China’s white paper on defense
By Sushil Seth

China’s new white paper on defense makes the usual points that its defense policy is “defensive in nature”, and that it “will never seek hegemony, nor will it adopt the approach of military expansion now or in the future, no matter how its economy develops.”
But this doesn’t square with its assertion lately of a fairly outright, even outrageous, twenty-first century Monroe doctrine.
For instance, its assertion of sovereignty over the South China Sea, ignoring earlier promises of a peaceful dialogue amid competing claims to some of the island chains by its neighbors, was hardly a defensive exercise.
By declaring territories and seas as its sovereign domain and then backing it up with the projection of force and/or diplomatic coercion, is not exactly defensive. It is provocative and aggressive.
And to keep on harping that “China will never seek hegemony” frankly becomes dangerously tedious.
At the same time, a double-digit increase in military expenditure of nearly 13 per cent (on top of similar increases in the past) to estimated $92 billions, doesn’t inspire confidence in China’s “peaceful rise”.
China concedes that the situation in Asia-Pacific region is generally stable but worries about the regional flash points, like the Korean peninsula.
It is important to realize that the instability in Korea is due to the dangerous antics of China’s neighbor and ally, North Korea, for two reasons.
First: Pyongyang’s nuclear policy has introduced a highly combustible element in a regional environment still unresolved since the 1950s Korean War.
Second: to compound it further, North Korea is continuing its policy of dangerous brinkmanship against South Korea.
This is not to suggest that China’s is encouraging Pyongyang on this course.
However, it is not effectively using its considerable leverage with North Korea by way of its political and economic dependence on China.
And unless this is done as part of a strategic consensus between regional powers, including the United States, Korean peninsula will continue to be a dangerous flash point.
The white paper also identifies Tibet, Xinjiang and Taiwan as challenges because of “separatism”. The first two are self-inflicted.
The unrest in Tibet and Xinjiang arises from China’s harsh policies to obliterate the ethnic and cultural identity of these regions.
It is doing this by changing the ethnic mix in these regions by settling a large number of Han Chinese in these regions.
And it is disallowing or curtailing their language, religious beliefs and practices.
At the same time, Beijing has turned upside down the economies of these regions, with local people denied new economic opportunities.
In other words, China can’t blame the local people for fighting against injustice; even when the odds are so heavily stacked against them
The situation in Taiwan is entirely different. Taiwan is a sovereign state and has sought to forge its destiny as a democratic political entity.
And it has managed to continue on this course despite threats from the mainland, including the targeting of 1000 or more missiles at Taiwan.
China’s insistence that Taiwan is part of China is indeed at the root of all the problems between the two countries. Once China accepts the reality of Taiwan’s separate existence, there will be enormous scope for development of relations on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
An encouraging feature in the white paper, particularly after the discord of last year due to China’s aggressive regional posture, is that Beijing is undertaking to pursue a policy of greater military dialogue with the United States.
Senior Colonel Geng Yansheng reportedly said at a news conference: “China attaches importance to its military relationship with the United States…The Chinese military is now taking steps to advance exchanges with the US military this year.”
The relations with the United States had taken a dive after its decision to sell weapons to Taiwan. Beijing retaliated by suspending military exchanges with the United States.
The relationship deteriorated further over a whole range of issues last year; including the US-South Korean joint naval exercises in the Yellow Sea.
The problem is that China has come to regard the Asia-Pacific region and its waters as either its sovereign territory or sphere of influence.
Therefore, it is not happy with the United States continuing to assert its political, economic and strategic interests in the region along with its allies.
With China so keen to assert its regional primacy, the US’ determination to maintain a strong commitment to the region, doesn’t square well with Beijing’s ambitions.
This is what Colonel Geng Yansheng apparently meant when he reportedly said at a news conference that “there is no denying that in developing military relations [with the U.S] we still face difficulties and challenges.”
Indeed they do because the United States is not likely to make it easy for China to create a new Middle Kingdom in Asia-Pacific.
Beijing has to realize that a cooperative relationship between the United States and China is a prerequisite for regional stability and prosperity.
The problem, though, is that China has come to believe that the United States is a declining power.
At the same time, they also believe that China is a rising superpower and there should be no compromising on this goal.
Beijing might entertain tactical shifts to better advance their ultimate goal but without losing sight of it.
If that were the case, the US-China relationship is unlikely to enter a cooperative phase except for China’s tactical reasons.
China might be over-reaching itself in seeking to edge out the United States from Asia-Pacific.
It has tremendous internal problems and contradictions. The way it is engaged in rooting out dissidence—the most prominent recent example being the detention of the famous artist, Ai Weiwei—and censoring all access and reference to the Middle Eastern popular uprisings, is indicative of the fragility of the regime.
Beijing might, therefore, be well advised to spend more energy on political reforms at home than crafting an expansive defense policy to assert its dominance.