But their "principal to principal" model will only be as effective as the political strength of each leader back home.
Damien Ma
{
"authors": [],
"type": "scholarSpotlight",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"East Asia",
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Security",
"Military"
]
}Source: Getty
China has developed and employed maritime power in its foreign and security policy and now actively contests American command of strategic maritime space in the Western Pacific and, increasingly, across the globe.
Maritime power is a central foundation of China’s global rise, and it means far more than just building a world-class naval force. Beijing’s competitive advantages arise from its powerhouse maritime industries, such as shipping, ports, shipbuilding, and fishing. From my prior position at the U.S. Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, I could see these issues emerging from the vantage of the Navy. China has developed and employed maritime power in its foreign and security policy and now actively contests American command of strategic maritime space in the Western Pacific and, increasingly, across the globe.
I join Carnegie to build on this research agenda, expanding beyond the maritime commons to explore China’s influence on the wider, global commons. Subsea, space, and cyber domains, in particular, are frontier issues prioritized by China’s leadership—and vital arenas to observe China’s influence on global rules, norms, and standards. Having carefully documented such (largely regional) changes in the international law of the sea in my book, China’s Law of the Sea: The New Rules of Maritime Order (forthcoming from Yale), I now turn to new rule sets in order to examine whether and how China is revising international order in other areas of strategic competition. We will need to better understand how China defines its interests in these domains, which rules it advocates, and to what effect.
Ports will also remain a part of my research portfolio. However, I am driving “past the pier” into the data networks that map onto China’s global maritime trade and transport networks. The commercial ecosystems that evolve around PRC firms’ major overseas port projects often include Chinese-built road, air, rail, communications, and other physical infrastructure. They also entail all manner of PRC-origin services like trade logistics, finance, and IT. These latter “soft” digital services complement the “hard” capabilities of Chinese-built infrastructure and position China to capture significant commercial value in global supply chains—and also to exploit this proprietary access to pursue noncommercial foreign and security policy goals.
Naval strategy (China’s and that of its competitors) is also an area of enduring research interest. I will remain intent on the question of overseas basing for the People’s Liberation Army. Chinese military forces are following China’s economic interests abroad, but they do so without the benefit of a large network of military installations on foreign soil. Ports are one part of this puzzle, but global access and power projection will be an enduring challenge for China. I will continue to prioritize the Indian Ocean region, including the greater Middle East and East Africa, as the locus of China’s important out-of-area basing interests.
Carnegie’s Asia Program is the ideal home for studying China in the international security environment. I am honored and privileged to join a global institution of leading thinkers and practitioners in the art of geopolitics and charged up for the struggle to define China policy in the consequential years ahead.
But their "principal to principal" model will only be as effective as the political strength of each leader back home.
Damien Ma
U.S. unpredictability has allowed China to capitalize on its positioning as the “responsible great power”. Paradoxically, the more China wins the perception game, the more likely expectations will rise for Beijing to deliver not just words but to demonstrate with its deeds.
Chong Ja Ian
Hanoi and Beijing have long treated each other as distant cousins rather than comrades in arms. That might be changing as both sides draw closer to hedge against uncertainty and America’s erratic behavior.
Nguyễn Khắc Giang
Across Asia, China is better positioned to withstand energy shocks from the fallout of the Iran war. Its abundant coal capacity can ensure stability in the near term. Yet at the same time, the country’s energy transition away from coal will make it even less vulnerable during the next shock.
Damien Ma
In the latest Five-Year Plan, the Chinese president cements the shift to an innovation-driven economy over a consumption-driven one.
Damien Ma