Abstract
The article is regarding the New
Cold War that is building up between the United States (US) and China. An old
era is passing, even if the contours of what is yet to come have not truly
announced themselves. We cannot fully imagine them in part because of the
sticky weight of the present. But even if the quotidian blinds us, an age of
substantially redistributed global power is fast approaching. This quote by
Howard W. French is apt for the new Cold War or the Cold War 2.0 i.e., is
slowly but gradually emerging between the US and China. “The Sino-US relations
are getting bitter and complex with each passing year and it seems that this
situation is going to stay for a long period of time”. India’s has to ensure
that in her strategic interests, economic interests, and overall national
interests this new Cold War doesn’t impact her negatively.
Introduction
The global
balance of power is shifting and the relationship between the US and Peoples Republic
of China (PRC) is undergoing a tectonic shift, and the world is now preparing
itself for a real change. Wang Yi, the Chinese Foreign Minister in his annual
interaction with the media had noted that it has come to his attention that the
US and China were on the brink of a ‘new Cold War’.1 Cui Tiankai, the Chinese Ambassador to the US
has upped the ante by making it clear that the US had to make itself aware of
the existing realities that governed our understanding of modern-day
international politics where China and the US were now standing shoulder to
shoulder in the realm of international politics.2 The diplomatic relations between the US and
China have thus turned somewhat sour in recent months and years.
The
New Cold War
The
new Cold War is now a reality. The question that, however, remains to be
answered relates to its onset. The erstwhile Cold War saw the US competing with
the Soviet Union for 45 years. It was a battle of wit and ideology and a way of
life. The new Cold War is ‘new’ in every sense of the word and unlike popular
perception this Cold War between the US and China did not begin with the Trump Presidency
but it can be dated to the early 2010s when the US-China relationship started
showing signs of disarray. Nicholas J. Spyker states that large states become
great powers and remain strong under centralised rule, and it is the location
of these states that influence their foreign policy.3 Since, China and the US are undergoing a
centralised period of governance where the states are being led by strong
personalities; it is possible that the new Cold War becomes an ongoing
phenomenon.
Moreover, the rise of Xi Jinping’s China
Dream Project and his clarion call for ‘the great rejuvenation of the Chinese
nation’ came at a time when US had begun its symptomatic decline.
Interestingly, US is trying to be ‘great again’ while China excels in its
attempts to ‘greatly rejuvenate itself again’.4 The ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
started by President Xi Jinping is a case in point. Through this project, he
‘aims for open co-operation and mutual development’ and has decided to connect
all the nations along the ancient maritime and terrestrial silk route. China
has its ‘own strategic considerations’ in proposing the initiative and it is
well known that ‘China wants to explore a new development space for its own
economic transformation’ especially across the Eastern Arm of China which has
remained considerably poor as compared to her Western Arm. Moreover, for China,
‘the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation’ which is a key goal of this
initiative involves restoring its place in the international order as
visualised by them. These ideas backed by the notions of Tian Xia and Pax
Sinica have now created a molotov cocktail. China is going back to its roots to
secure its future through the initiation of the ‘BRI and wishes to gain control
of the littorals of Southeast Asia which had traditionally served as
‘transmission belts of Chinese culture and prestige from the time of the Tang
Dynasty (618-907) till at least 1912. China wants the world to recognise that
it is hardly a pawn but a strategic actor in international relations who
executes its own interests and political will.5 Therefore, China can be deemed to be a
revisionist power in this era while the US is in favour of maintaining the
status quo. China, with its two-pronged attack on the US, therefore, is keen to
alter the existing status quo.
Sino-US
Great Power Rivalry
The
US and China want to view themselves as ‘great’ and these two powers draw
significantly on the notion of ‘symbolic power’. Since this notion grows on the
notion of ‘cultural capital’ that refers to non-financial social assets, both
are seeking a revival in their status through ways and means that are
independent of their economic status. This desire for notional power has also
led to the acceleration in the Cold War in recent years as both countries have
realised their ‘rejuvenation with a difference’ within their own cultural
contexts. In other words, since the notion of symbolic power is essential to
both the Chinese and Americans as China is on the rise and America seems to be
on the decline as the US faces its own set of challenges and both aspire to
spread their cultural footprint far and wide. Cultural power remains a
significant attribute of overall power. On the contrary, US foreign policy has
historically harped on the notion of the age-old notion of ‘Manifest Destiny’
and ‘Monroe Doctrine’.6 China is today where the US was 200 odd years
ago. However, today the renewed clash of civilisations between the West and
Sinic world is due to the ‘ensuing strategic competition’ that has engulfed
them.
Theatres
of the New Cold War
Like
any war in the past, the new Cold War is being fought on many frontiers though
the two major frontiers of this Cold War include East Asia and North America.
The new theatres of this Cold War exist both in the tangible as well as the
virtual realm i.e., traditional (SCS, intelligence, hegemonic ambitions,and
alliance building) and non-traditional security areas (technology, Artificial
Intelligence) while China has chosen to attack through more traditional or tangible
means in East Asia, her attacks in North America are more in the
non-traditional realm.
China wants to become a great power and
it understands that its great power aspirations can be fulfilled only through
control of the seas. Since control of the sea is a prerequisite for achieving
great power status in the international order and sea power has primacy over
land in both war and peace time. China feels the need to exert its influence
over the SCS.7
The
SCS
The
control of the SCS has become a major bone of contention between China and the
US. Since it is a repository of seabed oil and gas and controls large volumes
of international trade, it has become a theatre of the new Cold War. It is
non-traditionally a virtual area of the Cold War between China and the US for
both nations have used the SCS for power projection in East Asia.8 The possibility of a full-scale conflict over
the SCS is a distant possibility considering the US has now become rather
inward in its approach and especially after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,
she wishes to steer clear of long and arduous conflicts that have dotted her
recent history. The US wants to secure its own backyard now and is less
inclined to enter full blown conflicts in other parts of the world.
Technology
and Cold War 2.0
The
technological realm has emerged as the most important area of conflict in this nouveau
or new Cold War and is the oldest area of contestation as well. The battle of
the technological realm is multi-fold in nature with control of the Internet
and the realm of information security forming the chief pivot of this model.
The advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT)
forms the second pivot of contestation while 5G is the latest technological
innovation to join the bandwagon forming the periphery.9
The US had traditionally held an upper
hand in this domain with US based companies like Microsoft, Google and Apple
controlling the realm of Cyberspace. China joined the internet in 1994 and
started building the ‘great firewall’ to regulate the flow of ideas and
information from abroad. Since 2000s, it has moved from censoring ideas to
regulating public opinions on the net. From the 2010s, she has chosen to reward
and punish her people based on their social credit score in what has been
called digital totalitarianism. The Chinese state has unleashed a practice
whereby the state assesses the digital activities of its citizens. Under Xi
Jinping, it has taken a step further and tried to evolve into a ‘norm maker’
from being a ‘norm taker’ especially in the realm of Cyberspace. China has
promoted ‘Internet Sovereignty’ to reshape the discourse and practices of
global cyber governance. Thus, China has used technology to not just control
its own citizens but also of the world. Interestingly, countries like Iran and
Russia have supported China’s strict national sovereignty model in this regard.
China fears that the US has attempted to ‘nationalise the realm of information
security’ and it has reiterated its stance to have access to a ‘free and fair
internet’ in this regard.
The
Advent of AI
AI
has changed the scenario with China seeing exponential growth in this field due
to the rise of a burgeoning AI infrastructure, abundant data and a highly
skilled workforce led by ‘tenacious entrepreneurs’. China has, therefore,
emerged as the leader in technology be it in the domain of AI, cloud computing,
IoT or 5G. While the technological sphere was dominated by the US for much of
mankind’s history, the shift towards China is now more palpable than ever. China boasts of incomparable advantages in
the domain of 5G. While 5G construction in the US and Europe have been managed
purely by telecom enterprises, 5G deployment in China is a ‘national strategy
guided by the government’. Since regime security continues to be the core
concern of the Chinese state, it controls the hearts and minds of its people by
controlling the digital resources. This calibrated control is facilitated by
the media which acts as a bridge between the Chinese Communist Party and the
people.
Cold
War 2.0 and India
Cold
War 2.0 is an emerging and ongoing phenomenon and India is treading a cautious
path while dealing with both China and the US. It is in India’s strategic
interests, economic interests, and overall national interests that this new
Cold War doesn’t impact her negatively. The US sees India as a potential
balancer to China’s ambitions of power maximisation in the Asia-Pacific. India
itself is indulged in the long-time boundary dispute with China’s territorial claims
in Aksai Chin and India’s North-Eastern borders. Keeping this in mind, India is choosing to be
non-aligned, which is still a backbone of India’s foreign policy. India’s
strategic community has started using terms like ‘Strategic Autonomy’ to convey
the same message, albeit with a different terminology. New Delhi’s interests
lie in hoping and aiming that the international system remains in a mode of
status quo. What this means simply is that New Delhi wouldn’t want Beijing’s
power to increase as an outcome of the Cold War 2.0.
The reason being, that China’s rising
power could potentially prove to be much more detrimental to India’s own
interests than the hegemonic interests of the US. Atleast, in the short term,
it is India who would be wary of China’s growth. This analysis could be
challenged by those scholars who are proponents of liberalisation and
globalisation, and they might project a critique that this new Cold War 2.0 and
its analysis is based on the assumptions of structural realist thinking. The
liberals argue that the forces of globalisation almost force nation-states to
pacify their militaristic expansionist over zeal in favour of financial
progress for large-scale business interests. These two analyses are
ideologically opposed to each other and therefore provide a different
explanation to the same phenomenon i.e., Cold War 2.0. The new Cold War or the
Cold War 2.0 is increasingly getting acceptance as the pressing reality of our
times according to most of the scholars and international relations observers.
For instance, in his book, ‘Cold War
2.0: Illusion versus Reality’, author Madhav Das Nalapat, has summed up the new
Cold War. He opines, “Cold War 1.0 was fought principally between the US and
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Soon after the collapse of the latter,
Cold War 2.0 began. Just as with the earlier Cold War, this is also a battle of
systems on an existential trajectory. This time around, the principal
protagonists are the US and the PRC. Those who deny the reality of the new Cold
War believe that Cold War 1.0 has reappeared, this time with the Russian
Federation replacing the Soviet Union as the opponent. Such a view ignores the
changes to the global order caused by the increasingly visible efforts of the
PRC to replace the US as the prime mover influencing the trajectory of the
twenty-first century”.
Conclusion
This
new Cold War could well be unlike the Cold War of twentieth century. Of course,
some parallels always exist because of the great power rivalry, power maximisation,
hegemonic ambitions of great powers etc but the nature and character of the new
Cold War has changed tremendously. In the Cold War both the US and the Soviet
Union were already established superpowers in the international system who were
tussling with each other to become a global hegemon. Here, in the new Cold War,
the US is already a hegemonic power while China is yet to be accepted as a
superpower in the international community, despite its military and economic
power. China has still not filled the vacuum which was left in the
international system because of the disintegration of the erstwhile Soviet
Union.
However, with the growing bitterness in
the Sino-US relations, it would be interesting to see whether countries like
India still play a balancing act in this Cold War or China’s bullish intentions
would propel India to take sides with Washington to serve its own interests.
Unlike the 20th century, today non-military arenas are increasingly getting
more securitized than even before. Areas like Environment, Health, Cyber-Space,
Water and even Outer Space are getting securitised. These non-military areas
could potentially be the ones where the new Cold War would be fought. India
needs to increase its power in all these non-militaristic areas as well to
defend itself with ease.
To conclude, the Sino-US rivalry could
well be a defining factor of international relations in the twenty first
century. With increasing natural calamities, disasters, and pandemics on their
way, if humanity as a race couldn’t cooperate to avert these challenges, it
would be disastrous for the world. In pursuing their hegemonic ambitions, both
China and the US should not take steps that could prove disastrous for global
security.
Endnotes
1 Ministry of
Foreign Affairs (2020) State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi Meets the
Press dated 25/05/2020 URL: https://www.fmprc.gov. cn/mfa_eng/wjbxw/
t1782369.shtml (Last Accessed: 12 June 2020)
2 Chen Qingqing and Bai Yunyi (2023), If
China-US relations are already on the wrong track, what use US-proposed
‘guardrails’ are: Former Chinese ambassador, Global Times, 3July 2023,
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202307/1293618.shtml
3 Nicholas Spykman (1938), Geography and Foreign
Policy, I, The American Political Science Review Vol. 32, No. 1 (Feb., 1938),
pp. 28-50
4 Reuters (2013), Xi dreamed a dream of China’s
rise, 21 March 2013, https://www.reuters.com/article/idIN126210541820130320
5 Jagganath Panda (2015), China’s transition under Xi Jingping,
Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses, Pentagon Press, New Delhi
6 Deconde A (1976), Themes in the History of
American Foreign Policy, American Studies International Vol. 14, No. 3 (Spring
1976), pp. 3-22
7 Pant, H. (2017) China’s naval supremacy, Deccan Herald dated 14 May 2017 URL:
https://www.deccanherald.com/content/611592/chinas-naval-supremacy.html (Last
Accessed: 23 June 2020)
8 Sen, A. (2020) South China Sea: Beijing has a
major natural advantage in the geopolitical power game Economic Times dated 17
June 2020 URL:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/south-china-sea-beijing-has-a-major-natural-advantage-in-the-geopolitical-power-game/articleshow/76423659.cms
(Last Accessed: 19 June 2020)
9 Jianfeng, L. (2019) Global 5G: The Cost of
Doing Business China-India Dialogue Vol.14 No.2 March-April 2019
10 Zeng, J. Stevens, T. & Chen, Y. (2017)
China’s Solution to Global Cyber Governance: Unpacking the Domestic Discourse
of “Internet Sovereignty” Politics and Policy Volume 45, No. 3 (2017) 432-464
11 Lee, K.F. (2018) AI Superpowers: China,
Silicon Valley, and the New World Order (Boston: Houghton Miffin Harcourt)
12 French, H. (2017) Everything Under Heavens:
How the Past Helps Shape China’s Push for Global Power (London: Scribe)
13 Yunling, Z. (2017) Belt and Road Initiative:
New Co-operation and Development in China India Dialogue dated March, 2017,
Vol. 7 No. 2, (pp. 04-09)
14 Shambaugh, D. (2013) China Goes Global: The Partial
Power (New York: Oxford University Press)
15 Madhav
Das Nalpat, Cold War 2.0: Illusion versus Reality, Kindle Edition
https://www.amazon.in/Cold-War-2-0-Illusion-Reality-ebook/dp/B0CD84DT8Q
accessed on 29 Sep 2023
@Dr Martand Jha is a freelance
author who has a Doctorate in International Relations from Jawaharlal Nehru
University. He has contributed for many national and international news
publications including The Diplomat, The National Interest, International
Public Policy Review, International Policy Digest, and The Hindu among others.
His interests lie in the Cold War, Outer Space Diplomacy, Nuclear Security,
Disarmament, and Security Studies.
#Ms Anuttama
Banerji
is a Political Analyst based in New Delhi. She has graduate degrees in
International Relations from the London School of Economics and in Political
Science from Jawaharlal Nehru University. Her research interests include
International Relations Theory, South Asian Politics, Water and Maritime
Security.
Journal of the United Service Institution
of India, Vol. CLIII, No. 633,
July-September 2023.