China and a 'Confucian'
commonwealth By Andrei Lankov
The 17th summit meeting of the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) in Busan,
South Korea ended this month, to the surprise of
few, without achieving much concrete, apart from
allowing world dignitaries the opportunity for
informal behind-the-scenes discussions.
However, such meetings, now held
regularly, do raise the question of whether Asia -
or, to be more precise, East Asia - will go the
road of Europe, where large-scale summits and free
trade agreements laid the foundations for the
emergence of a powerful bloc, the European Union,
now well on its way to becoming a
unified state.
The
political and economic benefits of such a body are
obvious, leading to speculation that such a union
will develop and the region is heading toward a
"Confucian commonwealth", which would include
greater China, Japan, the Koreas and Vietnam.
Those
skeptical of such a group cite problems
of nationalism - witness aged Korean women
cutting their fingers in outrage at (purely symbolical)
Japanese claims to a rabbit-infested rock
(island), and how display windows of the Japanese
companies in China are smashed in protest against
textbooks that few Japanese schools use. These
doubters might be reminded that merely 70 years
ago Europe was a hotbed of even greater virulent
nationalism. If nationalism waned in Europe, why
cannot the same happen in East Asia?
It
can. But it seems that there is another challenge
to East Asian unity, one that is more difficult to
overcome, since it is related to the geographic
and demographic structure of the region.
East Asia is different from Europe in one
important regard: it is not polycentric, and has
almost never been. There are a few co-existing
centers of comparable if not equal power - China,
Japan, to some extent South Korea. But this
situation is unusual, has few historic precedents
and perhaps will not last.
Europe offers a
dramatically different picture. Since the collapse
of the Roman Empire and, at least, until to the
end of World War II, Europe consisted of countless
states and statelets whose numbers normally
reached hundreds, if not thousands. Yet
paradoxically, the current unity of Europe grew
from this tradition of disunity and centuries of
alliance politics.
And the continuing
polycentricism of Europe helps to make a
continent-wide bloc possible. Four or five major
European countries are more or less equal in size
and economic potential: for example, there are 60
million French, 82 million Germans, 58 million
Italians and 60 million British. The economic
potential of major European countries is roughly
similar as well. In the case of Germany, the
largest country and most powerful economy of the
EU, its population forms only 18% of the EU total,
and its gross domestic product (GDP) (purchasing
power adjusted) is 21% of the EU total. This ratio
means that in spite of German, French or British
prominence, the EU could not be merely an
appendage to Germany, France or Great Britain.
In East Asia, the picture is very
different. Currently, in this "Confucian region"
there are six independent states - the People's
Republic of China, the Republic of China (Taiwan),
Japan, North and South Korea and Vietnam - with a
population of some 1.6 billion. This has long been
the case. Since the rise of the Tang dynasty, the
number of independent states in the Confucian
world could normally be expressed in one-digit
figures.
And once China was united and
stable after 1949, it has far surpassed all other
states in the region in size, population and
economic potential. No other state can possibly
hope to play a diplomatic or military game against
this sole regional superpower, and East Asia has
no other permanent center of power that could be
used to ally against China.
China's
population has reached 1.3 billion, while the
population of all the other countries of the
"Confucian" region combined is 300 million.
Chinese GDP (purchasing power adjusted) is $6.5
billion, while the same figure for Japan is $3.6
billion, and the gross national product of all
other East Asian countries combined is about $1.5
billion.
In a union of Confucian nations,
China would control some 81% of its total
population and about 56% of its total GDP. This is
a far cry from Germany's 18% and 21% respectively.
In addition, China also has a fast-growing
economy, while Japan is fighting with a long
recession. The conventional military superiority
of China also is clear - of course, if one chooses
to forget that three "small" states of the region
are allies of the US.
These circumstance
hinder the possible emergence of an East Asian
Union far more than occasional nationalist
hysterics. If a union includes China, it will not
be much different from the half-forgotten
organizations where the communist regimes of
Eastern Europe were herded by Moscow. Such a union
would consist of an absolute hegemon and its
powerless minions, whose influence on the affairs
of the union might be only nominal.
Unlike Europe
of the Cold War era, the region does not face
any external threat that would speed up "regionalization"
trends. American influence is, certainly,
perceived as a potential threat in China,
but for a majority of the "smaller" states of
the region the US is not a source of danger, but
rather a useful counterweight to Chinese
ambitions. Three out of the six states in the
region are tied to the US by some kind of military
alliance (Japan, South Korea and, actually if not
on paper, Taiwan). Vietnam now also seeks to
improve its relations with the US - among other
things, out of fear of Beijing.
Thus, if
unity of the small states is possible at all, it
is likely to be a union against China,
rather than a union with it.
Dr
Andrei Lankov is a lecturer in the faculty of
Asian Studies, China and Korea Center, Australian
National University. He graduated from Leningrad
State University with a PhD in Far Eastern history
and China, with emphasis on Korea, and his thesis
focused on factionalism in the Yi Dynasty. He has
published books and articles on Korea and North
Asia. He is currently on leave, teaching at
Kookmin University, Seoul.
(Copyright
2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing
.)
