China is becoming a superpower. It should act like one.<\/b>
\nChina has suffered a series of diplomatic blows lately. Relations with the U. S. are at a multi-decade low as a trade war escalates. This month, Malaysia suspended four Chinese-backed projects as its prime minister tries to pull away from Beijing\u2019s orbit. From Myanmar to Sri Lanka to Vietnam, China\u2019s overseas investments are being met with a growing backlash.
These are all setbacks to President Xi Jinping\u2019s hopes for global greatness. Despite his aspirations to play the responsible world statesman, Xi\u2019s foreign-policy record is filled with squabbles, misfires and unfulfilled promise. If he\u2019s going to restore China to superpower status and cement its dominance in East Asia, he should take a cue from Chinese history about how to wield power.
For centuries, Chinese dynasties held a role in world affairs that looked very much like what Xi appears to want today. They sat at the center of an East Asian diplomatic and economic order that was stable, peaceful and prosperous over long periods.
That order was based on the \u201ctribute system.\u201d In the West, that phrase conjures up unsavory images of tyrannical emperors and cowering vassals. And it\u2019s true that other East Asian countries were expected to acknowledge China\u2019s supremacy. But the tribute system was also a sophisticated framework for diplomatic relations, with its own rules, customs and values.
The system was infused with the lofty principles of Confucianism, which acted as a governing ideology for China\u2019s imperial court and a cultural glue that bound the region together. In the Confucian ideal, relations were hierarchical, but not unfair. The superior power had a duty to treat subordinates with kindness and wisdom. \u201cWhen one by force subdues men, they do not submit to him in heart\u201d said Mencius, one of the great Confucian thinkers. \u201cWhen one subdues men by virtue, in their hearts\u2019 core they are pleased, and sincerely submit.\u00a0\u00bb
China had the military and economic power to force its neighbors to kowtow, of course. But for the most part, the emperors showed restraint. From the founding of the Ming Dynasty in 1368 to the first Opium War of the 1840s, China invaded an East Asian state only once (an ultimately disastrous 15th-century push into Vietnam), notes David Kang, author of \u201cEast Asia Before the West.\u201d In response, the other East Asian countries generally accepted Chinese hegemony; Japan\u2019s ill-fated invasion of Korea in the 1590s was the only overt attempt to challenge Chinese supremacy in that entire period.
To the extent the tribute system worked, it was because all parties saw benefits from it, in trade and diplomatic support. Emperors often bestowed gifts on foreign embassies worth more to their vassals than the tributes they received. Occasionally, they made concessions when they didn\u2019t have to. In 1725, when Vietnam moved part of its border about 40 miles north into Chinese territory to claim copper mines, the Qing emperor decided to compromise, leaving a majority of the land in Vietnamese hands.
Of course, the emperors were not always peaceful, especially with neighboring peoples to China\u2019s west. But if Xi had Confucian scholar-officials in his court, like the old emperors, they\u2019d likely advise him to act with more patience, generosity and conciliation \u2014 and thereby get foreign leaders to cooperate with him willingly.
What would that mean in practice?
For one thing, China would refrain from further militarizing disputed areas of the South China Sea, and instead sit down with the other claimants, maybe giving an inch or two to reach a compromise that gained foreign support while maintaining China\u2019s dominance. To resolve the trade war with Washington, China could focus on the very Confucian principle of reciprocity, and be willing to treat foreign companies on its turf the way its companies are treated overseas. And with Belt and Road, Xi could be more magnanimous and share the program\u2019s benefits more evenly with its participants, thereby avoiding a popular blowback.
Xi obviously shouldn\u2019t reestablish the tribute system; he couldn\u2019t if he wanted to. But the emperors and their Confucian literati did know a few things about prudent leadership. Just because you have power doesn\u2019t mean you should use it. Superpowers must sometimes make sacrifices to sustain their stature. And a little Confucian benevolence can go a long way.
To contact the author of this story: Michael Schuman at contactschuman@gmail.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Timothy Lavin at tlavin1@bloomberg.net<\/p>\n

\n

Sentiment rank: -0.8<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n

TW posts: 6<\/div>\n

TW reposts: 0<\/div>\n

TW likes: 2<\/div>\n

TW sentiment: 0<\/div>\n<\/div>\n