignment policy, its role as a leader of the Third World, and its attempts at Maoist socialist alternatives and internationalization against capitalism. Recent China can be seen as attempting to establish hegemony. Evidence for this can be found in China's G-2 activities, the establishment of a new type of major power relationship with the United States, military buildup (strengthening naval power), internationalization of the Renminbi, the Belt and Road Initiative, the institutionalization of alternative economic systems through the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the New Development Bank, Chinese-style development aid, and securing a bridgehead in Central Asia through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (Shin Sung-ho 2014; Lee 2015). As a result of these activities and outcomes, China is not free from global military security, economic, environmental, and climate issues, and is both a cause and a subject of these problems. Therefore, it can be argued that China has consistently maintained a tense relationship with the modern state-sovereignty system, meaning that China has historically experienced both victimhood and benefit from the existing order.

As discussed, the international political significance of China's rise at the dawn of the 21st century depends on whether China can propose and implement operational and functional principles for an alternative world order that transcends the existing state-sovereignty system. Therefore, a systematic analysis of the world order discourse being discussed within China can provide clues for gauging the future of the world order. Does the discourse on reshaping the world order in China aim to build and reshape an alternative world order? Or does it merely focus on how China can become a hegemonic power within the existing state-sovereignty system and how to use that acquired hegemony? ■

Author

Lee Yong-wook_ Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Korea University. He majored in East Asian Studies at the University of Kansas and received his Ph.D. in International Politics from the University of Southern California. His main research areas include international political economy, constructivism, East Asian regional cooperation and financial regionalism, and the multilateral trade order. His books and edited volumes include "Complex Transformation of the East Asian Regional Order and Korea's Strategy" (2014, co-edited), "Plurality of International Political Science Methodology" (2014, co-edited), and "China's Rise and Regional Integration in East Asia: Hegemony or Community?" (2014, co-authored).

<China Briefing> is a briefing series designed to provide insights through in-depth analysis of key China-related issues by various experts. Please cite the source when quoting.

EAI is an independent research institution, independent of any partisan interests. The claims and opinions expressed in reports, journals, and books published by EAI are not related to EAI and are solely the views of the respective authors.