Expert Picks #10 : Perspectives on Chinese Foreign Policy with Benjamin Creutzfeldt
Qwoll's weekly newsletter focused on helping you learn more about the topics that matter most with experts in the field
Qwoll seeks to help its readers better understand the world and develop new interests for intellectual exploration. This week were joined by Benjamin Creutzfeldt, a scholar of Chinese foreign policy who’s worked with prestigious institutions like Johns Hopkins’ SAIS and the Wilson Center in DC. But his interests around China expand well beyond that to art, culture, and business. Benjamin is now the director of the Confucius Institute in Leipzig, a non-profit association which helps promote a knowledge of Chinese language and culture abroad.
Kyle: Benjamin, thanks for joining us today. So it’s been quite a long time you’ve been studying China. What first stimulated your interest in East Asian / Chinese studies? Academically it looks like you started to focus more on Sino– Latin American relations. Why is this such an interesting area?
Benjamin: Yeah, so I’ve actually been studying China and Chinese for over thirty years. It was not an area of broad interest in the late 80s and early 90s, but I was intrigued and committed to a better understanding which gradually evolved into better explaining of China. With the complexities of China’s involvement the world over, the study of its policies, practices and effects became more complicated, so when I moved to Latin America for personal reasons, I found (a) that China was largely an unknown entity to most Latin Americans, (b) it was less intricate and less laden with historical entanglements compared to the United States or the European nations – China doesn’t have the resentment towards Latin American that it harbors towards the former colonial powers like the UK, France, Germany, nor the military interventions of Japan or the US, and Latin America doesn’t have the sense of direct competition for power the G7 and neighboring nations have. In other words, it was an understudied relationship and so this became an opportunity for me, and one that can help people today reconsider global relationships and China’s place in the world.
Kyle: Well that is interesting. Especially as China has advanced its interests in Latam and in Africa in the last decades with its ‘Going Out’ policy. Now, I have to ask: some pundits call this a form of neocolonialism. Beijing gets new export partners, secures contracts for Chinese companies, spreads Chinese influence abroad, and gets guaranteed access to natural resources. Is this aid / development good for Africa / Latam and does the approach differ between Africa and Latam?
Benjamin: China is certainly a latecomer to the global south. It is tempting to assume that China’s interests are similar to those of former colonial powers, but it is too convenient and simplistic, and thus “neo-colonialism” is misleading. China does approach Africa and LatAm differently from one other, and individual countries in those regions are also treated distinctly depending on their size and promise, and also according to the ability of those countries to deal with China: some (like Chile, Brazil or South Africa) are strong negotiators with a seasoned diplomatic and economic elite, others are governed by somewhat hapless or greedy individuals who rarely act in the best interests of their countrymen.
As for Beijing’s goals, they are indeed in part similar to those of other countries over the past 500 years: to secure resources (bearing in mind that lithium and produce from arable land are now more important than silver or diamonds) and access markets. They are however very different in that they do not seek to impose their faith (like the Spanish) or their value systems (like the US), nor so brutally exploit the poorer nations as the Belgians, French or British openly did in the past. The Chinese drive to improve infrastructure is, in my view, a highly valuable lasting improvement of local conditions, one based on China’s policies and practices at home. The fact that it comes with a cost and some indebtedness for some of the receiving countries is a logical result but should generate economic improvements over time, if well managed. I am therefore cautiously optimistic, but recognize that each national reality varies widely.
Kyle: So I noticed China recently penned a new free trade agreement with Ecuador on top of two previous ones it had with Chile and Peru. It also signed-up many Latin American countries as part of its Belt and Road Initiative. Is there an on-going battle for owning economic relationships in Latam? What’s at stake?
Benjamin: One does not “own” economic relationships. I can shop in as many different shops as I like, and this is something that LatAm nations (and others) appreciate about the shop that is China. The US and other nations, or their banks and corporations, have repeatedly either driven poorer nations into debt, dependency or unfreedom through sanctions. This makes China not only an attractive alternative, but often the only remaining alternative. As for the Belt and Road Initiative, this is an interesting proposal by China to show developing nations a robust way forward with outside support, but it is in no way comparable to a trade agreement, it is not even an “economic relationship” but more like a memorandum of understanding to consider negotiating infrastructure projects with Chinese technology and financing (not necessarily workforce!) on a case-by-case basis. If realized, these can be considered public goods and are non-exclusive.
China is a universe of realities and an extraordinary country and mix of cultures and over two hundred languages and thousands of dialects.
Kyle: Latin America has an interesting history when it comes to Asian relations. Many came as migrant workers after the abolition of slavery, and some countries like Peru have a substantial percentage of their population from Asian heritage. Does China have soft power ambitions in Latin America? Do they want students to learn Mandarin in school and to consume China views of the world? How the people feel about this?
Benjamin: To understand popular opinion toward China and other nations, surveys over time are very valuable, for instance the LAPOP Survey or the Latinobarometro survey. These are published online. LatAm countries have very diverse relationships with China: Peru did indeed see early migration from China since the 1830s, resulting in anywhere between 5 and 10% of the population having some Chinese ancestors, whereas for instance Colombia had a policy in the 1900s banning migration from Asia altogether. China today is similar to other countries, like France, the UK or Germany, in that it encourages and supports language learning and culture centers abroad, in the hope of breaking down barriers of miscomprehension and ignorance. I wouldn’t say “consuming” Chinese views, but furthering familiarity and understanding of other perspectives.
Kyle: As a wrap up point, beyond the what we’ve discussed are there any commonly misunderstood ideas you’d like to clarify from your deep familiarity with China?
Benjamin: I think there’s no easy answer to that question. But what I will say is that there’s no singularity of China. It is a universe of realities and an extraordinary country and mix of cultures and over two hundred languages and thousands of dialects; it is the source of countless inventions we take for granted, like porcelain and paper and movable print, the compass and gunpowder, to name but a few, and thousands of new inventions in our age.
Unfortunately, much of this is overshadowed by politics and a system that causes discomfort and feels threatening to many. From this discomfort, the distance, the perceived threat, and the lack of interest in engaging with different perspectives, arise endless misunderstandings, which go both directions.
Kyle: That is undoubtedly an issue that politics and ignorance get in the way of us seeing the beauty of things. Would you be able to maybe share a few resources which might provide our new readers with a new perspectives?
Benjamin: Well, I’ve really read tons of great literature over the years; here’s a few that pop into my mind. They’re all very history oriented but have great relevance today!
For All the Tea in China by Sarah Rose - it’s a fascinating account of the role of the British East India Company and its secret agent, the Scottish botanist Robert Fortune, who proceeded to steal the tea plant from China in the 1840s along with the knowledge of processing techniques, to make it possible to grow tea in India and henceforth reduce dependence on China. A goal familiar to many Western politicians today.
The Arcanum by Janet Gleeson - this is a wonderful telling of the European pursuit of the secret of porcelain, its discovery by a German alchemist in the 1700s and the decline of Chinese porcelain exports thereafter.
The Great Game by Peter Hopkirk - this one talks about the competition between British and Russians to conquer the roof of the world, Tibet and the Himalayas in the 19th Century.
Kyle: Interesting, I’m looking forward to checking those out after I now quick make myself a pot of afternoon tea. Thanks a lot for sharing your unique perspectives with Qwoll and hope to see you in Leipzig sometime!
