context: In his opening remarks during talks with US President Donald Trump, Xi Jinping 习近平 wondered whether the two nations could 'overcome the Thucydides Trap and create a new paradigm of major-country relations.' It was not the first time he had referred to IR scholar Graham Allison, who argued in his best-selling book that when an 'established power' is confronted with a 'rising power', conflict usually results.
Zheng Yongnian 郑永年 Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen) School of Public Policy dean gave an interview to Greater Bay Area Review, speaking about
- the Thucydides Trap
- whether or not one accepts the concept, one objective fact remains: transitions of power between established and rising powers have often been accompanied by war
- even in the few cases where full-scale war did not break out (e.g., the collapse of the Soviet Union) the outcome still involved one side being completely defeated in the competition
- some IR scholars remain convinced that a structural conflict between the PRC and the US cannot be avoided
- the situation today is different
- the world has entered an era of a 'de facto G2': the PRC and the US are the two superpowers, and it is an established reality
- the question of how these two superpowers can avoid falling into conflict and instead move towards substantive cooperation must be confronted directly
- the most important question in bilateral relations today is whether the zero-sum logic can be broken, opening a path towards 'win-win' outcomes
- 'Chinese wisdom' is extremely important
- the PRC's understanding of major-power relations and IR is fundamentally different from traditional Western realism
- the PRC, as a major power, is unique, and its unique resources give confidence in escaping the Thucydides Trap
- for major powers, avoiding war is extremely difficult
- yet this does not mean that stability is a utopian fantasy
- stability is a concrete objective that can be pursued through effort
- the PRC–US summit is moving in that direction and may even have a more far-reaching historical significance than Nixon’s visit to the PRC
- building a constructive PRC–US relationship of strategic stability, agreed at the summit, is a long-term, systemic project that cannot be accomplished overnight
- yet this does not mean that stability is a utopian fantasy
- the next stage of PRC–US relations, understood at three levels
- minimum stability
- as two superpowers, the PRC and the US must, at the very least, avoid direct war
- if this bottom line is maintained, local conflicts in other regions of the world will remain manageable regional issues
- if they were to enter into direct conflict, that could become the prelude to a world war
- as two superpowers, the PRC and the US must, at the very least, avoid direct war
- development of positive relations on the basis of stability
- the two sides can
- resolve problems through dialogue and consultation
- continue to develop economic and trade cooperation
- maintain normalised communication on regional and global affairs
- simply avoiding conflict is not enough
- both sides must continue moving forward
- the two sides can
- building a new international order for the future
- this new order should
- not be a traditional structure in which one side overwhelms the other
- not be a battlefield of zero-sum competition
- move towards a deeper form of new international relations based on peaceful coexistence, mutual coexistence, and pragmatic cooperation
- this new order should
- minimum stability