What's new

The U.S. Is Losing the Developing World to China

beijingwalker

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 4, 2011
54,331
-19
97,104
Country
China
Location
China

The U.S. Is Losing the Developing World to China​

Dec 8, 2022

China has an image problem, and Xi Jinping’s "wolf warrior" diplomacy is largely to blame. At least that’s how most in the United States and Europe see it. But this narrative fails to recognize the headway Beijing is making in other parts of the world. What many fail to realize is that Beijing is conducting an effective diplomatic offensive in the developing world, and it poses a real challenge to U.S. global leadership.

To be sure, the abrasive tone China has presented to the international community has caused serious problems in Beijing’s relations with much of the developed world. Even many of China’s most important trading partners are increasingly aligning with the U.S., undoing decades of painstaking efforts by a smoother generation of diplomats. This is a weakness in Xi’s diplomacy, and Washington should capitalize on it.

But on a global scale, Xi’s diplomatic style isn’t failing so much as it’s playing a different game with rules unfamiliar to many Western powers. So-called wolf warrior diplomacy isn’t a flaw of Xi’s "New Era" program—it’s a feature of it. Since Xi came to power, China has recalibrated its diplomatic strategy to focus on the developing world, which it hopes to use to change the world order gradually.

This was a radical shift. Since the 1980s, the primary aim of Chinese diplomats was to placate the U.S. and its allies, easing their concerns about the Chinese Communist Party’s global intentions and convincing them that China’s rise actually benefits the existing international system. This policy was successful—the U.S. not only didn’t oppose China’s rise, but it actively enabled it, truly believing the disinformation narrative that engagement would result in democratic and free market reforms.

But the effectiveness of this U.S.-centric approach to diplomacy started to wane during the Trump administration. By 2017, Xi already pivoted from Deng Xiaoping’s injunction to "hide your strength and bide your time" in favor of assuming China’s place as a major world power in its own right. "Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy" aims to "reform" the international system and create a China-led world order, which is ominously referred to in Chinese as a "community of common destiny for mankind."

This is where the developing world comes in. Beijing knows it cannot currently challenge U.S. hegemony through military means. Rather, in a strategy likely informed in part by the CCP's own experience using workers and peasants to overthrow Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist government in China, Beijing hopes to entice as many members of the international community as possible to back its rise as a global leader. In a United Nations system characterized by "one country, one vote," the country with the most supporters often wins, and there are considerably more developing and nondemocratic countries than there are developed Western democracies.

China has worked to entice countries that are less invested in the U.S.-led international order to take its side and help fight its battles in the international community. This includes nations that openly resent the U.S. and oppose its leadership, such as Iran and Russia. China’s harsh anti-American rhetoric and aggressive treatment of Western countries appeal to these countries, giving Beijing credibility in their eyes.

It also includes underdeveloped countries in Africa, Latin America, and the South Pacific, which are not necessarily opposed to U.S. leadership but whose favor Beijing can buy through economic statecraft. China’s tone in dealing with these countries differs vastly from the harshness with which it approaches the West. In the case of many of these countries, state-owned Chinese firms are among the only developers willing to invest in much-needed infrastructure projects. While many developing countries don’t fully trust China and worry about becoming overly reliant on Beijing, cooperation is usually the least expensive and often the only way for political leaders in these countries to fill urgent needs for their struggling populations.

The U.S. can’t expect to win over rogue states intent on its decline, but it can and must compete with Beijing in the developing world. Already, China is having considerable success securing the votes it needs to block U.N. actions inconsistent with its interests. The greatest casualty has arguably been global human rights norms. China punches well above its weight in the U.N. Human Rights Council despite not even ranking among the top funders of that body. The fact that the world’s preeminent human rights authority is unable to pass a resolution to even discuss the genocide in China’s Xinjiang region shows how effective Beijing’s assault on democratic norms has become.

This is just one of many examples of how Beijing is using its influence over developing countries to overturn global norms and promote its interests in opposition to the U.S.-led global order. It is past time for the U.S. policy community to take China’s influence in the developing world seriously. Many developing countries desire alternatives to Beijing’s enticements, and the U.S. and its allies should develop strategies to compete with China for their loyalty.

 

Beidou2020

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 3, 2013
7,858
-48
20,797
Country
China
Location
New Zealand
US and India always say that the whole world is against China, what they really mean is the western world and couples of their lackeys.

1670582184689.jpeg
 

etylo

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 9, 2021
2,554
-21
2,264
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
US and India always say that the whole world is against China, what they really mean is the western world and couples of their lackeys.
Indians think they are part of the West developed world and it is the entire world, but in fact, US and Europe just treat India as a convienent tool to contain China, thats all.
 

SIPRA

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 31, 2019
13,555
3
23,274
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Indians think they are part of the West developed world and it is the entire world, but in fact, US and Europe just treat India as a convienent tool to contain China, thats all.

Yes, but since Indian decision makers know their limitations and incapacity; they have till date avoided this trap. Mostly, it is their public and media, who are raising hue and cry.
 

Horse_Rider

BANNED
Nov 24, 2022
551
1
511
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan

The U.S. Is Losing the Developing World to China​

Dec 8, 2022

China has an image problem, and Xi Jinping’s "wolf warrior" diplomacy is largely to blame. At least that’s how most in the United States and Europe see it. But this narrative fails to recognize the headway Beijing is making in other parts of the world. What many fail to realize is that Beijing is conducting an effective diplomatic offensive in the developing world, and it poses a real challenge to U.S. global leadership.

To be sure, the abrasive tone China has presented to the international community has caused serious problems in Beijing’s relations with much of the developed world. Even many of China’s most important trading partners are increasingly aligning with the U.S., undoing decades of painstaking efforts by a smoother generation of diplomats. This is a weakness in Xi’s diplomacy, and Washington should capitalize on it.

But on a global scale, Xi’s diplomatic style isn’t failing so much as it’s playing a different game with rules unfamiliar to many Western powers. So-called wolf warrior diplomacy isn’t a flaw of Xi’s "New Era" program—it’s a feature of it. Since Xi came to power, China has recalibrated its diplomatic strategy to focus on the developing world, which it hopes to use to change the world order gradually.

This was a radical shift. Since the 1980s, the primary aim of Chinese diplomats was to placate the U.S. and its allies, easing their concerns about the Chinese Communist Party’s global intentions and convincing them that China’s rise actually benefits the existing international system. This policy was successful—the U.S. not only didn’t oppose China’s rise, but it actively enabled it, truly believing the disinformation narrative that engagement would result in democratic and free market reforms.

But the effectiveness of this U.S.-centric approach to diplomacy started to wane during the Trump administration. By 2017, Xi already pivoted from Deng Xiaoping’s injunction to "hide your strength and bide your time" in favor of assuming China’s place as a major world power in its own right. "Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy" aims to "reform" the international system and create a China-led world order, which is ominously referred to in Chinese as a "community of common destiny for mankind."

This is where the developing world comes in. Beijing knows it cannot currently challenge U.S. hegemony through military means. Rather, in a strategy likely informed in part by the CCP's own experience using workers and peasants to overthrow Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist government in China, Beijing hopes to entice as many members of the international community as possible to back its rise as a global leader. In a United Nations system characterized by "one country, one vote," the country with the most supporters often wins, and there are considerably more developing and nondemocratic countries than there are developed Western democracies.

China has worked to entice countries that are less invested in the U.S.-led international order to take its side and help fight its battles in the international community. This includes nations that openly resent the U.S. and oppose its leadership, such as Iran and Russia. China’s harsh anti-American rhetoric and aggressive treatment of Western countries appeal to these countries, giving Beijing credibility in their eyes.

It also includes underdeveloped countries in Africa, Latin America, and the South Pacific, which are not necessarily opposed to U.S. leadership but whose favor Beijing can buy through economic statecraft. China’s tone in dealing with these countries differs vastly from the harshness with which it approaches the West. In the case of many of these countries, state-owned Chinese firms are among the only developers willing to invest in much-needed infrastructure projects. While many developing countries don’t fully trust China and worry about becoming overly reliant on Beijing, cooperation is usually the least expensive and often the only way for political leaders in these countries to fill urgent needs for their struggling populations.

The U.S. can’t expect to win over rogue states intent on its decline, but it can and must compete with Beijing in the developing world. Already, China is having considerable success securing the votes it needs to block U.N. actions inconsistent with its interests. The greatest casualty has arguably been global human rights norms. China punches well above its weight in the U.N. Human Rights Council despite not even ranking among the top funders of that body. The fact that the world’s preeminent human rights authority is unable to pass a resolution to even discuss the genocide in China’s Xinjiang region shows how effective Beijing’s assault on democratic norms has become.

This is just one of many examples of how Beijing is using its influence over developing countries to overturn global norms and promote its interests in opposition to the U.S.-led global order. It is past time for the U.S. policy community to take China’s influence in the developing world seriously. Many developing countries desire alternatives to Beijing’s enticements, and the U.S. and its allies should develop strategies to compete with China for their loyalty.



I think it's a very unfair comparison in my opinion. What's in the developing world? Outside of India (already a US partner), what exactly is the remainder? African countries? Russia? Sri Lanka? Bangladesh? Sri Lanka? Pakistan? Hong Kong? Vietnam?

From this list of all the countries left in the "developing world", there are no financial powers that standout to have $ 3-4 Trillion worth economies or beyond.

Now let's see who is in the US sphere of influence and many a direct ally? The European Union, the UK, Canada, Australia, India, South Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc. So from this list, you can see that ALL rich countries side with the US or are close allies of the US. We now match this list with the above list for Chinese influenced nations. What stands out?

To me, it appears that the countries the US and it's allies thought were "useless" financially or military wise, they've essentially not cared to have strong relations with them so they are going into the Chinese influence. That doesn't mean they will turn enemies to the US. The US / West is just not interested in beyond what is necessary in dealing with them. They have all the big, rich, powerful players on their side. So that's the reason. It's not that China is loving them so much that they can't find that much love from America.

For the Chinese list to make an impact, Chinese need to court some financially and militarily strong nations. Military wise, they have a strong relationship with Pakistan but that's it. They don't have deep strong financial and other ties like allies. Lastly, the Chinese need a softer approach in building close ties like the US does. Chinese ties are often very business oriented and don't penetrate deep into various leaders and nations.
 

tower9

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 19, 2018
5,445
-20
8,920
Country
China
Location
United States
Pretty biased neoliberal article.

The writer speaks as though China just woke up one day deciding to be hostile to the West. There is no mention the unrelenting hostility and aggression that the West has taken up against China that created the need for the Wolf Warrior diplomacy. It also does not mention why many non-Western nations are resentful of American power.

The truth is that most non-Western countries are pretty fed up at the hypocrisy and imperialism of the West, the non stop wars and bombings, the selective demonization and the endless hysteria about selected issues that serve the political agenda of the West.

When China stands up against the West, it gains support because it provides hope that the Western dominated world order, which is oppressive to most of the non-Western world, will be overturned and lead to a more equitable system.
 

Horse_Rider

BANNED
Nov 24, 2022
551
1
511
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Pretty biased neoliberal article.

The writer speaks as though China just woke up one day deciding to be hostile to the West. There is no mention the unrelenting hostility and aggression that the West has taken up against China that created the need for the Wolf Warrior diplomacy. It also does not mention why many non-Western nations are resentful of American power.

The truth is that most non-Western countries are pretty fed up at the hypocrisy and imperialism of the West, the non stop wars and bombings, the selective demonization and the endless hysteria about selected issues that serve the political agenda of the West.

When China stands up against the West, it gains support because it provides hope that the Western dominated world order, which is oppressive to most of the non-Western world, will be overturned and lead to a more equitable system.

You bring up some good points. But still the issue isn't being addressed as both sides are going their propaganda :lol:. Like I mentioned above with names in my lists, the US is aligned with rich nations that probably own 75% or more of the World's GDP and Markets. So what's left is poor nations who these rich nations don't really want to deal with "closely". These nations are then targeted by China with offerings like Belt and Road initiatives as they lack the money to do it themselves. Is China doing it out of love for humanity? NO!

China is finding ways to continue growing it's economy and this is one way to do so, while, loaning these nations money and creating influence. A natural ally would be somewhat of an even benefit, like it is with US and EU or UK and Germany / France, etc. Otherwise attracting poor nations for Belt and Road doesn't mean they've "aligned" with China. Nor the world will go "multi polar". If China wants to feel it being a "super power" by having two dozen poor countries build it's Belt and Road through Chinese provided loans, then that's great! And it's all talk no results to these poor nations.

What the Chinese need to do, is to OFFER some benefit BACK to these nations economically so their GDP can grow and they have the means to grow economically and militarily and these alliances will then have some meaning to turn the world multi-polar.
 

Sam6536

FULL MEMBER
Jun 26, 2022
280
0
213
Country
India
Location
India

The U.S. Is Losing the Developing World to China​

Dec 8, 2022

China has an image problem, and Xi Jinping’s "wolf warrior" diplomacy is largely to blame. At least that’s how most in the United States and Europe see it. But this narrative fails to recognize the headway Beijing is making in other parts of the world. What many fail to realize is that Beijing is conducting an effective diplomatic offensive in the developing world, and it poses a real challenge to U.S. global leadership.

To be sure, the abrasive tone China has presented to the international community has caused serious problems in Beijing’s relations with much of the developed world. Even many of China’s most important trading partners are increasingly aligning with the U.S., undoing decades of painstaking efforts by a smoother generation of diplomats. This is a weakness in Xi’s diplomacy, and Washington should capitalize on it.

But on a global scale, Xi’s diplomatic style isn’t failing so much as it’s playing a different game with rules unfamiliar to many Western powers. So-called wolf warrior diplomacy isn’t a flaw of Xi’s "New Era" program—it’s a feature of it. Since Xi came to power, China has recalibrated its diplomatic strategy to focus on the developing world, which it hopes to use to change the world order gradually.

This was a radical shift. Since the 1980s, the primary aim of Chinese diplomats was to placate the U.S. and its allies, easing their concerns about the Chinese Communist Party’s global intentions and convincing them that China’s rise actually benefits the existing international system. This policy was successful—the U.S. not only didn’t oppose China’s rise, but it actively enabled it, truly believing the disinformation narrative that engagement would result in democratic and free market reforms.

But the effectiveness of this U.S.-centric approach to diplomacy started to wane during the Trump administration. By 2017, Xi already pivoted from Deng Xiaoping’s injunction to "hide your strength and bide your time" in favor of assuming China’s place as a major world power in its own right. "Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy" aims to "reform" the international system and create a China-led world order, which is ominously referred to in Chinese as a "community of common destiny for mankind."

This is where the developing world comes in. Beijing knows it cannot currently challenge U.S. hegemony through military means. Rather, in a strategy likely informed in part by the CCP's own experience using workers and peasants to overthrow Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist government in China, Beijing hopes to entice as many members of the international community as possible to back its rise as a global leader. In a United Nations system characterized by "one country, one vote," the country with the most supporters often wins, and there are considerably more developing and nondemocratic countries than there are developed Western democracies.

China has worked to entice countries that are less invested in the U.S.-led international order to take its side and help fight its battles in the international community. This includes nations that openly resent the U.S. and oppose its leadership, such as Iran and Russia. China’s harsh anti-American rhetoric and aggressive treatment of Western countries appeal to these countries, giving Beijing credibility in their eyes.

It also includes underdeveloped countries in Africa, Latin America, and the South Pacific, which are not necessarily opposed to U.S. leadership but whose favor Beijing can buy through economic statecraft. China’s tone in dealing with these countries differs vastly from the harshness with which it approaches the West. In the case of many of these countries, state-owned Chinese firms are among the only developers willing to invest in much-needed infrastructure projects. While many developing countries don’t fully trust China and worry about becoming overly reliant on Beijing, cooperation is usually the least expensive and often the only way for political leaders in these countries to fill urgent needs for their struggling populations.

The U.S. can’t expect to win over rogue states intent on its decline, but it can and must compete with Beijing in the developing world. Already, China is having considerable success securing the votes it needs to block U.N. actions inconsistent with its interests. The greatest casualty has arguably been global human rights norms. China punches well above its weight in the U.N. Human Rights Council despite not even ranking among the top funders of that body. The fact that the world’s preeminent human rights authority is unable to pass a resolution to even discuss the genocide in China’s Xinjiang region shows how effective Beijing’s assault on democratic norms has become.

This is just one of many examples of how Beijing is using its influence over developing countries to overturn global norms and promote its interests in opposition to the U.S.-led global order. It is past time for the U.S. policy community to take China’s influence in the developing world seriously. Many developing countries desire alternatives to Beijing’s enticements, and the U.S. and its allies should develop strategies to compete with China for their loyalty.

Africa, Latin America, South Pacific, Pakistan, some other nations in BRI scheme that should be it.
Are any of them notable for having stability, economic strength or growth and a strong military or rather being important geopolitically?
Bangladesh and Sri Lanka work with both China and India as it's political and geopolitical suicide for them to pick a side.
Bhutan is in India's lawn and other South East nations seem more interested in their neutrality and just focus on their economic growth which is mostly west driven, they directly benefit from westerners leaving China.
And these just constitute the developing world. Heck even EU nations like Germany are on a military modernisation drive, Japan is beefing up their military too.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom