• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Minxin Pei"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
    "Carnegie China"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [
    "Eurasia in Transition"
  ],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Economy",
    "Domestic Politics"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie China

Why the West Should Not Demonise China

A troubling perception gap exists between Chinese citizens, who feel their country is discriminated against in the international arena, and Western observers, who harbor suspicions of Beijing’s intentions.

Link Copied
By Minxin Pei
Published on Nov 25, 2010
Project hero Image

Project

Eurasia in Transition

Learn More

Source: Financial Times

Why the West Should Not Demonise China Nowadays China and “assertiveness” have become practically synonymous. The portrayal of the Middle Kingdom in the western press is uniformly unflattering. It is maintaining an undervalued currency to gain unfair trade advantages; it is bullying its neighbours in territorial disputes; it is doing nothing to rein in the dangerous North Korean regime and, despite its escalating aggression (including the latest artillery attacks on South Korea), continues to pump aid into Pyongyang.

Within China, however, popular perception of Beijing’s international behaviour is almost the exact opposite. Most ordinary people believe the Chinese government is, if anything, not assertive enough. They see their leaders as spineless and western criticisms of Chinese behaviour as unfair and hypocritical.

Take, for example, two well-publicised issues: the tussle over China’s exchange rate policy and the Sino-Japanese row over disputed islands in the East China Sea. The predominant perception within China is that America is unfairly blaming China for its own economic woes and bullying China to adopt a policy change that would only hurt the Chinese economy without reviving America’s growth. In the case of the Sino-Japanese dispute, most Chinese believe the west has unfairly sided with Japan.

Such divergence is not unprecedented. But it is hard to recall an era when western views of China’s international stance were diametrically opposed to those of the Chinese themselves. The most obvious reason is the rising nationalism within China, fuelled both by state-sponsored patriotic education and by the Communist party’s control of the media that has precluded objective coverage and analysis of China’s disputes with the west. While most ordinary Chinese distrust the official media’s coverage of domestic issues, they are far more credulous of the government’s versions of China’s conduct abroad. Ironically, the Chinese government is pursuing a strategy that attempts to achieve the impossible: bolstering its nationalist credentials while maintaining a flexible foreign policy. On the one hand, the ruling Communist party is eager to show that it has made China a respected world power. On the other hand, Chinese leaders want to stick to a pragmatic foreign policy that avoids costly and needless conflicts with the west. The tensions inherent in this strategy are making it increasingly untenable.

Further exacerbating the gap in perceptions is that China is, indeed, held to a different standard. In its dealings with the world in general, and the west in particular, China suffers from two handicaps: its power and the nature of its regime. Like other great powers, China is judged by a much higher standard. It is expected to use restraint under all circumstances (particularly in dealing with less powerful countries) and to assume greater international responsibilities. But unlike democratic powers, China also pays an implicit but substantial authoritarian penalty. Because the democratic west views authoritarian regimes as illegitimate, China’s international behaviour is seen through far more sceptical and distrustful prisms in the west. As a result, whenever China is featured in an international dispute, western sympathies naturally flow to China’s opponents. To western politicians and opinion-makers, such ideological bias is second-nature. But to an average Chinese, such differentiated treatment engenders outrage. Few states are subject to such a triple standard.

Left unattended, this growing and troubling perception gap can only lead to rising tensions, even conflict. It makes it all the more difficult to gain Chinese co-operation on matters vital to global security and prosperity. For example, China will face growing western pressure to prevent North Korea, Beijing’s strategic buffer, from expanding its nuclear programme and engaging in further aggression against South Korea. But with rising distrust and acrimony between China and the west, China may choose to do nothing just to show that the west cannot bash it and beg at the same time.

Narrowing this perception gap requires efforts on both sides. On balance, Beijing can do much more. It must allow more objective reporting on Chinese foreign policy and stop fanning nationalism. Western politicians and opinion-makers should exercise greater tact in criticising China (even when such criticisms are justified) and strive to see the issues from the Chinese perspective. Such modest steps may not fully close the perception gap, but there are few realistic alternatives.

About the Author

Minxin Pei

Former Adjunct Senior Associate, Asia Program

Pei is Tom and Margot Pritzker ‘72 Professor of Government and the director of the Keck Center for International and Strategic Studies at Claremont McKenna College.

    Recent Work

  • In The Media
    How China Can Avoid the Next Conflict

      Minxin Pei

  • In The Media
    Small Change

      Minxin Pei

Minxin Pei
Former Adjunct Senior Associate, Asia Program
Minxin Pei
Political ReformEconomyDomestic PoliticsEast AsiaChina

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 Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Conspiracy Theories Are Eclipsing the Real Dangers of Russia’s Messaging App Max

    The internet is awash not only with instructions from digital security experts, but also with urban legends and conspiracy theories that divert attention away from the real dangers of Max.

      David Frenkel

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Blocking of Telegram App Sparks Rare Public Rift Among Russia’s Elites

    The prospect of a total block on Russia’s most popular messaging app has sparked disagreement between the regime’s political managers and its security agencies.

      Andrey Pertsev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    After Ilia II: What Will a New Patriarch Mean for Georgia?

    The front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.

      Bashir Kitachaev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    “Mr. Nobody Against Putin”: A Deep Dive Into Russian Propaganda

    Talankin and Borenstein’s documentary is a unique inside look at a regime that threatens the world and has killed thousands of people in its neighboring country. And many critics and general viewers alike draw parallels between the Putin regime and their own governments.

      Ekaterina Barabash

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Why Did Messaging App Telegram Fall From Grace in Russia?

    The history of Telegram’s relations with the Russian state offers a salutary lesson for international platforms that believe they can reach a compromise with the Kremlin.

      Maria Kolomychenko

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.