Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Talking History: The Chinese Classics And Foreign Policy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Talking History: The Chinese Classics And Foreign Policy

    TALKING HISTORY: THE CHINESE CLASSICS AND FOREIGN POLICY
    by Nikolas K. Gvosdev

    The National Interest Online, DC
    http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=1 5306
    Aug 28 2007

    In the aftermath of the Bishkek summit of the Shanghai Cooperation
    Organization, some Western observers have raised concerns about
    a China more prepared to operate "out of area" and have wondered
    about the type of global order China seeks. Some have wondered if
    Beijing¡¯s plans for the 21st century reflect a break with past
    Chinese traditions. Perhaps an examination of some of China¡¯s
    classical historical texts is in order.

    First, even a casual perusal of some of the Chinese classics indicates
    that our Western notion of what constitutes a historically Chinese
    "sphere of influence" (essentially limited to East Asia) is somewhat
    deficient. This becomes clear when considering what is to be found in
    the entries grouped under the rubric of "Traditions regarding Western
    Countries". [NOTE: My thanks to Paul Halsall of Fordham University
    and his Asia History Sourcebook, from which the following excerpts
    are taken.]

    For instance, in the 123rd chapter of the Shiji of Sima Qian, we read
    of the first embassy sent by the Chinese to the Parthians (the nation
    then in control of what we today would consider to be Iran) in 91 BC,
    following the campaigns undertaken under the orders of Emperor Wudi in
    Central Asia. A Parthian ruler, probably Mithradates II (123-88 BC),
    sent a return embassy to "to come and see the extent and greatness
    of the Han Empire."

    The H¨°u H¨¤nsh¨± (The Book of the Later Han), contained the notes
    and observations of the famous General Ban Chao, who campaigned in
    what is now Uzbekistan, reached the shores of the Caspian Sea, and
    established outposts of the Chinese army only a few days march from
    the Parthian capital of Ctesiphon, a city on the Tigris in the heart
    of present-day Iraq. He also sent an emissary to treat with the Roman
    Emperor Nerva under Gan Ying (who turned back before reaching Italy).

    The Chinese presence in the region caused one of the kings of Armenia
    to send tribute to China, and the 86th chapter of the Book of the
    Later Han records that the Emperor An Di made an Armenian potentate
    a daduwei, a "great commander in chief" of the empire, in essence,
    recognizing him as a vassal.

    In the Summer 2005 issue of The National Interest, Ambassador Robert
    Blackwillnoted, "Too often we do not know our history" when touching
    upon India¡¯s "civilizational ties" to the Greater Middle East. The
    same might be said of China.

    And in ancient China¡¯s relationship with the other superpower of
    its day, the Roman Empire, we might gain some insight into the type
    of multipolar world order Beijing has in mind for the future.

    What is striking from the Chinese classics is the emphasis on the
    Roman Empire as "another China"¡ªan equal state on the opposite side
    of the world creating a balance for the global order. By the first
    century, enough "Westerners" had made their way to China so that
    differences in physiognomy could be registered, and yet the Hou Hanshu,
    in describing the Romans with approval for the type of empire they
    had created, had this to say: "The inhabitants of that country are
    tall and well-proportioned, somewhat like the Han, whence they are
    called Da Qin." Da Qin¡ª"Great Qin"¡ªis a reference to the founding
    dynasty of China, and reflects the opinion that on "either side of
    the world" are to be found two similar peoples, two similar states,
    even to the point of suggesting that the Romans somehow "resembled"
    the peoples of the Chinese empire in appearance.

    In the Weil¨¹e of Yu Huan, written in the early third century, an
    even more revealing passage occurs, when Yu says that the Romans call
    their realm "another Middle Kingdom (Zhongguo)"¡ªperhaps drawing upon
    the Roman notion of their empire as the "circle of lands" around the
    "Middle Sea" or a reference to the Greek concept of the Roman realm
    as the oikumene, the civilized world.

    Indeed, in these classical texts, one gets a sense of a global order
    defined by two "Middle Kingdoms", each with their own set of vassal
    states and subordinate realms, linked together by a series of smaller
    independent powers (such as the Parthians or the Gupta kingdom in
    India) that facilitated contact between the two "Qins". I found an
    echo of these ancient sentiments in recent comments by a former Chinese
    ambassador to Germanywho opined that the way forward in international
    affairs is for leading states, each reflecting their own particular
    history and culture, each influential in their own regions of the
    world as well as on the global scene, to foster dialogue to find
    common solutions.

    It is very true that most modern Chinese foreign policymakers are not
    read in their classics, just as few members of the State Department
    can be said to be well-versed in Thucydides, Polybius or Herodotus.

    But our "civilizational" heritage does help to shape attitudes
    and worldviews. Looking at China¡¯s past can help provide some
    understanding about the type of future they hope to create.

    Nikolas K. Gvosdev is editor of The National Interest.

    --Boundary_(ID_xFT+btHRibc/iZLF0ahMOQ)- -
Working...
X