Is 'China threat' still haunting Asia?

Is 'China threat' still haunting Asia?

By Rizal Sukma

JAKARTA (JP): Recently, Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir
Mohamad declared that his country no longer sees China as a
political or military threat. Instead, he regarded China as an
economic opportunity. According to Mahathir, China should be seen
as a partner in the pursuit of regional peace and prosperity.

He also said that nobody nowadays would be interested in
entertaining the view that China was bent on exporting its
communist ideology. Therefore, he called for a fundamental review
of the so-called "China threat" in the Asia-Pacific region (The
Jakarta Post, Jan. 24, 1995).

Mahathir's call is in fact not new since many scholars have
raised this issue on many occasions. However, as far as China-
Southeast Asia relations are concerned, it can be said that
Mahathir's remark was a "great leap forward." It shows a
significant shift in Malaysia's strategic perception which was
previously imbued with suspicion towards China.

If the remark was genuine and not a polite diplomatic
rhetoric, then it shows a sincere hope from a Southeast Asian
leader that Sino-Southeast Asian relations should be framed into
a new, better psychological state of mind.

The most important question, then, is how should the question
of the "China threat" be fundamentally reviewed as suggested by
Mahathir? Such a question not only begs a critical examination of
the nature of the "China threat" itself, but also requires the
promotion of greater transparency in China's intentions and
objectives towards Southeast Asia.

The ill-defined "China threat" concept and uncertainties about
China's future intentions among Southeast Asian countries have
for a long time complicated China's relationships with regional
countries.

Up to now, the debate on the nature of the "China threat" has
not been satisfactorily resolved. Two opposing views are readily
discernible when it comes to the question whether a strong China
would pose a threat to the region.

One view strongly maintains that as China grows strong, it
would pose a serious danger to the region, both in terms of
military and economic threat. The proponents of this view believe
that China would never alter its ambition to dominate all aspects
of life in Southeast Asia.

To support their view, the proponents of the "China threat
theory" cite historical evidence to suggest that in the past,
China had attempted hegemonic practices by supporting "war of
national liberations" of the communist parties in this regions.
Only the discrepancy between China's capability and its ambiguous
goal failed the Chinese strategy. Therefore, the argument goes,
if a weak China had tried to dominate the region, then a strong
China would no doubt give another try to accomplish what it could
not do in the past.

China's involvement in territorial disputes in the South China
Sea stands as another, more contemporary, argument put forward by
the proponents of the "China threat theory" in warning the region
of the Chinese danger. The issue provides a convenient ground
upon which the judgment that China is a country likely to resort
to force in handling disputes with other countries can be
founded.

The South China Sea was a scene of armed clash between China
and Vietnam in 1988. Based on this evidence, it is argued that to
defend its interests China might try another military blow to
strengthen its claim in the dispute.

On the other hand, there is a growing body of opinion which
argues that China is no longer a threat to the region. This view
argues that a reform-oriented China, as it is now, would be
committed to establishing a peaceful environment in Southeast
Asia.

As China strives for economic development at home, good and
cooperative relations with Southeast Asian countries would be the
main priority of China's foreign policy. Moreover, the proponents
of this view argue, China's integration into the web of
multilateral economic cooperation would strengthen "the complex
interdependence" between China and the region. Theoretically,
complex interdependence would reduce the opportunity for war, and
increase the chance for peace.

Based on such a line of thinking, the second view maintains
that China is indeed an economic asset. It believes that greater
cooperation, without suspicion, between China and Southeast Asian
countries would be in the interests of both sides.

Recent surges in economic exchanges between China and Asian
countries, for example, are often cited as clear evidence that
China and Southeast Asia are in fact bound to foster their common
economic interests. If Southeast Asian countries want to see
China remains committed to a peaceful foreign policy, the
argument goes, they should promote such cooperation further.
Mahathir's call is perhaps based on such an assessment and that
to alienate China is not a viable option.

Such differing views are not easily reconciled. For many in
Southeast Asia, history is still regarded as a useful guideline
in dealing with China. However, as Mahathir suggested, it should
be noted that clinging to past will not always help the path
towards a better future.

An excessive suspicion of China on the part of Southeast Asian
countries would hamper positive efforts to establish closer
relations between the two. China is no doubt part of the Asian
community and therefore, it should be dragged into the region's
constructive activities.

From the Chinese side, if it really wants to foster peaceful
relations with Southeast Asia, a greater transparency is
required. Many in Southeast capitals have not had a clear idea of
where China is heading. China's military build-up is one, but a
significant issue in this regard. A clearer articulation of its
position with regard to the idea of greater military transparency
and cooperation in the South China Sea disputes will greatly
enhance various Confidence-Building Measures is the region.

If these basic issues can be dealt with in a more open dialog
by China and Southeast Asian countries, then the coming of a
suspicion-free relationship between both sides would not be too
far away.

The changing international relations after the end of the Cold
War requires a similar change in Southeast Asian leaders thinking
on old issues. Here, any call for a review in China-Southeast
Asia relations is indeed timely. However, such a call should also
be extended to the Chinese side. A unilateral review from
Southeast Asia countries alone would not help improve Sino-
Southeast Asian relations which carry enormous historical
burdens.

Mahathir's recent "positive" assessment of China should be
taken into consideration by other Southeast Asian leaders.

The writer is a researcher at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies, Jakarta, and a PhD candidate at the London
School of Economics and Political Science, Britain.