China's Geo-Strategy Teachings
Confucius once suggested that real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance. It is, therefore, time for Western political and business leaders to acknowledge their ignorance and make the best out of it.
Over the past 15 years, the global scene has altered dramatically, and the changes to come (cf. due to shifts in the geo-financial balance and the irruption of disruptive technologies) will necessitate the appropriate mental framework from global political and business leaders alike. Alas, in the West, many business and political elites have difficulty in grasping the challenges of the future as they continue to rely on an intellectual toolkit of the past.
To be a global leader today, one needs to acquire a global mindset. Embracing such a global state of mind means taking into consideration different perspectives and, through creative thinking, bringing them together into a new one. A new view can assist the West to untangle the complexity of the global world and discover new answers to new problems. Western leaders need to comprehend that learning from Chinese culture, just like learning from any other culture for that matter, can be beneficial and open up new opportunities and frontiers. Here are seven take-away teachings on what the West could learn from China and apply these to geo-strategy:
Takeaway Lesson #1: The West should play the long game
Amongst the Western countries, there is a certain impatience in solving problems, but it is the United States, in particular, that is easily frustrated by protracted wars and disputes. They seek a quick resolution, and when it is not forthcoming, they abandon their objectives or alter them. They want smart solutions – the “Desert Storm” war in Iraq, Grenada, Panama – in and out with a minimum of fuss. They do not like Vietnams or Koreas that drag on or Somalia that get messy.
In other words, Western scholars seem to be eager to write history before the fullest extent of a historical event has been adequately understood. Look at the Western media headlines claiming that each time there is a so-called unforeseen event unraveling a systemic change is due to take place. While the Chinese, on the other hand, tend to take a longer view on events and will not let facts unfold before rushing to judgment. The Chinese, after all, invented the game of weiqi -- known in the West by its Japanese name, go -- which requires the utmost in patience and a sense of long-term positioning. And that outlook spills over into geostrategy.
Although I am probably not a scholar at the game of weiqi, the differences between chess and weiqi quickly are clear to me. At the same time, those dissimilarities seem to mirror as well the differing approaches to the defense and foreign policies of China and the United States. Whereas chess is, as one grandmaster put it, “99% tactical”, weiqi, on the other hand, is a game of strategy. Militarily, chess is a single battle while weiqi is a multi-front war. The former is played on an 8x8 board while the latter on one of 19x19 squares or 361 interstices. Chess is a stratagem that relies on the left hemisphere of our brain, meaning the analytical function, whereas weiqi requires the employment of both left and right brain hemispheres – analytical and perception of spatial patterns respectively. Chess is designed for short-term engagement and Weiqi for the long term.
In other words, the object of weiqi is to place stones on the open board, balancing the need to expand with the necessity to build protected clusters. Chess starts with force on force and pieces that have a specific and limited arsenal of moves, reflecting the values of rugged individualism and accountability of the West. Weiqi begins with an empty board where each piece is equally essential and completely flexible in its abilities, mirroring the collectivist nature of Chinese culture. Weiqi features multiple battles over a broad front, rather than a single decisive encounter. Think of it more as a kind of a zone defense instead of man-to-man coverage. It focuses on long-term planning rather than a quick tactical advantage, and games can last hours or even days.
Takeaway Lesson #2: The West should do away with short-termism.
The long-term inclination of China is reinforced by the Daoist concept, according to which the single unchanging law of the universe is continuous change. For the Chinese, things will always be subjected to change and what is terrible today could turn out to be positive, just as much as a loss could become a benefit in the upcoming future. This is why in the Chinese culture it’s always the context that is important. All of this plays out in the global success of many Chinese businesses that can integrate their short-term objectives pragmatically into a long-term strategy (cf. look at the multitude of 'China towns' throughout the world). But maybe the best illustration of long-term Chinese inclination is the BRI (aka Belt and Road Initiative), Beijing’s vision for a new Silk Road that, if promising, is set to reshape global commerce in the coming decades. The BRI is a geostrategic and economic project of such historical importance that it could not have been devised by a Western leader used to focusing more on the upcoming elections than on the future generations.
Apparently, the nature of the political regime in China favors long-term policies given that the Chinese Communist Party has a monopoly and that its leaders are not challenged in any way. Henceforth this allows them to design and implement strategies that go beyond the usual democratic term of 4 years. However, this would never be an excuse for the West to dump democracy in favor of authoritarianism. In the US the short-termism is particularly saddening given that the US political system is caught in two-year election cycles, thereby giving very few incentives for politicians leaders to think even five years down the line.
There is a need for much more sustainable thinking and geostrategic planning (cf, granted, a notion which evokes up memories of Maoist China and the Soviet Union). In modern China, though, performance targets differentiate new planning strategies from old Marxist ways. The five-year plans implemented nowadays are no longer the five-year plans of grandfathers. As long as the performance objectives are met, government authorities are allowed some degree of autonomy to try out and find new, creative ways to develop more economic growth. In the West, performance milestones, in combination with government accountability, could result in more efficient spending, leading in turn to higher economic growth. With a focus on plainly defined metrics, Chinese political figures act more like McKinsey consultants than anyone in the Western parliaments.
Note: one could however argue that given the very few differences between a foreign policy governed by the GOP or by the Democrats, that at the end of the day there would be a continuity in terms of US foreign policies as whoever is the tenant of the White House US foreign policy will generally speaking remain the same.
Take-Away Lesson #3: It doesn’t matter if a cat is black or white; as long as it catches mice, it’s a good cat
Indeed, following the decade of extreme political oppression during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), Deng Xiaoping presented his famous “Cat Theory” to disseminate his concept of a capitalist market economy. His theory states as follows: “It does not matter if a cat is white or black for as long as it catches mice, it’s a good cat.” In other words, the “white cat” and “black cat” stands for “planified economy” and “market economy,” and Deng Xiaoping was basically suggesting that whichever one gets the job done will be adopted.
The bottomline here is about pragmatism trumping ideology. Like Deng Xiaoping, the West should be advised to find a new more pragmatic road; away from doctrine, towards tangible and practicable policies to expand prosperity and influence to fill the ever-widening gap of inequality. A good illustration would be the European Union: by adopting policies that are more tangible for the citizens of the EU, this is the EU’s best chance to avoid nursing an absolutist, resentful outlook towards the EU establishment, and thus the best opportunity to bring to a halt the populist wave that is engulfing Europe. Deng Xiaoping, who watched nationalism engulf China, would agree.
Takeaway Lesson #4: Sweep the snow only in front of your doorstep, but open your mind to other cultures
The contrast with the west's concern to shape the world in its image could not be more profound. While we live in a multipolar and complex world, in which China is becoming an indispensable player, too many still think through a Western-oriented and simple mental framework that remains rooted in the 20th century and therefore does no longer meet today’s challenges.
And not just China is rising, but also India, Indonesia, Brazil, Nigeria, Turkey, and so on. The merging markets' increasing clout on the global stage is met with a combination of fascination, awe, concern and sometimes outright fear, and rare are those who make a serious effort to understand the culture of these countries and try to see the world through its cultural prism. Yes, the Western media is pretending that in the West we are all tolerant, and we all love exotic food and music, but when it relates to geopolitics, it's still the West against the rest of the world. This is a severe mistake because understanding all these other cultures have become all-important for anyone interested in trying to make sense of a hyper-complex world where emerging markets play an increasingly crucial role.
Take-Away Lesson #5: The West should focus on its regime durability.
Western scholars and pundits alike love to predict that either Russia is in decline, or China (or even France to be sarcastic). But instead, Western leaders would be advised to learn a lesson from former Chinese emperors, namely about the legacy and sustainability of the Western political culture. Democracy on a mass scale is a relatively recent phenomenon on history's timeline, and no one can predict how the political regimes of the West will look like in 50 or a 100 years from now. Therefore, Western political parties would also be advised to be blindsided by lurking dangers that could threaten the legitimacy of the Western political institutions.
The most significant challenge to regime durability is not foreign enemies, but the masses and the elites within the regime. When inequality is rising, and perception of political absolutism is emerging, the masses - especially in this day and age of social media and instant information - have both the knowledge and resources to organize a coup against the political leadership. And during so-called mass revolts, part of the elites can also play a leading role in mobilizing the masses. The liberal parties in the West seem not to appreciate this historical pattern fully. While the West is paranoid about foreign influences (Russia and China), it should pay more attention to the needs of its people and hence be aware of mass protests.
Take-Away Lesson #6: Embrace a holistic approach
Another feature of China’s culture that differentiates it profoundly from the West is the manner by which the Western mind is focussing on things while the Chinese mindset emphasizes relations between elements. In the Western tradition, people tend to think analytically: to make sense of the whole, one needs first to analyze the parts separately. The Chinese way is entirely different. The Chinese consider things holistically, meaning they do not separate the pieces from the whole given that the whole is not made of the combination of the parts but the links between them.
This kind of modus operandi can be very useful in attempting to make sense of the complexity of the global scene, for example as it relates to the South China Sea dispute, where all the global issues of this period (whether social, political, economic, cultural, environmental or military) are interconnected and cannot, therefore, be analyzed independently from each other without running the risk of failing to see an essential part of the “big picture”.
Take-Away lesson #7: do not think in a binary way
Another central aspect of Chinese mindset is the synthetic integration of contradictions and opposites. In China, as they say, if a statement is true, its opposite can also be exact. This is in opposition to the binary logic of Western thinking, based on the notion of non-contradiction, according to which if A is exact and B is the contrary of A, then B must necessarily be false. It does not work this way for the Chinese mindset, which is affected by the Daoist axioms of “yin and yang” that stipulate that all things are inseparable from their antitheses; both A and B, notwithstanding being opposites, can be exact.
While Westerners see two (apparently) contrarian notions as irreconcilable, the Chinese mindset will see them both as part of a bigger picture and therefore can synthesize them into a new idea. The best illustration of this psychological pattern comes from the Mandarin language itself, where the term for “crisis” is the amalgamation of the terms "opportunity" and“danger.” By being at ease with ambiguity, the Chinese can, therefore, unite two opposite perspectives and create a new view.
We can see this cultural characteristic playing out in some geostrategic concepts developed in the past few decades, such as “one country, two systems” and the “socialist market economy.” For many Western pundits and scholars, these notions would be considered nothing less than illogical adumbrations, but for the Chinese they merely illustrate a dialectic and holistic integration of opposites that open the way to a new and creative view on things; a perspective that is no longer based on a dogmatic and abstract analysis of reality but instead on pragmatic adaptation to a specific context. The Chinese mindset does not think in terms of “or” but instead “and”: not “The West or Russia” but “the West and Russia," not “partnership or rivalry” but “partnership and rivalry.”
In the West, most political leaders still think dogmatically in terms of irreconcilable obverses; they have difficulty in developing a new perspective on reality, and this is why they might be losing ground.