Other
François Godement, Ashley J. Tellis
{
"authors": [
"François Godement"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [],
"topics": [
"Global Governance"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
China’s Promotion of New Global Values
What China seeks is a nonintrusive, low-cost international order built on two very contrasting pillars: national sovereignty as an absolute principle, and the free flow of goods and services for as long as China’s exceptional status as a nominal developing economy is maintained.
Published on Jan 29, 2020
Source: The National Bureau of Asian Research
China has moved over time from a global alliance with the Soviet Union, followed by a short-lived revolutionary stance, to a path of integration with most international institutions and rules. But that course has abated as the country has gained wealth and power. With Xi Jinping’s ascent, China has set aside its long-standing reservations and defensive stance and begun to directly contest the liberal world order through the promotion of Chinese alternatives presented as “complementary,” with a strong preference for bilateral deals with other nation-states. China is more interested in hollowing out the international order than in a revisionist upheaval, and it also rides the trend of self-doubt and isolationism in several democracies. Mutual interest is the operative factor, often coinciding with the lure of financial gains for partners. China’s approach remains pragmatic, emphasizing diversified participation in multilateral institutions. What China seeks is a nonintrusive, low-cost international order built on two very contrasting pillars: national sovereignty as an absolute principle, and the free flow of goods and services for as long as China’s exceptional status as a nominal developing economy is maintained.
About the Author
François Godement
Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Asia Program
Godement, an expert on Chinese and East Asian strategic and international affairs, was a nonresident senior fellow in the Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- Reorienting China Policy By Working With Europe
- China at the Gates: A New Power Audit of EU-China RelationsIn The Media
François Godement, Abigaël Vasselier
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie China
- The Challenges Behind China’s Global South PoliciesCommentary
While China will remain a significant political and economic force in the Global South, its ambition to leverage the Global South as a counterbalance to the United States and the Global North is far from assured.
Xue Gong
- How Are Various Countries Responding to China’s Belt and Road Initiative?Commentary
Pitched as a new Silk Road sweeping from Asia to Europe, China’s enormous Belt and Road Initiative is an ambitious, multinational infrastructure project. Experts from four Carnegie global centers explain other countries’ perspectives.
- +4
Paul Haenle, Dmitri Trenin, Alexander Gabuev, …
- Who Can Break the U.S.-China Trade Impasse?Commentary
Trump is fixated on the United States’ bilateral trade deficit with China, but the United States–China impasse comes from much deeper differences in perceptions.
Yukon Huang
- Is Chinese Investment Good for Workers?Commentary
As the Belt and Road Initiative moves forward, countries and local communities more directly in the initiative’s path could learn from Latin American countries’ labor practices.
Matt Ferchen
- Where Is the “Development” in China’s Global Development Finance?Commentary
Before experts can understand China’s growing role in global development finance, and its impact on development outcomes more generally, they must decide on the meaning and content of development itself.
Matt Ferchen
