The following article was written by a professor from the Beihang University Research Center of Strategic Issues. It points out that, “The outdated and ill-mannered western conduct is a reflection of their insufficient self-confidence. Not only are they reluctant to let go of the opportunity for the Olympic Game; they use the Olympics to criticize China.  Effective diplomacy is uttering fine words while holding weapons to dominate the enemy. However, the West is only cursing on the streets, while holding no weapons to dominate China. At the same time, the West is dependent on strategic cooperation with China.” Below is the translation of the original article. [1]

The culture of strategy belongs to the category of soft power. In this respect, the East and West each have their own characteristics. Hence the large Eastern and Western countries have different national strategic capacities, different characteristics and different national fates.

With a culture of reunification (a unified culture), Modern China has witnessed (in the area of economics) the development of Marx’s maxim, “One day equals 20 years.”

The West is the home of metaphysics. Dialectics is the way of the East. However, Westerners often seem clumsy when they come across the Eastern dialectics. Metaphysics solves problems mainly by using incremental approaches. Let’s look at how Bush Jr. fights Iraq. His strategy emphasizes the superficial form, with little change, fighting in a single way from the beginning to the end and using tons of gold to hit countless targets. Except for those addicted to a foreign country’s way, true Asians usually are not like that. Asians know that “If you are winning the war, fight; if you are not winning the war, leave.” They thus take the initiative. They have an understanding of Mencius’ words: “The answer is already within me. Therefore whatever happens, I will not be unhappy.”

Different cultures bring different results to their countries. Modern China’s development started at a very low point, but the rate of [economic] improvement is rare among the world’s countries. This is, to a large extent, related to our profound cultural advantages accumulated over 5,000 years of history, not to mention the rapid changes in the 20 year period from the 1901 “Xin Chou Treaty” to the victory of the Northern Expedition in China. The history before and after the Pacific war (World War II) is sufficient to illustrate the point. In 1940, when China was at the lowest point in relation to the allied countries, China was divided into a number of political entities. Those political entities merged into two major entities in 1945 when China, in one stride, became one of the four big victory countries. By 1949, except for Taiwan, China had basically achieved national reunification. In 1953, China defeated the insufferably arrogant Americans in the battlefield of North Korea. In 1964, China became one of the world’s few nuclear countries. It only took 24 years for China to complete these miraculous transformations.
{mospagebreak}
The same situation also appeared in Europe, albeit with the exact opposite results. In 800, Emperor Charlie unified Europe, similar in significance to the reunification of China by China’s first Emperor, Qin Shihuang. However, in 843, Emperor Charlie’s three grand children signed the “Treaty of Verdun” and divided Europe into three parts. Thereafter the European geographical sections were divided into smaller and smaller pieces like “Calculus.” This laid a deeply broken foundation for the European geo-political section that has been extremely difficult to repair to date and which Britain, Russia and the United States very easily manipulate. Why is it so? It is the different ways of thinking. Westerners emphasize analysis, like the “Calculus” of metaphysics, while Asians emphasize integration, the integration of grand unification. This is the essence of the Eastern philosophy, and also the essence of the Oriental spirit.

It is precisely because of the humanistic spirit of unification and anti-secession that in 1945, despite Marshall’s advice not to go northward across the river, Chiang Kai-shek decided he would rather resign than not re-unify China. Whereas in the north, Mao Zedong did not listen to Stalin’s advice not to go southward across the river. After winning the Northeast and with the notion of “With our courage unspent pursue the overthrown foe to the end; do not fish like the Herculean King for reputation, while letting the enemy go,” he continuously fought across the river to the south and reunified China. This is Chinese people’s grand philosophy: fight rather than separate. It is precisely because of this unification culture that modern China has achieved rapid development. Like Marx said: “One day equals 20 years.” What was the determining factor? It is not mainly the material force—China was weak in this regard then. It was the Asian-specific humanistic spirit of re-unification and anti-secession, based on China’s great historical and great philosophical legacy. Stalin had told Chiang Ching-kuo, “As long as China is reunified, you will make progresses faster than any other country.” Clearly, the dialectical thinking of Oriental culture with the premise of reunification should be the most profound basis of our strategic research.

The role of the US is increasingly transforming from a world manipulator to a “strategic scavenger” for other countries

Shortly after the Soviet Union disintegrated, the position of the US in Middle Asia was advantageous to the US. At that time the Taliban was checking and balancing the five republics in the North of the former Soviet Union, with the Soviet Union on the north and Iran on the west. Afghanistan under the rule of the Taliban and Iraq under the rule of Saddam Hussein were Sunnis, while Iran was Shiite. The Taliban and Saddam were containing Iran, a major rival of the Americans, from the east and from the west. In the Gulf War, the United States defeated and retained Saddam Hussein and used him to constrain Iran; they used the liberated Kuwait to contain Saddam from the south. The United States also used minimum force to achieve their maximum strategic interests in the Middle East. After Bush Jr. gained power, however, the United States defeated the Taliban, while instead allowing the Russian forces to enter the south of Afghanistan. The toppling of Saddam granted the victory to the Iraqi Shiites and instead resulted in the expansion of Iran’s territory.
{mospagebreak}
Moreover, before the expiration of his presidency, after toppling the Taliban and Saddam for Russia and Iran, Bush Jr. shifted from the Middle East to Europe to actively support the independence of Kosovo, further eliminating the strategic obstacles for the rise of the Europeans. Accounting for the shaking effect of the Euro against the U.S. dollar, the United States is now self-destructing the foundation established in the Yalta system after World War II, which was beneficial for the US as world hegemony. In World War II America not only wanted to defeat German’ and Japanese’ fascism, but also wanted to use the war to destroy the European hegemony. For these reasons, Roosevelt supported Marshall’s plan in Normandy on the east coast of the Atlantic Ocean, rather than launch a second battlefield in Italy on the north coast of the Mediterranean. This naturally left east Europe to the Soviet Union. The consequence of the Normandy landing was the rise of the Soviet Union’s forces and the large-scale squeezing of Europe’s strategic space. Since then, the great Europe of history has become the now “Western Europe” caught between the Soviet Union and the United States. West Europe subsequently became a political vassal of the US.

After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Americans were overjoyed like children and unconsciously took the job of “strategic scavenger” for Europe. In 1999, the US promoted Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to join NATO. In the same year the US led NATO to launch the Kosovo War that separated Kosovo from Serbia. In 2004, the European Union (EU) achieved the largest eastward expansion in history and its member countries increased from 15 to 25. On February 17, 2008, the Kosovo Assembly adopted the Declaration of Independence; the United States subsequently declared the formal recognition of Kosovo independence. If we look at the map, we will be surprised to find that if Kosovo finally achieved “independence” or de facto independence, the European forces and their geographical basis would again be close to overlapping the great European map that existed before World War II. Thus, the geographical layout of the “mini Europe” that Roosevelt and Marshall designed to squeeze out the Europeans was lost.

Studying the Kosovo issue in the post-war Yalta pattern, we will find that the Kosovo event drew a perfect period for the resumption of Europe’s political map at the North Atlantic Ocean before World War II. Europe’s new rise will again create strategic pressure on the US similar to that before World War II. Such pressure will force the United States to further implement the Nixon style contraction strategy from the west bank of the North Pacific. If taking into account the U.S. defeat in the Middle East and the resulting rise of the Euro and the decline of dollar, it is reasonable to believe that this shrinkage will be considerably large-scale. The changes on the two sides of the North Atlantic Ocean inevitably leave greater expansion space for China—and of course for Japan, who has been extremely fragile in the current geo-political situation—in the West Atlantic Ocean area. It will also create a more proactive, free and relaxed geo-political environment for China to resolve the Taiwan issue.
{mospagebreak}
The West’s outdated anti-China practice indicates that Westerners no longer have the self-confidence they had before

The strategic capability of the US is in decline. On the contrary, after experiencing confusion and difficulties a few years ago, China and Russia are on the rise in their national strategic capabilities. The rise of China has once again aroused the narrow-minded complex jealous mentalities of Westerners who once admired Chinese civilization. Their unique mentality of old city households that have now finally lost control have been transformed to curses and abuses on the streets in the course of the Olympic torch relay. Viewed throughout history, we have found that cursing on the streets and beating people when upset are not novel to the Europeans and were exactly the way Europeans treated the United States, with the consequence of forcing the United States to become a world power. Interestingly, today’s Americans also have the same kind of mentality that the Europeans had in the past. The outdated and ill-mannered Western conduct is a reflection of their insufficient self-confidence, so that they are even reluctant to let go of the opportunity of the Olympic Games. Effective diplomacy is uttering fine words while holding weapons to dominate the enemy. Today the West is only cursing in the street with absolutely no weapons to dominate China; meanwhile it is dependent on strategic cooperation with China. This indicates that the current western anti-China diplomacy, if not mentally retarded, is showing the “the trick of an empty city.”[2]

In July 1897, Russia’s Finance Minister Witt talked about Europe to the visiting German Emperor William II, “In the near future, the angel-like Europe admired by scholars and artists will become a senile and trudging old woman.” An old woman always gossips about “Cinderella” because she has lost the confidence of a young woman. It now appears that today’s United States is not far from that day. (The author Zhang Wenmu is a professor in BHU Research Center for Strategic Issues. The original article was published on April 30, 2008 in Global Times)

Endnotes:
[1]. Xinhua News Agency, April 30, 2008
http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2008-05/02/content_8091192.htm
[2] According to a famous intelligence story of about the wise Chinese, ZhuGe Liang, during the three country period after the Han dynasty, ZhuGe faced total defeat and could not go home. Therefore, he played the Empty City trick on his opponent SiMa. Both were intelligent and knew each other well. When SiMa saw ZhuGe’s city was empty, he was afraid it was a trick, and withdrew his army. Thus ZhuGe could safely go home. Thus the “Empty City trick” here implies there is no substantial threat.