Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 615

Concerns about China's rise to power seem overblown

Statecraft history may provide some insight into the world where China challenges US hegemony. 

Why? Because many folks are concerned about a future with China, a non-democratic country, becoming a global power and possibly a new global hegemony. Western folks have only ever known western imperialism and have generally benefited from it.

In the western world, some view the rise of China with fear and distain, and historically these views are based purely on racist sentiments.

China is considered a threat to the world order and a challenge to US exceptionalism, so many are calling for the preparation for war and American actions including sanctions, tariffs and pulling back from Europe and the Middle East are consistent with moving to a war footing. 

The idea that European/American society is an inherently superior civilisation is embedded in a range of ideologies stretching back over centuries. Until recently, these beliefs were embedded in European governments’ actions, and in more recent times in American government behaviour and the so called “US exceptionalism”.

The key question is whether China will act in the same manner as historical hegemonies. To answer this question, we need to consider both European (which includes the US, as it was a colonial project) and Chinese history.

The European approach to statecraft

European statecraft is based on state dominance, where states are competing with each other, and frequently at war. 

State dominance takes three forms - economic, religious and military. All European empires, e.g. the Roman, Spanish, French, Portuguese and British empires have used these elements in their colonial pursuits. Similarly, the American empire has embraced this model, albeit with less focus on religion and more on spreading democracy and control over autocratic regimes, e.g. Saudi Arabia. 

This European statecraft approach has meant that war became the normal state of being in Europe from about 500AD to the 1950s, and since WW2 the USA has been involved in the so called “forever wars” and coups.

China's approach to statecraft

China statecraft thinking applies a Confucianism approach which is a system of social and ethical philosophies, rather than religion-based philosophies. 

Chinese statecraft is about internal order, and by and large China has had peaceful relations with its neighbours. For nearly 500 years – from 1358 (Ming Dynasty) to 1839 (first Opium war created by the British) – China did not have wars with its neighbours. Instead there were internal wars and power struggles.

The facts support the conclusion that external imperialism and colonialism are not part of the Chinese statecraft. Does that apply today? Some may argue it does, while others say China will act in the same manner as European style statecraft.

Geographically, China is boxed in by the Pacific Ocean to the east, Himalayas to the west, tropics in the south and the dry lands to the north. China has fragmented at times and then reunited. For most of the last 2000 years, China has been a centralised controlled state and isolated from the rest of the world.

Of course we do not know the future. However, we pose some questions below that readers may wish to consider in formulating their views about a future with China being a global power.

  1. Will China naturally have a different statecraft because of its lack of democratic history? Or will it simply adopt the approach of the Western countries?
  2. Will China’s millennia of Confucian-based statecraft – compared with Western statecraft where religion is an important element – lead to a different statecraft? Perhaps it will be a mixture of the two.
  3. Will China, having been isolated for hundreds of years until relatively recently, lean towards a different type of statecraft?
  4. Are the Confucian values so strong that it will override the natural imperialistic statecraft approach?

 

Michael McAlary is Founder, CEO and Managing Director of WealthMaker Financial Services, a family office that provides investment, financial planning and mortgage broking services. This article is for general information only and has been prepared without taking into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs.

 

9 Comments
Hampton
June 26, 2025

Dudley ---Thanks for correcting my error. I accept that "murders" may have not been sent, but how about "child convicts" both male and female, as young as 10, were sent to the penal colony of Australia.
The Chinese have used opium for centuries for "medicinal" purpose, but the British made it available to everyone in the 1800s, and what a roaring trade.
"The Chinese have gone European ----" The Chinese have retain their system of Govt for over 4-5000 yrs of civilization and do not want or need the recent (last 2000yrs) European "Democratic" style of Govt. or the recent "Ruled Based Order"

Maurice Barnes
June 22, 2025

The writer poses interesting questions for debate as is clearly the case in the variety of remarks thus far contributed.

Ross
June 18, 2025

This article is naive.

James
June 13, 2025

Classic left wing rubbish. It attacks the west for being racist and imperialist, yet it ignores the last 75 years of the history of China under communist rule. It raves about the beauty of confucism, implying that fatally flawed Marxist theology has had little impact on Chines behaviour. And where is the analysis of Chairman Xi, the dictator who currently has 94 million subservient members of the CCP.
A better question for readers; since 1949 how many people in China have died prematurely due to forced labour, execution, or appalling social policy (eg: the great leap forward)? My guess is somewhere north of 50 million.
No cause for alarm?

Dudley
June 16, 2025

"50 million":

Google AI question:
'Since 1949 how many Chinese have died prematurely?'
Reply:
'a reasonable range for deaths related to political campaigns and famine is between 30 and 70 million.'

CoVID ignored.

Jim
June 12, 2025

Excellent article Michael - and posing very relevant questions.
The 1800's and early 1900s were a humiliating time for China as it acceded to European incursions along its coast with 'Agreements' along the lines of what the UK had over Hong Kong. Little wonder that modern day China's leadership resolves to never be in that position again - and to 'right any wrongs' that might still exist (Taiwan). With current economic pressures in CN, all the more reason to perhaps distract the Chinese population and to 'lay the blame' at the feet of western imperialists.
If CN does carry through with an attempt to 'incorporate' Taiwan - it will only be when they are convinced that the West would be unsuccessful in preventing a successful takeover. A complex calculus.

John
June 12, 2025

A simple way to consider China's ambitions is to look at how it treats it neighbours. Disputes with India, Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan and Taiwan are all instructive. The way it has treated Australian exports is another marker. China's "allies" include other aggressive countries, North Korea, Russia and Iran. With friends like these, who needs enemies.

Hampton Mar
June 25, 2025

I have no problem with John’s description of how China treats its neighbours. But look a little further and see how the Europeans (whites) democratic society and its “rules- based order” treat the world in general. Dumping their poor unwanted souls (thieves, murders etc) into a foreign land-Australia. Decimate the indigenous people of the US, Canada and took their land. Colonise India, Papua New Gunea, Malaya, Burma, New Caledonia, Nigeria, Algeria, Sth Africa, Botswana, Niger, Mali, Ethiopia, Senegal, Uganda and treat the indigenous population as 2nd class citizen and stole their minerals etc. These countries are not even their neighhours. Taught the Chinese to smoke opium and now blame them for producing and exporting Fentanyl. Need I say more.
Give me the Chinese system as compared to the European system of the last 200 years. Don’t throw stones when you live in a glass house

Dudley
June 26, 2025

"Dumping their poor unwanted souls (thieves, murders etc) into a foreign land-Australia":
Only gentlethieves transported, saved from deadly dungeons. Murderers murdered legally, and only after 1830 were commutation sentence murders transported.

"Taught the Chinese to smoke opium":
Facilitated:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_opium_in_China

"Give me the Chinese system as compared to the European system of the last 200 years":
The Chinese have gone European along with much else of the world. Not quite shaken Emperorism.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Why China and Russia's partnership threatens the West

How powerful are Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party?

In praise of our unique democracy and its sausage

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

Superannuation

Less than 1% of wealthy families will struggle to pay super tax: study

An ANU study has found that families with at least one super balance over $3 million have average wealth exceeding $19 million - suggesting most are well placed to absorb taxes on unrealised capital gains.   

Superannuation

Are SMSFs getting too much of a free ride?

SMSFs have managed to match, or even outperform, larger super funds despite adopting more conservative investment strategies. This looks at how they've done it - and the potential policy implications.  

Property

A developer's take on Australia's housing issues

Stockland’s development chief discusses supply constraints, government initiatives and the impact of Japanese-owned homebuilders on the industry. He also talks of green shoots in a troubled property market.

Economy

Lessons from 100 years of growing US debt

As the US debt ceiling looms, the usual warnings about a potential crash in bond and equity markets have started to appear. Investors can take confidence from history but should keep an eye on two main indicators.

Investment strategies

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

US mega-cap tech stocks have dominated recent returns - but is familiarity distorting judgement? Like the Monty Hall problem, investing success often comes from switching when it feels hardest to do so.

Latest from Morningstar

A winning investment strategy sitting right under your nose

How does a strategy built around systematically buying-and-holding a basket of the market's biggest losers perform? It turns out pretty well, so why don't more investors do it?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.