Skip to main content Accesibility Help
×
×
Home

China, the EU, and the New Multipolarity

  • Gustaaf Geeraerts (a1)
Abstract

The world within which the EU and China have to deal with each other is changing. The unipolar moment is definitely fading and slowly giving way to an international system characterized by multilayered and culturally diversified polarity. This development has far-reaching consequences for the EU–China relationship; the more so since the EU and China have distinctive identities and define their value preferences differently. China is no longer the developing country it once was and is becoming more assertive by the day. Beijing is at the head of the world’s most successful economy and will weigh more and more heavily on global governance.1 Three decades of impressive economic growth have boosted the self-confidence of the Chinese leaders significantly. In Beijing, the notion that China should start taking on an attitude befitting a great power is gaining ground. China is taking up ever more space within various multilateral organizations and is setting up diplomatic activities throughout the globe. Moreover, Beijing has become more active in setting up its own multilateral channels to further its national interests and own norms. China no longer considers itself an outsider that should crawl back into its shell and steer clear of a global political system dominated by the West. All this puts into question the EU’s conditional policy towards China, which is based on the assumption that China can be socialized and persuaded to incorporate Europe’s post-modern values. The way ahead seems to be for Europe to opt for a more pragmatic approach, which takes stock of the changes in the underlying power and identity relations between the EU and China. The analysis of this paper will be developed at three levels. First, it examines the changes in the structure of international politics. To what kind of structure are we evolving and where do China and the EU fit in? Second, it takes a closer look at the respective identities of China and the EU and explicates the major differences between them. Finally, this study appraises the implications of the emerging multilayered and culturally diversified polarity for the further development of the EU–China relationship.

Copyright
References
Hide All
1.Shen, Q. (2009) Subtle changes in relations among key players in the reform of the international financial and economic system. Foreign Affairs Journal, 21(92), pp. 3355.
2.Wang, J. (2005) China’s Search for Stability with America. Foreign Affairs, 84(5), p. 39.
3.Ikenberry, G. J. (2008) The rise of China and the future of the West. Can the liberal system survive? Foreign Affairs, 87(1), p. 23.
4. See IISS (2007) The Military Balance (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies), pp. 346351.
5. See SIPRI (2009) SIPRI Yearbook 2009. Summary (Stockholm: SIPRI), p. 11.
6.Hughes, C. R. (2005) Nationalism and multilateralism in Chinese foreign policy: implications for Southeast Asia. Pacific Review, 18(1), pp. 119135.
7.Waltz, K. (1993) The emerging structure of international politics. International Security, 18(2), p. 50.
8. Comprehensive national power (CNP), is an indicator used by Chinese scholars to aggregate economic, political and military sources of power. China has climbed up onto the fourth rank, behind the United States, Japan and Germany. According to these assessments, China has already attained a higher ranking in terms of political, diplomatic, economic, and military capabilities. See for example: China Academy of Social Sciences (2009) Shijie jingji huangpishu [World Yellow Economic Book] (Beijing: CASS); Liu xhibiao tuxian 60 nian zhongguo jingji bianhua: zonghe guoli you ruo dao qiang [Six Highlights, Sixty Indicators of Economic Change in China: Comprehensive National Strength from Weak to Strong], China News Net, 19 August 2009.
9.Mearsheimer, J. (2000) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W.W. Norton), p. 145; R. Kagan (2005) The illusion of managing China, The Washington Post, 13 May 2005; R. Bernstein and R. Munro (1997) The Coming Conflict with America. Foreign Affairs, 76(2), pp. 18–32.
10.Lateigne, M. (2007) China and International Institutions: Alternate Paths to Global Power (New York: Routledge), p. 1.
11.Editorial (2010) Pékin et l’Asean, Le Monde, 1 January.
12.Geeraerts, G. and Holslag, J. (2007) The Pandragon: China’s double diplomatic identity. Asia Papers, 2(2).
13. On neo-mercantilism see Gilpin, R. (1987) The Political Economy of International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
14.European Council (2003) A Secure Europe in a Better World: European Security Strategy, p. 9.
15.European Commission (1995) A Long-term Policy for EU–China Relations (Brussels: European Commission), p. 6.
16.Cooper, R. (2003) The Breaking of Nations: Order and Chaos in the Twenty-First Century (New York: Atlantic Press), p. 137.
17.Holland, M., Ryan, P., Nowak, A.Z. and Chaban, N. (eds) (2007) The EU Through the Eyes of Asia (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing).
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

European Review
  • ISSN: 1062-7987
  • EISSN: 1474-0575
  • URL: /core/journals/european-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed