Kishore Mahbubani, a prominent Asian voice from Singapore and a man often highly critical of Europe, was recently asked what Asia could learn from Europe. His reply: Europe was above all the continent of peace, compassion and cooperation.
“Asia” may not exist culturally, historically, religiously, socially and economically the way that Europe does. It is a much more varied continent. However, “Asians” have been looking at, and reflecting upon, the European experiment for a long time. Enlightened Japanese elites are fascinated by Franco-German reconciliation. Could that model be applied to Japan’s relations with its former enemies, from Korea to China? And today, with the irresistible rise of a more assertive China, the European example of a continent where the prospect of war between traditional enemies — or contemporary rivals — has simply disappeared, is more attractive than ever.
One does not naturally associate China with the quest for compassion. Yet some Chinese have recently discovered the virtues of the Nordic social model and Chinese delegations have been coming to Oslo regularly to see what lessons they can bring home.
The reasoning of China’s elites is pragmatic: If Chinese were reassured by the existence of a social–welfare state, they would probably save less and spend more, allowing the domestic market to take over from export-led growth. Although the EU’s image has deteriorated, Asians still find Europe’s “sharing of sovereignty” model appealing in many ways.
For Mahbubani, the “lessons of Europe” are crystal clear. If emerging Asia begins to look more and more “like a socially and politically harmonious Europe,” the world would be a much better place.
At a time when Europeans are full of self-doubt, though perhaps not as morose as the French, this praise from thoughtful Asians is more than welcome. Europeans, unfortunately, too often fail to see the merits of their peaceful conquest over their own worst natures.
Moreover, Europeans should, in the same spirit of openness, ask themselves what they can learn from Asia. In a multipolar world, the flow of examples and inspiration has become a two-way street. Europeans can no longer look down upon Asians with a “Western” combination of arrogance and ignorance, perceiving themselves as the unique carriers of a universal message.
The problem, of course, is that the concept of Asia is largely a Western one. Asians do not perceive themselves as Asians in the way that most Europeans view themselves as Europeans. India’s historical patrimony is very different from China’s, for example, not to mention the singular experience of Japan.
Yet it is legitimate to ask what, for Europeans looking at Asia, would be the equivalent of the “peace, compassion and cooperation” that Asians see in Europe? Could it be a combination of hope, energy, long-term thinking and curiosity?
Hope is a state of mind and not only the result of economic growth. Hope means confidence and young Asians are exuding the stuff, whereas young Europeans — arrogant toward others and diffident toward themselves — too often lack “appetite” and cling to the status quo, seeming to demand protection from life. Many Chinese may dream of spending like Europeans, but the nightmare of most Europeans nowadays is that they might have to start working as hard as the Chinese.
Beyond confidence and the energy that goes with an appetite for success, Europeans lack long-term thinking and curiosity about the “other” in general. As a result, they know little about the history, culture and languages of Asia. By contrast, the large numbers of young Chinese and Indians who are graduating from the best Western universities (mostly in the US) know the Western mind from the inside, and thus feel that they understand “what makes [Westerners] tick.”
Indeed, they are “Westerners,” while remaining themselves. How many Europeans can claim such familiarity with the “Asian Other?” The fact that so many Asian students come to the West to study — and so few Europeans (Westerners) do so in Asia — is not a sign of the superiority of the Western mind and model. On the contrary, it impoverishes the Western mindset, if not the Western culture.
The need to for Westerners to open themselves to the Asian mind, and even to some different societal models, does not imply, however, that Westerners should relinquish their values. The peace, compassion and cooperation Asians are contemplating with such admiration are the direct product of values which some of them see as “Western,” and that, yes, Westerners regard as “universal.”
Given Asia’s rise, it is, of course, illusory for Europeans to consider their relations with the biggest Asian power, China, only through the prism of human rights. Moreover, Europe’s ability to exert pressure on China is extremely limited at best and may be least potent where Chinese domestic matters are concerned.
Nevertheless, Europeans should not be deterred by the Chinese government’s anger at the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波). In the name of Europe’s core values, all EU ambassadors to Norway should make a point of attending the Nobel award ceremony — which the imprisoned Liu cannot — despite China’s call for them to stay away. It is simply a question of self-respect — and, ultimately, that of China.
Dominique Moisi is the author of The Geopolitics of Emotion.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath