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.