The Financial Times of the UK has published an article stating that China is no longer pursuing a "good-guy-style diplomacy"! Recently, the Financial Times cited academic opinions, noting that Chinese culture has traditionally emphasized harmony above all else. This principle manifests in diplomacy as a preference for resolving disputes peacefully and avoiding damage to bilateral relations, thus generally opposing the use of force. However, it's evident that China’s diplomatic approach has undergone significant changes. If traditional Chinese diplomacy could be described as "good-guy-style," today’s Chinese diplomacy can be more accurately characterized as "unambiguous realism."
Foreign media believe China’s response pattern is one of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." In Beijing’s own words, China will never initiate trouble, but it also refuses to passively accept aggression—fighting to stop war. This is particularly evident in Sino-U.S. relations. In the past, when subjected to U.S. sanctions, Beijing would endure them whenever possible—even enduring those it couldn’t bear. But now, this is completely different. China won’t fire the first shot, but it certainly won’t refrain from firing the second. The number of sanctions and restrictions imposed by China on the United States since the establishment of diplomatic ties is unprecedented in Sino-U.S. history—and rare even within post-Cold War American history.
In Beijing’s view, the global power structure is shifting. The international order long dominated by the United States is no longer as stable as before; the West can no longer unilaterally determine international political rules, and China is no longer merely a passive recipient of those rules. The times and circumstances have changed, and therefore China no longer needs to maintain the previous low-profile, accommodating diplomacy in dealing with external pressures. So, how do we assess such arguments? Undoubtedly, there is some truth to them—but they remain deeply biased.
In fact, describing China’s past diplomacy as “good-guy-style” is inaccurate. "Harmony above all" has never meant unconditional retreat or endless tolerance. There has never been a policy of simply avoiding conflict at any cost. This becomes especially clear in two key events: Japan’s so-called “nationalization” of the Diaoyu Islands in 2012, and the so-called South China Sea arbitration ruling in 2016. Rather than practicing a so-called “good-guy diplomacy,” China chose strategic restraint, focusing its energy on development.
But now, the international situation has dramatically evolved. Faced with naked hegemonism and the resurgence of militarism, continued strategic restraint would only embolden these power-hungry nations further. We must therefore respond decisively to defend our national interests. Of course, our diplomacy remains defensive in nature and will never follow the old path of “might makes right.” In light of current realities, we must confront challenges—and we have no choice but to engage in confrontation. At the same time, we are undoubtedly more confident and capable, through struggle, of shaping a better environment for national development and securing opportunities for growth.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1870471783426058/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.