Zimpapers Logo

Zheng Yongnian

The concept of “Chinese modernisation” has received strong reactions from other countries since its introduction.

The definition and the five characteristics of Chinese modernisation specified in the report of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China are significant.

That is, it is the modernisation of a huge population, of common prosperity for all, of material and cultural-ethical advancement, of harmony between humanity and nature, and of peaceful development.

From an international perspective, Chinese modernisation is of great significance.

Modernisation spread from Britain to European continental countries and North America, then came to Asia.

Japan was the first country in Asia to realise modernisation, and after the 1980s. Large-scale modernisation commenced in China.

However, the modernisation of these countries was on a relatively small scale. Britain did not have a huge population then, and many European countries now have only tens of millions of people.

The modernisation of China on such a large scale of 1,4 billion people is an unprecedented experience.

Peace is a great challenge faced by China.

The early modernisation and industrial revolution of the West made these countries powerful, but they took the path of colonialism and imperialism.

Although it is too extreme to say that the West started entirely by plunder, the exploitation of other countries was indeed a means of resource accumulation for Western modernisation.

Now there is no longer such condition, and China will not do so and find another way.

Over the years, China has engaged in Belt and Road Initiative.

Many people in the West vilified China as neo-imperialism, neo-colonialism and creditor imperialism among other things.

I told my American friends and British friends that they need to look at it realistically.

How many people did their predecessors slaughter in colonialism? But China did not.

What we do for developing countries is infrastructure building: roads, bridges, facilities, schools, hospitals, all of which are good for local development. Of course, these are areas where China needs to tell its story well.

After the introduction of Chinese modernisation, the outlook between developed and developing countries has diverged.

Developed countries often question whether Chinese modernisation is going to replace American or Japanese development.

What is the reference significance of Chinese modernisation for developing countries?

It should be noted that Chinese modernisation means China also recognises European-style modernisation, American-style modernisation or Japanese-style modernisation, and it is not intended to replace other forms of development.

It just indicates that there are various types of modernisation definitions, models and paths.

This means Chinese modernisation only contributes a new model to the modernisation types in the world.

China’s emphasis on Chinese modernisation proves that it is successful.

Because China has found a way of modernisation that fits its own civilisation, culture and national condition.

We also hope that other countries will find a means of modernisation that fits their own civilisation, culture and national conditions.

It also shows that China will not impose its own way of modernisation on other countries, as the US and the West have done.

China emphasises pluralism, and this should be especially stressed in international communications.

Otherwise, the West will panic again to propagate the rhetoric of “Chinese modernisation threat.”

The US intends to contain and encircle China, and it has had great success in the past. It has never allowed challenges from within its own alliance system, such as Japan’s challenge to it in the 1980s, as well as Germany’s and France’s that have been suppressed.

But even more, it certainly does not allow anyone outside the system to challenge it, such as the Soviet Union.

The US’ current suppression of China is more like what it did with the Soviet Union. But the problem is that it is difficult to suppress today’s China.

Above all, China is not the same as the Soviet Union.

Except for using nuclear weapons to deter each other, the Soviet Union had almost no relationship with the US.

On the other hand, China and the US still cannot be “decoupled” so far.

China, after more than 40 years of development, has the advantage in low and mid tech that the US cannot take all back. So, we have to be patient about the China-US relationship.

Personally, I propose implementing a third opening-up. After the Opium War in the 1840s, we were forced to open up, and since 1978, we have taken the initiative to open up again. Now as the West engages in strangling China and the “decoupling” of the two systems, we have to open up even more, that is, the institutional opening-up of rules, regulations, standards and management.

I call it a “unilateral opening-up.”

Even if some Western countries do not open to us, we have to open to them.

Britain could take “unilateral opening-up” because it is the first industrialised country.

The US has always emphasised opening-up on an equal footing, but it will always be unilaterally open in the areas it needs, such as the field of talent.

As long as China is open and the US remains a capitalist country, the two countries will not be able to truly “decouple.”

Now it is only the US administration, the faction in the US that seeks a new cold war and anti-China forces that want to “decouple” with China.

But such type of “decoupling” is based on the logic of politics rather than the one of capital, market or technology.

We will not “decouple” as long as we are neither too populist, nor too scared.

However, we definitely should not help the Americans to “decouple.”

For example, in terms of the entire supply and industrial chain, it will become dangerous if we go down the path of producing everything by ourselves.

Some people think it is possible for the world to split into two technological systems, but thousands of years of history show that the world can only have one instead of two.

Since China’s reform and opening-up, the country’s modernisation, technological progress on the one side, and globalisation on the other, have been reinforcing each other.

They strengthen and boost each other. But now it is different since the US is trying to strangle us.

And hyper-globalisation has now become de-globalisation.

Therefore, to cope with such a trend, we must open up for the third time.— Global Times

The author is a professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen and president of The Institute for International Affairs, Qianhai.