The China Choice: Why We Should Share Power
by Hugh White
Oxford University Press
4 stars
Mark O'Neill
This book argues that the US must give up leadership of Asia and share power with China, to avoid war and terrible consequences for the world.
Author Hugh White, professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University's Strategic and Defence Studies Centre and principal author of Australia's 2000 Defence White Paper, has been a leading figure in public debates on defence and foreign policy.
When the book was first released in Australia in August last year, it provoked a rapid response from the country's four most recent former prime ministers, the foreign minister and two of his three immediate predecessors.
White's argument is that, within a few years, China will have a larger economy than that of the US, the first country to do so since it overtook Britain in the 1880s. "That makes China, in the long run, more formidable than the Soviets were at the height of the cold war."
This means that, after nearly two centuries, China has become a great power again and wants to be a leader in Asia and is no longer willing to accept the US as the single global and regional leader.
So what are Washington's choices? It can resist China's challenge and try to preserve the status quo, step back from its dominant role, or take on a new role by allowing China a larger role while maintaining a strong presence of its own. The China Choice argues that the third option best serves American interests.
"For China, it will mean abandoning hopes to lead Asia and accepting a strong US presence there indefinitely," White writes. "For America, it will mean accepting that its unique leadership role is no longer feasible and learning to work with China as a partner in a way that America has never done with another country before."
White argues that the rivalry between the two could, with little warning, flare into crisis and even war. "Such a war would be easy to start and very hard to end and its consequences would be catastrophic for America."
The spark could be sovereignty disputes over islands and waters in the South China Sea, US naval exercises in the Yellow Sea or quarrels between China and Japan in the East China Sea.
Even after a minor conflict, trade and financial transactions between China and most of the world would stop, as would shipping in the western Pacific. "The consequences for the global economy are incalculable, even if the conflict ceased within a few weeks."
He urges the two sides to work out a compromise. He cites the example of the peace in Europe between 1815 and 1914, preserved by countries that included Tsarist Russia, an absolute monarchy, the Austro-Hungarian empire and Britain, a parliamentary democracy.
"The political systems of Russia and Britain had as little in common as those of the United States and China today." In other words, in the interests of peace and stability, you must not question the essential legitimacy of another powerful state and government.
In the same way, the West should acknowledge the Chinese government. "Over the past 30 years, it has achieved by far the largest, fastest increase in human material welfare in history … we should not too lightly assume that the people of China would be better off - that China would remain stable, orderly and growing, as well as free - if it was governed according to Western precepts."
He concludes that both China and the US should set aside their ambition to dominate Asia and work with each other to maintain a peaceful order.