Enlightening Experiences of Major Powers Rise for China

By Liu Hua and Yang Shilong Outlook Weekly Research Center

?

Enlightening Experiences of Major Powers Rise for China

By Liu Hua and Yang Shilong Outlook Weekly Research Center

The road China today faces can not be a beaten track by major powers in the past, and may even require a unique set of brand new explorations.

Since the 15thcentury, there have been nine countries including Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, (the former Soviet Union) Russia and the United States having occupied major power status on the world stage at different times of the day. Take the ancient cases as mirror, one country can know its rise and fall. Calm and profound reading of the rising major powers, and thinking and comprehending the mystery behind their implications undoubtedly have an important reference for the development of emerging economies today.

Internal Power with Congenital Conditions

The rise and fall of a major power fundamentally originate from the internal driving force in a country, and important factors include institutional arrangements, the ability to innovate and sustained growth and natural endowments and other congenital conditions. For example, have a certain territorial space, relatively good natural and geographical conditions, a certain population and natural resources. Historically, some small countries also had a short-term leap development, but due to the limited volume, their development often only had a regional effect, and could not influence the world system, therefore, they could not be considered "rise of major powers". At the same time, if a country does not have enough volume, and its development is often uncertain and vulnerable, and it is difficult for it to leave a profound mark on the history with a "century" as a time unit.

It is worth noting that the science and technology development of human society can change the implication of a country's natural endowments. For example, in the period of underdeveloped shipbuilding industry, small island states such as the United Kingdom and Japan can hardly become a country with the world-wide influence. But, the developed shipbuilding industry turns the United Kingdom and Japan island countries into some kind of favorable geographical advantages. For a long period of time, the British simply invested major resources into the navy and was able protect its own homeland security and global status, which makes it enjoy more favorable conditions than France and Germany as coastal countries. For another example, the resources such as rare earth and oil, to a certain extent, do not become meaningful resources until materials technology or the internal combustion engine technology developed. A country has a rare earth mine or quality oilfield, which does not make a difference for national strength before the development of relevant technology.

In addition, before developed human traffic and communication, a vast land area is not necessarily the advantage of a country, because to govern effectively and to mobilize itself is a difficult domestic task. Therefore, for a long historical period, the medium-sized countries can often become rising powers. After means of transportation and communication get developed, geography and a population of a country can give full play to the advantage of its own volume. The United States and the former Soviet Union (Russia) fall into this category.

Industrial Foundation and Social Integration

After the industrial revolution, the history of the rise of a major power fully implies that a country must first have industry as the foundation for long-term development after the rise, and Portugal and Spain are non-positive typical cases.

In the Maritime Age of Discovery, Portugal and Spain accumulated enormous wealth through maritime trade and overseas colonial plunder, and became the richest countries in Europe. To plunder the huge amount of wealth is much too easy so that both countries deeply depended on this old mode. They neither converted the wealth into productive forces, nor fully aware of the significance of developing industry and technology, but intended to survive by relying on colony. As the rise of latecomer powers such as the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, Portugal and Spain were not only lack of industry support for economic competitiveness, but also lack of the industrial (such as the shipbuilding industry) support for the military strength. These make Portugal and Spain decline rapidly and thoroughly, and also remain relatively backward in Europe's economy for a very long time.

In contrast, the United Kingdom in the rising process takes a full advantage of the effects of industrial development. The huge productivity brought about by the Industrial Revolution ensures the UK to manufacture a huge amount of cheaper and better goods than other countries, and build warships with less costs than other countries, and enables the UK to make better use of resources of its own and from colonies. Subsequently, the United States successfully copies the British experience in the second industrial revolution and the third industrial revolution. Today, the United States takes advantage of the information technology revolution, and still enjoys leading advantages in associated industries, which is the fundamental support of its world status today.

Continuous rising of a country must be accompanied by the internal organizational innovation and changes, including the need to achieve the domestic social integration, properly handle relations between different regions and between different ethnic groups, and properly handle the relationship between central and local governments, and build mechanisms for long-term sustainability. The process for Prussia to become Germany and the development of the United States are typical examples.

Before the rise of Prussia, "Germany" is largely just a geographical term. However, by the rapid development in the 19thcentury, Prussia, by means of war and trade and self-centered integration for more than half a century within Germany, and ultimately created the basis of modern Germany. Without this process, there may be a different story in Central Europe.

The transformation process of the United States is also from geographical terms to the state concept. Until the early 19thcentury, North America, to a large extent, is still in loose state, there are conflicts of interests between different regions and the Civil War is the result of comprehensive outbreak of these contradictions. Worth considering is the end of the Civil War helps the completion of national integration, found the "balance point" of the relationship between the central and local governments in the federal system, and a real rise takes off. It can be said that, in the cases of Germany and the United States, the country's development and the rise promote national integration while the national integration, in turn, is also beneficial to their development and the rise.

International Recognition

History and reality have proven that the soft power of a state is an integral part of the stabilizer and boosters of the rise of a major power. The rise of a country needs international recognition. Historically, the rise of a power can generate a certain degree of international recognition, but it does not directly produce enough international recognition. This requires it to win over international recognition, in turn is related to the soft power matter. France, the United Kingdom and the United States have a lot of experiences in this regard.

The rise of France is particularly successful in the field of culture, making it largely the 17th–18thcentury European cultural center. The French architecture, dance, painting, music, and others became subjects for European countries to follow. The high social strata of each country began learning French, and took pride of making a trip to Paris or living there, naturally conducive to winning over more recognition.

The United Kingdom, in the process of rise, made full use of the role of media. After popular use of telegraph and other means of communication and growth of newspapers, the United Kingdom attached great importance to the role of public opinion, used mass media and other means to compete for the moral high ground and won international support and demonized opponents.

In the process of rise, it should be said that the United States creates soft power most successfully. The United States has not only inherited the attention of public opinion and the use of media, but also directly worldwide fight for the recognition by people (rather than government) through multiple platforms such as the media, universities, research institutions, cultural industries. This can be done only after development, to a certain extent, of means of mass communications such as television, film and the Internet.

It is worth recalling that soft power is not a simply and narrowly defined "culture", is also related to industry and involves complex political and economic operation. Moreover, the distinction between soft power and hard power is sometimes not "clear-cut", but overlapping each other. For example, the U.S. and British capital has long dominated the global financial information collection and dissemination, which, to a certain extent, belongs to media or professional media operation, and can be classified as a "soft power". But, meantime, and this is also effectively in favor of the United States and Britain to strengthen their financial and fiscal strength, which is a real "hard power".

Hard Problems for Latecomers

First, the "danger zone." From late 19thcentury to early 20thcentury, in the process of rise of Germany and Japan, one problem attracts attention, and that is the so-called "danger zone". This concept was first derived from the decision-makers of the late 19thcentury Germany. In the course of study, it is discovered that the latecomer Germany would face with a long "danger zone" once it initiated the development of the Navy for overtaking that of Britain. In the meantime, a rapid development of the German Navy would stimulate that of Britain while the strength of German Navy was unable to keep balance with that of Britain. These phenomena would sink the German Navy into a dangerous situation.

If extending this concept to the comparison of comprehensive national strength, it is easy to find that as a latecomer country catches up with the number one power at the time, there often emerges a "danger zone". At this point, the rapid growth of a latecomer national strength stimulates the number one, but is still unable to change the old order or to replace the number one. During this period, the number one usually searches for ways to prevent its development. History has left us the problem that during this period of "danger zone" how a latecomer country should manage its relationship with the number one, and quickly and safely passes through the "danger zone".

Second, the neighboring relations. For a latecomer country, the surrounding relationship is also a noteworthy problem. The number one power in the process of becoming the number one often has a various co-operation with neighboring countries of a latecomer, such as alliance or traditional friendly relations. Then, how should a latecomer country handle its relations with the neighboring countries in the process of its catching up with the number one? In this regard, Germany, before the First World War, is actually a typical case of failure. For a fairly long period of time in the 19thcentury, under the Bismarck careful operation, Germany maintained relatively balanced relations with the neighboring countries, and at least avoided making enemies with several major powers at the same time. Bismarck was fully aware of leaving behind "posterior" and "living space" to opponents, and carefully avoided making a "mortal enemy" for Germany. Therefore, despite occurrence of the Austro-Prussian War and the Franco-Prussian War, the emerging Prussia was not isolated in Europe. Even until 1905, Germany and Russia signed a treaty of alliance.

However, due to the subsequent failure of foreign policy, before WWI, Germany had been the enemy with the three neighboring countries at the same time, one of which was then the world's number one power, the United Kingdom, the other two - France and Russia - were the strongest powers of Europe beside Germany. Moreover, France and Russia are located to the east and west wings of Germany respectively, leaving Germany in an extremely passive geopolitical dilemma. During WWI, despite relying on a strong rail transport, and with limited forces to maintain two fronts, Germany’s final defeat in the war in large part was doomed at launching of the war.

Similar cases include Japan. In fact, since the Meiji Restoration to the World War II defeat, Japan was unable to solve its relations problems with neighboring countries. Of course, this is also the result of the needs by its external policies of colonial expansion. A profound impact on Japan by this issue even still continues up to today.

And after WWII, the Soviet Union was also another case unable to appropriately manage its relations with the neighboring countries. Geopolitically, the USSR mainly had three dimensions, to its west, south and east. To the west, the Soviet satellite states system was built in Eastern Europe, this system was not equal, with the Soviet Union as the "parents" of the order, such a system was clearly difficult to sustain. To the south, the Soviet Union "reached" too far, eventually caught in the quagmire of Afghanistan War. While to the east, the Soviet Union failed to maintain good relations with China, which made it, in most of the time of the Cold War, both maintain military high pressure in Europe and invest considerable resources in the direction for China, an extreme failure in geopolitical policy.

Third, the choices of competitive mode. In the rising process of latecomer countries catching up with the number one power, how to choose the means of competition, peaceful competition, or arms race or war? A direct war or a proxy war if a war is chosen? During the period of the United States replacing the United Kingdom as number one power, the peaceful competition prevailed largely. The rise of the comprehensive national strength of the United States actually started after the Civil War, but till early 20thcentury, the United States always did not significantly challenge the global hegemony of the United Kingdom. This about half a century of peaceful competition helped lay the material foundation for the United States to assume a leading position later through the two world wars.

From the late 19thcentury to early 20thcentury, the competition between major powers were often reflected in an arms race, in which the naval shipbuilding contest was a typical case. Because of different financial, industrial and technological capacity, various countries had differentiated ability for the arms race, and the arms race can indeed help eliminate some rivals. During the Anglo-German naval race from the late 19thcentury to early 20thcentury, the United Kingdom was able not only to ensure its own naval superiority, but also force the Germans to pour lot resources into the navy. Germany spent heavily on building a large fleet in WWII, but a little of these resources could be saved for the ground forces, which then played a decisive role.

The competition between the United States and the Soviet Union was more straightforward, and that is peaceful competition, arms race and proxy war. Regarding peaceful competition, the United States, through high-speed development after the 1960s, successfully threw off the Soviet Union in the aspect of national living standards. Regarding the arms race, the two sides basically stroke even, inputting a huge investment by each side. Regarding proxy war, the Soviet Union and the United States had counterproductive results in the proxy wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan, leaving opponents beneficial. These experiences are thought-provoking.

In some cases, a latecomer country may also have direct conflict with the number one power, for example, in the case of Britain and German during WWI. But in fact, a latecomer shall avoid aggressive initiative before its strength reaches a certain level. Moreover, the number one power, in domination of the world order, often applies various ways to force or lure a latecomer toward war. This is the challenges that are bound to be faced and must be responded by a latecomer country.

The "Double-Edged Sword" In the Hands of Major Powers

Building alliance is a traditional phenomenon in international relations. But for emerging powers or established major powers, an alliance is always a "double-edged sword".

Undoubtedly, building an alliance can strengthen one's own strength, and weaken opponent's strength. Through alliances, a country can get more assistance by military forces, more benefits of resources, critical straits and canals, more constraints from another direction for opponents, and more international support, etc. This is why many countries are fascinated by building alliance.

However, an alliance also has the other side of the coin. For example, if a major power is in alliance with another country, which means greater possibility for the two sides involved in war because of the other side. The outbreak of WWI although has deep-seated root causes, yet, is largely related to a complex allied relationship generated by the two alliance groups, the Allied Countries and League of Nations, prior to the Sarajevo incident, and the two groups were unable to avoid the procedure for general mobilization and declaring war on each other by the signed agreement. According to data collected for the past 5 centuries by American scholar Jack S. Levy, alliances indeed make war more frequent.

For another example, selecting an alliance partner is extremely important. At least pay attention to the following issues as selecting alliance partners and entering into an alliance: Firstly, overall benefits from an alliance should be greater than the cost one pays for the alliance. In the two world wars, Germany chose Italy as its ally, but did not get the expected effect. During the First World War, noticing that Germany could not knock out France in early days of the war, Italy in 1915 steered to Allied camp, causing considerable difficulties in the southern frontline for Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. During World War II, Mussolini regime in Italy worked very hard though, its poor and weak operational capability failed to help the Axis to establish an advantage in the Mediterranean. Italians even were even unable to take Malta, less than 100 km distance from Sicily, which enabled the United Kingdom to maintain the Mediterranean shipping route, and managed to support the North African war situation; while causing Germany in the most critical period of fighting the Soviet Union to fragment its forces to North Africa, scattered and lost a large amount of resources.

Secondly, it should avoid one's own side diving into an unnecessary trouble and even a war due to the alliance relationship, which is particularly important for a major power. For example, if a major power clearly makes an alliance with a small country, and which sometimes will help toughen a stance of the small country on foreign policy, and will result in an increased risk for the major power to involve in a war waged by the small country. In addition, a clear-cut established alliance will make a major power bear the corresponding responsibility and obligations, which tends to reduce the leeway for maneuver of a major power in international relations.

In this regard, the United States has a lot of both lessons and experiences. So it can be seen that, today, the United States keeps maximum leeway for maneuver and space for themselves in alliance relationships, and often leave sufficient room for interpretation in the various documents. For example, on the issue of the Diaoyu Islands, the U.S. interpretation is the Diaoyu Islands administrative rights belong to Japan, and therefore, applicable to Article V of the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, but on the issue of sovereignty, the United States "does not choose side". This makes the United States both avoid "endorsement" on a risky behavior of Japan and prevent from being dragged into a conflict with China by Japanese reckless actions; and also continue to retain the existence of this problem and discourse on it, and leave a "grab" fro making use of the issue. Similarly, in the South China Sea, the United States on the one hand instigates and agitates some individual countries to challenge China’s sovereignty, but at the same time would make no clear commitment to avoid bearing specific responsibilities.

In short, entering into alliance relationship is an important strategic choice, a common means used in the process of rise of major powers. However, both the positive and negative effect brought about by an alliance relationship must be soberly and fully considered to avoid a "double-edged sword" effect.

Not Necessarily War

There is an argument in the West: war is a "litmus test" for the rise of major powers. Well, does history prove it? Look at the history of the rise of great powers in the past, there is some truth in this argument, but it is not comprehensive.

Portugal and Spain became strong through colonial wars on the American and African continents and their rise directly originated from war. However, due to their lagging behind the social and economic development, the two lost to the Netherlands and the United Kingdom in the subsequent wars.

Germany and Japan have a lot in common on this issue: they achieved rise in key-wars, such as the Austro-Prussian War and the Franco-Prussian War by Germany, as well as the Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War by Japan. However, they are over-pursuing the means of war, and later defeated in key-wars. After WWII, Germany and Japan recorded rapid recovery and development and have become world's major economic powers. However, this is based on giving up the goal of "hegemony" as a precondition.

Britain's rise is largely benefited from war. After the victory of the anti-Napoleonic Wars, Britain entered about a century-long peak period of prosperity. But it is worth pondering that during World War I and World War II, the United Kingdom was a winner, but lost the status of the Empire and the number one power. Especially in the period between the two world wars, the United Kingdom failed to create a favorable international system, but also adopted confused tactics regarding the "League of Nations "and the German diplomatic issues, which as a result not only accelerated the outbreak of World War II, but also directly triggered the post-war disintegration of the entire old empire system.

The Soviet Union is the main battlefield with Germany in World War II, and its victory in World War II also laid an important foundation of the post-war status, and a starting point to become one of the world's two strong powers. However, the final defeat of the Soviet Union is also closely related to war: long-term, high-profile preparations for war and arms race not only became the core content of the Soviet Union national construction, but in turn affected its overall development, so the Soviet Union national political and economic system was colored by "wartime" or "war preparations", damaging the economic vitality and capacity for sustainable development and suppressing the people's living standards improvement. In the later period of the Soviet Union, the war in Afghanistan dragged on, overwhelming the entire Soviet Union. The ultimate disintegration of the Soviet Union after World War II is thought-provoking.

The opportunity for the United States to get to the pinnacle is undoubtedly the two world wars. During this period, relying on geopolitical advantage of far away from the center of Europe and rapidly growing comprehensive national strength, the United States successfully stayed out in the first half of the two world wars, and looked for an opportunity to join the war in the latter half in order to decide war situation with one strike. Particularly noteworthy is the United States, after the war, strived to achieve long-term favorable institutional arrangements. This attempt failed after WWI due to the British and French-led National League, and caused some isolationist tendencies in the United States. However, after World War II the United States succeeded on the basis of the United Nations and the Bretton Woods system. Towards war, especially a war for a major power, the United States is relatively more cautious. However, it can be seen from the history that the U.S. attitude on local war does not seem prudent enough, which made it suffer a major setback in the Vietnam War, almost shaken the Cold War system. Entering the present century, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have severely affected its comprehensive national strength and status in the world. In summary, the United States is more successful in handling a world-wide war, but its overall situation is always impacted by local wars, this dramatic historical phenomenon is likely to continue.

In summary, historically, the experience and lessons of the rise of great powers are extremely rich. After the industrial revolution, the development of human society is much faster than that of the traditional society. And technological innovation and industrial upgrading accelerate significantly. The historical experience and lessons may be no longer applicable today, but can serve as reference for solving real problems of today.

The road China today faces can not be a beaten track by major powers in the past, and may even require a unique set of brand new explorations.