China and the United States: a succession of hegemonies?

Abstract

This article critically reviews the suggestion that we are experiencing a ‘succession of hegemonies’ from the United States to China. It develops Martin Wight's writings on hegemony, and introduces a fundamental distinction (not made by Wight) between a power transition and a hegemonic succession. Wight held complex views about the nature of power and at times seemed to subscribe to a purely materialist account. Elsewhere he was more nuanced and appealed to the purpose of dominant states as part of his argument that influence does not correlate exactly with mass and weight. This suggestion is developed in the author's view of hegemony—as distinct from primacy—as denoting a legitimate practice within international society. These ideas are then superimposed upon current debates about a power transition, or a succession of hegemonies, as between the United States and China. The existing debate conflates those two issues. Accordingly, while it can readily be acknowledged that there are important indicators of a shift in the material distribution of power, this in no way amounts, as yet, to any kind of hegemonic succession. For the latter to occur, there would need to be clear evidence of an effective socialization of the aspirant hegemon's purpose and support for its preferred order. On the contrary, to date China has been largely content to operate within existing frameworks, rather than instigate a revision of them, and does not yet present a model for emulation elsewhere. It is possible that a power transition, without any hegemonic succession, could be corrosive of global governance.

Does the rise of China present a threat to the interests of the United States?

“…This parallels with one of the branches of realist theory, offensive realism, which argues that if China continues to grow economically then it will attempt to dominate Asia in the way that the US dominates the Western Hemisphere (Clark 2011:19, Mearsheimer 2014:1, He 2017. At some point, it is true that China will dominate Asia, particularly in economics.…”

Beyond the ‘RtoP’: Responsibility as doing, being and sharing

“…Brzezinski (2009) underscores the need to interact with other great powers; the EU and United States must influence the world in a 'positive and responsible' direction, whereas the United States and China must wage a dialog to the benefit of the evolvement of a 'shared sense of global responsibility'. Some present alternative visions of a superpower that does/may follow rules and recognize the rights and responsibilities of other states while others problematize the idea of a hegemon with special responsibilities, stressing that the allocation of responsibilities depends on approval granted by others (Clark, 2009(Clark, , 2011. Moreover, as a consequence of globalization, states may increasingly ignore or contest America as a power with special responsibilities for defining and addressing major threats (Lindsay, 2011).…”

O Brasil no espelho da China: tendências para o período pós-crise financeira global

“…Os impactos da CFG na China serão cruciais para a evolução de seu relacionamento com a América Latina. Aqueles que criticam o padrão de desenvolvimento chinês têm enfatizado suas vulnerabilidades, particularmente o que se assume ser um viés autoritário, a superexploração da mão de obra e do meio ambiente, a crescente desigualdade social, o nacionalismo, a corrupção, dentre outros (Babones, 2011;Clark, 2011). Em um contexto de lenta recuperação da economia global, particularmente nos países desenvolvidos, e assumindo a possibilidade de menor crescimento econômico chinês, enfatiza-se que há riscos de maior instabilidade social capaz de minar o status quo político.…”

“…Esse desafio brasileiro insere-se no quadro mais geral de transformações na ordem econômica e política internacional. Nesta primeira década do século XXI, e com mais intensidade a partir da crise financeira global, economistas, cientistas políticos e formuladores de política têm discutido intensamente se o século XXI assistirá a uma disputa pela hegemonia global entre EUA, supostamente -para alguns, uma potência em declínio -, e a China, a potência em ascensão (Clark, 2011;Jacques, 2012). Os estrategistas chineses e especialistas da academia têm sustentado que esse reposicionamento não só é legítimo, dada a importância do país, como será pacífico e benéfico à comunidade internacional.…”