Beijing Xiangshan Forum Part II

October 1, 2024

Happy 75th Anniversary of New China

Read my earlier article on Xiangshan Forum: Freeman Speaks on China-Africa Strategy at Respected Beijing Xaingshan Forum

After attending three days of discussion at the 11^th Beijing Xiangshan Forum, from September 12-14, and spending over a week in China, it is apparent to me that neither the people of China nor the government, desire confrontation with the United States. However, it is also evident that China has no intention of submitting to the doctrine of the West’s so called rules-based order, with its demented zero-sum game doctrine.

As someone who has attended hundreds of conferences in Washington DC over many years, this gathering in Beijing was unique. It was comprised of a diverse and inclusive list of speakers from all over the world, with a sizable number of Americans participating. There was a refreshing open exchange of ideas with opposing points views expressed.

Over 500 delegates, scholars, security experts, and thirty defense ministers, from over 100 countries, plus a large delegation from China, attended this three day conference, as reported: Xiangshan Forum Global Times. There were thirty-six separate sessions. In the four plenary sessions, twenty-four speakers, predominantly representing their nation’s defense establishment, addressed the conference attendees. The composition of presenters was heavily weighted to the nations of the Global South. This included a dozen nations from Africa and Asia, the ASEAN Institute for Peace and Reconciliation, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Of special note, plenary speakers from the Ministry of Defense for the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the German Federal Ministry of Defense, addressed the conference. The Vice-President of the International Red Cross also delivered remarks.

Three most important and prominent themes of the conference were:

–China-U.S. relations

–China and the Global South commitment to development

–China’s challenge to Western domination through its “rules-based international order.”

China: Enemy or Competitor of U.S.?

In the first session on China-US relations the U.S. position was represented by John Richard Waters III, former Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs. He was a key Coordinator for the U.S. Department of State for China and Taiwan for the administration of President Joe Biden, from 2021-2023. Although he repeatedly professed that he was not speaking for the Biden administration, he was the top American diplomat (former) at the conference and thoroughly knowledgeable about U.S. policy towards China and Taiwan.

Wu Xinbo, Professor, Dean of institute for International Studies, Fudan university, China, while also not a spokesperson for his government,  articulated Chinese foreign policy in his exchange with Waters.

Rick Waters attempted to present a more reasonable view of U.S. attitude towards China then what one hears from President Biden and State Department on a weekly basis. Rick Waters espoused the position of the U.S. towards China as one of competition, and not always a zero-sum game. Wu Xinbo pointed out that the U.S. policy towards China is more than so called competition, but rather one of rivalry, with the U.S. treating China as an adversary. He said, if the U.S. policy towards China is not as an enemy, then it should “walk the walk” as opposed to “talk the talk.”

Wu Xinbu also accused the U.S. of being less sympathetic to China’s goal of reunification with Taiwan and that the U.S. uses the Taiwan issue to contain China.

As one who closely follows Washington’s strategy toward China, it is more than obvious that the U.S. does indeed see China as an enemy; a threat to the transatlantic political and military establishment. This hostile anti-China attitude is expressed by leaders of both the Republican and Democratic parties, and the majority of the Congress. One can find, on almost any given week, a seminar in Washington DC, or a written commentary, by one think-tank or another, predicting when and how China will attack Taiwan, and suggested military counter measures the U.S. should take, even preemptively. The primary justification for the gargantuan U.S. defense budget of almost one trillion dollars, is to contain China’s influence in the Asia-Pacific theater.

The Disease of the “Zero-Sum” Mindset 

The real grievance that the U.S. (and the West) has with China, is its insistence to chart its own independent course of development for its people, not willing to be subservient to Western domination. China correctly, does not accept the precepts of the so called rules-based international order. Rick Waters let the cat out of the bag, so to speak, when he  explicitly accused China of trying to change the rules of the West’s rules-based order. To that extent he is correct. China’s actions have produced rage in the Western establishment for its refusal to submit to their ideologically driven system.

Germany’s representative from the Ministry of Defense, was dripping with Western arrogance towards China in his presentation during the plenary session. After criticizing China for not condemning Russia, he stated the obvious, that we live in a multi-polar world. He went on to insist, that this multi polar fact must be embedded in an internationally accepted framework…the world needs rules based multipolarity.

Is it a crime for China to want to change the axioms of a structure created by the West, which is based on a false understanding of reality?

The following few paragraphs briefly explain the inherent flawed axioms embedded in their rules-based order.

The first thing to understand is that our universe and us humans in it, are not guided by rules, but rather, our ability to comprehend and act on the principles that govern our existence.

The most critically flawed axiom in the world view of those supporting the rules-based order geopolitical structure, is its fictitious view of a fixed universe. In their imagined world, the zero-sum mentality decrees that there are only winners or losers, victors or victims. This notion of “zero-sum,” stipulates that action must be taken to suppress China’s development, because it is perceived (wrongly) as a threatening hegemon to their existing rules-based order.

This warped outlook has three perilous epistemological defects. One, the actual physical universe in which the human race dwells, is not static. We do not exist in an unchanging world, where each nation is dependent for survival on acquiring a fixed, limited category of so called natural resources. Our universe is constantly advancing to higher levels of development. Two, all human beings are born with the potential for creativity, irrespective of nationality or ethnicity. We humans are uniquely endowed with the power to hypothesize previously unknown principles embedded in the universe. From this power of creative reason, not logic, these discoveries allow civilization to overcome any constraints. It is this inborn potential of creative mentation, which each of us possesses, that makes us exclusively human. Three, the physical universe is structured to respond fruitfully to human creative intervention. If we comprehend these three principles, we know unequivocally that there are no limits to the continuous advancement of our planet. There are no limits to growth!

All nations have the same common interest: satisfying the material needs of their citizens and nurturing their creativity. Thus, the anti-human, zero-sum game outlook should be abolished and replaced with the concept that humankind can act cooperatively for the benefit every nation and its people. This principle should form the corner stone of all foreign policy.

The Global South Demands Development

China’s leadership in the emerging Global South, which has led to an irreversible multi-polar world, has caused consternation in the West, even as they publicly dismiss it.

The First Plenary Session was opened by remarks from China’s Minister of National Defense, Dong Jun, whose theme was, building a community with a shared future for mankind. He discussed the shared pursuit of development, cooperation, and win-win, over conflict, and the need to abandon the zero-sum outlook. He also spoke of promoting economic development to narrow the gap between rich and poor nations.

This theme, and the linking of peace to development, in collaboration with China, was echoed by several speakers in the four plenary sessions.

Beti Assomo Joseph, Cameroon’s Defense Minister, called for a new just equitable world economic system. He said in a separate interview with China Central Television (CCTV)

“You have a Global South, it means we also have a Global North. So, if we can work hand-in-hand for all humanity so that those who have power, economic, political, or diplomatic power, can work hand-in-hand with those who are not developed or who are poor, so that there could be human solidarity. We have that dream, and we are doing that with China.

The defense minister from the Republic of the Congo, Charles Richard Mondjo, was emphatic about the need for economic development when he told the conference, no peace no development. He said the Global South  was not industrialized, its economies are based on agriculture and mining. There is inequality between the North and the South; the North should reduce these inequalities. Any effort to support the Global South is an effort to support peace.

Sri Lanka’s Secretary of Defense discussed the need for a new economic order and reforming the current economic system to shape a more peaceful world.

 Ignoring China’s Transformation

As China celebrates on October 1, its 75^th anniversary of the founding of New China by Mao Zedong, China’s accomplishments over three quarters of a century are quite remarkable.

The achievements over the last four decades, from the beginning of Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms in his “opening up” of China in 1978 are astonishing. The World Bank reports that China has lifted 770 million Chinese from poverty, with poverty defined as $2.15 income per day. This represents three quarters of the world’s reduction in poverty and is more than the 450 million Africans still living in poverty today.

Examining China’s demographic trend also reveals its successful transformation of  economic conditions for its people. In 1960, average life expectancy in China was thirty-three years, in 1978 it almost doubled to sixty three years. Today, average life expectancy in China is seventy-eight years, comparable to U.S. levels.

Infrastructure, which drives economic growth and productivity, has been an essential component of China’s incredible transformation. During my stay in China, I chose to travel on their High Speed Rail (HSR) from Beijing to Shanghai/Pudong, rather than flying. It was a delightful journey. The HSR travelled at 215 miles per hour (345 kilometers-km) and covered the distance of 819 miles (1,318 km) in four-hours and thirty-seven minutes, on a smooth ride that arrived on time. Currently, China has 46,000 km (29,000 miles) of HSR, out of a total of 155 thousand km (96,312 miles) of rail. HSR represents almost thirty percent of China’s total rail system. The U.S. has no comparable rail system. Amtrak’s Acela train is the most advanced, but only travels a maximum speed of 150 miles per hour and there is only forty-nine miles of track that can even manage the Acela. The total rail network in the U.S. is 160,000 miles (260,000 km).

Think of the savings in time and increase in productivity if Americans could travel at the HSR speed of 215 mile per hour. For comparison, today, traveling to Chicago from Washington DC, a distance of 593 miles (956 km) by train will take almost eighteen hours.         

Yes, China has a different political, economic, and social system than the U.S. Would it not be wise to investigate how China achieved all these economic successes? Might it not be possible to learn from China? Cannot the U.S. and China embark on a joint mission to eliminate poverty throughout the world, in service of the shared-common aims of humankind? I made this proposal in my presentation at the Beijing Xiangshan Forum. Freeman Speaks on China-Africa Strategy at Respected Beijing Xaingshan Forum

Read below my earlier posts:

Will FOCAC Summit Strategize For Africa’s Future Economic Growth?

Lawrence Freeman: Why The “Rules-Based International Order” Has Failed and Will Always Fail: The Case of Africa

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, and consultant on Africa. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog:  lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com, and also publishing on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the World.”