The Grand Alliance:
Making China
the Global Enemy
By Seung
J. Yim
September,
2007
sjyim111@uga.edu
With the
emergence of powerful nations like China
and India
in the 21st century, the Unites States is facing a difficult task of keeping a
global order and provide global stability both economically and militarily. Especially,
the emergence of China as a
major power in today’s global world is a serious threat to the stability of the
global order since China
is a non-democratic country with a great size and economic power to destabilize
the current world order. The proposed Grand Alliance by Professor Carlo Pelanda
in The Grand Alliance, in which an
alliance between democratic regional blocks strong enough to deter any actor
from instigating a conflict in the global governance, is needed to stop the unstable
and undemocratic China from being the leader of the new world order. But how
feasible is the three headed Grand Alliance between the U.S., Europe, and Russia and Asian Democracies? It is
highly unlikely that a multilateral alliance that strong can be established
between the above mentioned groups. Although there are many valid reasons for
the unlikelihood of the Grand Alliance, the biggest reason will be that
Americans will not allow a multilateral alliance where they will have a shared
leadership with other regional blocks. Even if an alliance could develop
between the democracies, it will not last long before Americans will reject it
in favor of autonomy in foreign policy making and governance of the world. Americans
will try to hold on to their perceived supremacy in the world. The only way a
multilateral alliance like the Grand Alliance being established is facing a
strong common enemy that poses a serious immediate threat to all the
democracies. With unlikelihood of China
making a mistake of threatening all the democracies in the world and alienating
their economic partners, we must paint China as the common global enemy
that needs to be contained.
The recent trend
in world politics suggests that the new world order in the post-Cold War era
will consist of regional blocks or meganations that establish a sphere of
influence in different regions. China
is a dangerous actor in the world governance because it is a meganation who
refuses to play by the rules of the current global order. Their selfish way of
promoting economic growth in their country destabilizes the entire global
economy. The lack of human rights as well as lack of actions to limit the
pollution generated in China
shows their refusal to be restricted by the global order. With China as the most likely candidate to disrupt
the current structure of world order headed by the U.S.,
the containment of China
becomes necessary. The United
States is without a doubt the most powerful
nation in the world today. However, recent events show that the U.S.
might not be powerful enough or big enough to effectively govern the world.
The task of
global governance by the United
States, which has been continuing since
1945, has taken a toll on the superpower over the years. It has been
increasingly difficult to manage the complex nature of the global politics ever
since the collapse of the Soviet Union. With
the Soviet Union no longer playing the role of a global governor in their half
of the world, the burden of the global governance fell solely on the U.S. The U.S. saw the
limits of their power and resources to govern the world order in the early
1970s. The U.S.
made an attempt to share the responsibility of providing global security and
managing global economy by dividing the responsibilities with its allies. That
was the first attempt at the Grand Alliance. With its allies in Europe and Asia unable to gain support for providing global
security, this attempt failed although it established a group led to the
current G8 group.
With the
collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. became the only superpower in
the world whose powers are unmatched both economically and militarily. As a
hegemon, the U.S.
has enjoyed a great power and respect from the rest of the world. With this status,
a sense of American superiority over other nations has been developed. This American
supremacy in the world was, for the most part, has been justified with its
power and influence in the world politics. Professor Pelanda does not dispute
that America has the most
important role in the global economy with its huge market, and that America has
absolutely the most powerful military capabilities in the world. This perceived
supremacy over other countries have fueled a nation that already believed that
it is morally good and somehow special. History has provided Americans with a
proof that they are in fact superior to the rest of the world as the American
model has been successful in economic, military, and scientific innovations.
American supremacy
is a concept that is deeply embedded in the American society. It is also a
driving force behind the strong nationalism of the American people. When the
events of September 11 occurred, many people called for an immediate
retaliation by sending troops to show their military strength. This sentiment
by many Americans arose from their sense of supremacy. People were shocked
because they couldn’t believe that someone was challenging them when they are
so powerful. In the book, The Arrogance
of American Power, Nancy Snow points out that the Americans don’t
understand why people outside the U.S. often dislike the Americans
because they were always taught that they are basically good, if not superior
people who make only unintentional mistakes in terms of foreign relations (Snow
46). Snow also argues that the U.S.
government manipulates the people with propaganda techniques and the media to
project a better image of the U.S.
She believes that people have in their mind that the U.S. is the “number-one country.?This
sense of American supremacy often leads to unilateral decision in foreign
policy making. American tendency to be unilateral in decisions regarding
foreign policy further adds to reasons why the Grand Alliance will be difficult
to achieve. Professor Pelanda noted that the American unilateralism often fails
to respect the needs of their allies (Pelanda 36). No American politician will
be able to favor an alliance where the U.S. will sacrifice their autonomy
over foreign policy because of the Americans will not allow it (Pelanda 111). Also,
American politicians tend to view proposals by its allies inferior and would
not follow the initiatives of their allies. That is because American supremacy
has Americans believing that only things “made in USA?is the best. Professor Pelanda
and I share this belief with one difference. While he believes that American
supremacy is a feature that makes it problematic for formation of alliances, I
believe that it is not only problematic, but it will make any multilateral
matrix alliance virtually impossible to achieve in the U.S. Americans trusts no
one but themselves.
Let’s assume
that the Grand Alliance is established to contain China. Although it will be
extremely difficult to achieve, assume that the Grand Alliance is achieved through
collective effort from the U.S.,
Europe, and Russia and Asian
Democracies to build a coalition against China. If the Grand Alliance is
achieved, China
will be contained and its influence will be limited. But how long will it take
to build a Grand Alliance? By the time the Grand Alliance is achieved, China may be
too strong to be contained easily. Achieving the Grand Alliance takes a lot of
time on negotiations and sacrifices by the members of the alliance. Not only is
it difficult to achieve an agreement on the terms of the alliance, it will be
difficult and time consuming to build up necessary support from the populations
of the members of the alliance. An argument can be made that while the Grand
Alliance is achieved, China
will not stand still and watch the coalition against them formed. The time it
takes to build a strong alliance between the democracies may provide time to China
to build an alliance of its own. They will try to form a coalition of their own
where, anti-western countries and non-democratic countries might join China to fight
against the imperial democratic alliance. China will seek an alliance with
the Islamic nations where strong anti-American sentiments are growing, as well
as African countries with energy resources available. In fact, China is
already building a strong influence in African countries with oil. With a
strong coalition of their own, China
could resist the influences of the Grand Alliance. With the Nation of Islam and
Africa, China
could also form a large and powerful enough of a coalition to deter any
democracies to limit their power. The end result might be that of the Cold War
era when there were two super powerful alliances against one another.
Maintaining a
multilateral alliance will be difficult in the long term. Even if the Grand
alliance is achieved successfully, it will likely be for a short term. There
are too many things that have to go right for a large multilateral alliance to
be achieved: economic convergence between America
and Europe, co-optation of Russia
into Euro-American economy, self co-optation by Japan, and etc. One of the
strengths of democracy is the political representation of the people. Although having
a political representation is so important in democratic process, sometimes it
can hurt the government’s ability to do what is in the best interest of the
people. Often people don’t have the expertise to make correct decisions on the
political issues and sometimes issues are too complicated for them to make good
decisions. That is why Americans can simply believe permanent alliances are bad
without any sound reasoning. Maintaining the Grand Alliance will be difficult
because the countries each have their agenda. Once China
is contained by the Grand Alliance, there is no doubt that Americans will call
for a return to the old ways where America determines its own foreign
policy without outside factors to consider. Americans would allow the
multilateral matrix alliance only temporarily to fight off a problem. As long
as Americans believe in American supremacy, they will resist long term
alliances of this nature. Even if China
is contained, when another regional block like the Nation of Islam or Russia
rises to challenge the global order, the difficult process of building an
alliance against a new enemy may have to be repeated.
Another reason
why it would be difficult to get a support for the Grand Alliance in the U.S. is that the U.S. has been a reactionary
government reacting only when certain events occur. Democratic nations tend to
be reactionary nations that react to events when they occur. Instead of being
the initiators, democracies are usually very reactionary to everything they do.
Policy makers in the U.S.
react to what the public opinion says more often than initiating their own
policy changes. One example of this is the September 11 attacks. The U.S. did not
view al Qaeda as a serious threat to the national security until the attacks occurred.
The U.S. government reacted
to this terrorist attack on the U.S.
soil by improving national security measures and sought after Osama Bin Laden
and al Qaeda, as well as other terrorist organizations. Democracies often have
to be reactionary because they would have to have a valid reason before they
can initiate any sort of campaign to eliminate terrorists like the al Qaeda. Because
of this reactionary nature of the democracy, it would be difficult to gain the
public support for building an alliance against China,
especially when China is so
closely tied to the U.S.
economically. Unless there is an immediate threat from the China that undermines the U.S. security
or an attack against Americans, the Grand Alliance will be difficult to justify
in the eyes of the public.
With many
reasons why the Grand Alliance will not get the public support it needs from
the American public, building a strong multilateral alliance between the United
States, the Europe, and Russia and Asian Democracies to deter China’s ambition
to become the largest regional block in the new world order seems unlikely. Although
he sees improvements in chances of the Grand Alliance forming between the
democratic nations, Professor Pelanda realizes that right now it is still an
unlikely proposal. So what can be done to improve the chances of achieving the
Grand Alliance? A proposal for achieving the Grand Alliance can be made to the
policy makers in the countries of the proposed allies that will bring increased
support for the alliance from the public. That proposal is the use of
propaganda to promote the alliance as a strong reaction to the threat of
dangerous China.
In other words, paint an image of China to the public as an evil,
dangerous, and a serious threat to the national securities of the allies.
By creating an evil
and dangerous image of China,
policy makers can create a public panic. When the public panics it can have serious
consequences as sometimes they make irrational decisions due to their state of
panic. However, if this sense of public panic is used correctly, then policy
makers can maneuver them to push for support of their policies. To make people
of all the proposed allies support a multilateral alliance at their expense is
creating a common enemy. The only way a multilateral alliance like the Grand
Alliance being established is facing a strong common enemy that poses a serious
immediate threat to all the democracies. Of course, China won’t cooperate by committing
actions that can be used to depict them as an evil nation. China will
appear to be gentle and non-threatening on the outside. It’s the responsibility
of the policy makers in the proposed allies to paint China as an enemy. It requires
creativity, and sometimes false accusations must be made against China to make the public genuinely be scared of China. History
has shown the effectiveness of propagandas. The propagandas used by both the
communists in Soviet Union and the democratic
Americans during the Cold War to spread their ideology to the rest of the world
were quite successful. The American propaganda against communists was also
successful in creating fear amongst the American public to enable the U.S. government
to successfully battle the Soviets. Even the American supremacy will not be
able to stop Americans from supporting the Grand Alliance if they genuinely
feel threatened by China.
Salem witch-hunt is an example of how powerful
public panic can be in the U.S.
As a realist, I
realize that sometimes you have to be flexible when engaging in a battle
against an enemy that does not play by the rules. People might criticize the
idea of using propaganda to make China a villain in the eyes of the
public to gain support for a policy, but you have to weigh in all the
advantages and disadvantages. Sometimes an end can justify the means,
especially if the outcome yields more good than bad. People may criticize the
idea, but this method of propaganda is often used to bring support for a cause.
Media is an excellent source to spread the idea that China poses a great security
thereat to the nation if something isn’t done to fix it. Since media can be
used to spread propaganda to project a better image of the U.S., it can also be used to project a worse
image of China.
With unlikelihood of China
making a mistake of threatening all the democracies in the world and alienating
their economic partners, we must paint China as the common global enemy
that needs to be contained. If the Grand Alliance can be formed through
propagandas, China
can be contained. The U.S.
will continue to play an important role as a superpower, now it just shares the
responsibility of global governance with its allies.
In conclusion,
the Grand Alliance, in which an alliance between democratic regional blocks
strong enough to deter any actor from instigating a conflict in the global
governance, is needed to stop the unstable and undemocratic China from being
the leader of the new world order. But it is highly unlikely that a strong
multilateral alliance between the three headed Grand Alliance between the U.S., Europe, and Russia and Asian Democracies can
occur. The main reason why the Grand Alliance in unlikely is that the Americans
will not allow a multilateral alliance where they will have a shared leadership
with other regional blocks. Perceived American supremacy makes America
unlikely to participate in multilateral matrix alliance. Even if an alliance
could develop between the democracies, it will not last long before Americans
will reject it in favor of autonomy in foreign policy making and governance of
the world. China
could also try to form an alliance of their own with the Islamic nations and
African nations. The only way a multilateral alliance like the Grand Alliance
being established is facing a strong common enemy that poses a serious
immediate threat to all the democracies. Policy makers in the proposed allies
should use propaganda to paint China
as an immediate threat to the national security to create a public panic that
can garner support for the Grand Alliance.
Works Cited
Pelanda, Carlo. The Grand Alliance:
The Global Integration of Democracies. Milano, Italy:
FrancoAmgeli, 2007.
Snow, Nancy. The Arrogance of American Power.
Lanham, Maryland:
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007.