In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Postscript In May and June 2002, while I was lecturing at East China University in Taiwan, I finished writing Inside China’s Grand Strategy, a book that was published by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in November 2003. More than seven years have passed since then, and there have been many changes regarding various subjects that the book discusses. Some things I wrote have been confirmed, and others have become a reality. Nevertheless , the Chinese people must still continue their efforts to achieve what I posited as the ultimate objective of China’s grand strategy, namely, the renascence of the Chinese people (zhonghua minzu). At the same time, after further reflection, I have developed some new ideas concerning a number of topics addressed in the book. In what follows, I would like to present them as a modest supplement to the English translation. An examination of China’s national renascence requires that we look at its pursuit of its goal from a historical perspective, namely, that of recovering the great power position and influence that China once enjoyed in the East Asian region. The objective is to attain a position and wield influence in international society commensurate with its historic culture, population, size, economy, and comprehensive national strength. This, however, is not enough. The real question is what sort of great power should China become now that it has become a modernized and powerful state in a globalized world? What follow are my thoughts regarding this subject. First, China should strive to the utmost to undertake certain obligations and responsibilities with regard to the contemporary world. I do not like the expression to act as a responsible great power because it insinuates that, in the past, China has not behaved responsibly. One of the great changes with respect to contemporary China is that it has demonstrated a strong economic capability in the current financial crisis. Its US$2 trillion foreign currency reserve provides it a capacity to solve the crisis that other countries lack. Moreover, this capacity is not only very useful in 258 INSIDE CHINA’S GRAND STRATEGY helping solve China’s crisis but also very important with respect to solving the world financial crisis. Therefore, China’s great economic power should be used not only to solve the current economic crisis but also with an eye toward advancing international economic development in the direction of greater stability. Regarding this point, however, China lacks strategic thinking. It is especially unfamiliar and inexperienced regarding the proper use of financial power. On the one hand, its foreign currency reserves have been influenced and restrained by U.S. financial markets; on the other hand, it has been unsuccessful in its initial attempts at investing its foreign currency in international markets. Therefore, it faces the enormous challenge of how to transform its wealth into the kind of strategic financial power that can exert a larger and healthier influence on international financial development. The financial crisis has shown how invisible and omnipresent financial powers can instantaneously destroy a country’s wealth and plunge it into political and economic crisis. If China wishes to become an influential world power, it must also become a financial power with global influence and not simply attract Western financial resources for its own development. At the same time, its so-called international obligations and responsibilities should not be understood as meaning simply that, once a financial crisis occurs, it should use even more money to purchase foreign goods and debt or to make more investments in Western markets to stabilize them. But, if it lacks influence in and is excluded from the international economic and financial system that gave rise to the financial crisis, how can it discharge its so-called international obligations and responsibilities? In addition, what are considered China’s international obligations and responsibilities is subject to Western influence and constraints. There are certain responsibilities, such as China’s dispatch of its navy to the waters off the Somali coast in Africa to protect ships against piracy, that both protect its own interest and uphold the interests of international society. But, if this should take place somewhere else, would Western countries be similarly accepting? For example, if the its navy were to protect shipping in the Pacific Ocean, would others see this as an example of China acting responsibly or an example of it acting irresponsibly and provocatively? Further thought must be given to the question of what constitutes China’s international obligations and responsibilities. The...

Share