An Introduction To The Complexities Of The Concept
In The World Of Politics And Contemporary History, Few Concepts Evoke As Much Controversy, Ambiguity, And Questioning As The Concept Of China. In His Exceptional And Profound Book The Idea Of China: A Contested History, Published By Harvard University Press In Twenty Twenty-Six, The Distinguished Historian Xu Guoqi Takes Us On An Unprecedented Intellectual Journey To Deconstruct and Reconstruct Our Understanding Of What This Nation Truly Means. With A Graceful And Flowing Journalistic Style, And Through Rigorous Research Tools, The Author Presents A Central And Intriguing Thesis: China Is Not A Fixed Fact Or A Rigid Entity, But Rather A Flexible, Evolving, And Deeply Contested Idea Whose Meanings And Significations Have Varied Across Different Eras And Peoples. This Article Is The First Installment Of A Comprehensive Review and Careful Reading Of This Important Historical Tome, In Which We Will Delve Into The Dilemmas Of Naming, The Roots Of Identity, And The Historical Fluctuations That Shaped What We Know Today As China.
Xu Guoqi Begins His Book With A Deep Personal Reflection Dating Back To His Childhood In A Poor And Isolated Village In Anhui Province During The Nineteen Seventies, Where Teachers Instilled In The Minds Of Pupils A New And Complex Idea About The Nation: Socialist China Is Great, And Only The Communist Party Can Save It. This Narrative, In Which The Image Of The Party Became Merged With That Of The Homeland, Continues To This Day, As The Chinese Communist Party Adopts An Attitude Reminiscent Of Louis The Fourteenth’s Famous Saying “I Am The State, And The State Is Me.” In Contemporary China, Citizens Are Constantly Reminded That Loving The Nation Necessarily Means Loving The Party, And The People’s Republic Of China Fiercely Insists In International Forums On The One-China Principle, Demanding That The World And The Domestic Public Accede To This Monolithic Vision.
The Author Brilliantly Asks: Why Does The United States Of America Not Feel The Need To Tell The World That There Is Only One America And That Guam Is Part Of It? Why Does The United Kingdom Not Have To Declare That Scotland And Northern Ireland Belong To It? And Why Was Canada Not, Until Recently, Forced To Emphasize That Quebec Is An Integral Part Of Its Territory? This Chinese Obsession With Asserting Identity And Unifying The Name Reflects A Fundamental And Ongoing Crisis Regarding How To Define China Today, Both Domestically And Abroad.
The Book Does Not Pose The Question “What Is China?”, But Rather Moves Toward A Much Deeper And More Complex Question: “What Do Chinese People And Foreigners Alike Mean When They Talk About China?”. The First Question Assumes The Existence Of A Fixed And Stable Reality, Whereas The Second Question Acknowledges That China Is An Idea Carrying Divergent Meanings For Different People. To Answer This Question, We Must Explore How China Became China, And How The Chinese Became Chinese—A Journey That Requires Diving Into The Depths Of History, Far Removed From The Official Narratives Imposed By Successive Authorities.
In The Context Of Volatile International Relations, The Writer Points Out That Relations Between The People’s Republic Of China And The United States Of America Since Nineteen Eighty-Nine Have Witnessed Instances Of Collision, Retreat, And Rapprochement. From The Bombing Of The Chinese Embassy In Belgrade In Nineteen Ninety-Nine, Through Chinese Support For America Following The Attacks Of September Eleventh, To The Beijing Olympic Games In Two Thousand And Eight Which Seemed To Signal China’s Peaceful Rise. However, When President Xi Jinping Launched The Belt And Road Initiative In Twenty Thirteen, Relations Entered A Phase Of Stagnation, Later Exploding In Twenty Eighteen Under Donald Trump Into An Unprecedented Trade War. These Conflicts Were Not Merely Commercial Disputes; Rather, They Extended To Encompass Ideological Clashes, Strategic Competition, And Disputes Over National Identity And Civilizational Differences Surrounding The Idea Of China.
The Author Quotes An Article By Journalist Thomas Friedman, Who Warned That An Excessive American Focus On Understanding Who The Chinese Are And What They Are Trying To Become Has Caused Americans To Forget Their Own Identity And How They Reached Their Current State, Considering That The Absence Of Self-Reflection Represents A Real Danger. This Warning Applies Even More Strongly To The Chinese Regime, Which Promotes The Idea Of A Strong, Indomitable China Leading A Rising Glory For The East Versus A Declining West, Even Though Many Chinese Elites Have Begun To Question The Accuracy Of This Vision In Light Of The Economic, Political, And Technological Challenges Facing The Country.
The Dilemma Of Names: From The Middle Kingdom To China
The Author Devotes The First Part Of His Book To Discussing The Dilemma Of Names, A Matter Whose Roots Go Back To The Philosopher Confucius, Who Declared In The Fifth Century BC That If Names Be Not Correct, Nothing Can Be Properly Explained Or Clarified. Throughout Most Periods Of The Chinese Empire, There Was No Single Official Name For What We Call China Today; Rather, Each Ruling Dynasty Bestowed Its Own Name Upon The Country. The Idea Of China Was Primarily Tied To Shared Culture, Rituals, Customs, Traditions, And Moral Values That Might Be Invented Or Altered Over Time.
The Book Reviews How Each New Ruling Dynasty Came To Power By Declaring Its Predecessor Corrupt And Unworthy Of Carrying True Chinese Moral Values. For Example, Three Thousand Years Ago, The Founders Of The Zhou Dynasty Justified Overthrowing The Shang Dynasty By Accusing Its Rulers Of Drunkenness And Of Failing To Listen To The Voice Of The People Or To The Mandate Of Heaven. This Concept, The Mandate Of Heaven, Formed The Fundamental Pillar Of Political Legitimacy; No One Had An Absolute Right To Rule, But Had To Earn And Maintain This Right Through Virtue. The Han Dynasty Used Confucian Moral Philosophy To Legitimize Its Rule, And This Philosophy Became The Official Ideology That Held The Empire Together.
Astonishingly, The Absence Of A Unified Name For China Was A Source Of Shame And Frustration For Chinese Elites In The Late Qing Dynasty. The Diplomat And Poet Huang Zunxian Noted In The Late Nineteenth Century That Countries Of The World Like England And France Had Names Encompassing The Entire State, While China Lacked One. He Attributed This To The Fact That China Had Long Been Self-Centered, Regarding Itself As The Only Civilized State Surrounded By Barbarian Neighbors. Meanwhile, The Prominent Thinker Liang Qichao Expressed Bitter Shame That Hundreds Of Millions Of Human Beings Had Maintained This State For Thousands Of Years Without Having A Specific Name For It. Liang Wondered Whether China In Ancient Times Was A State Or Merely The Court Of A Ruling Dynasty, Arguing That Dynastic Names Made The Country The Private Property Of A Single Family, Whereas The Land Should Be The Common Property Of The People.
The Writer Also Points To The Historical Paradoxes Associated With Naming China. In The Sixteenth Century, A Portuguese Merchant And Soldier Named Galeote Pereira Was Surprised To Discover That The Chinese Did Not Know They Were Called Chinese. When He Asked Them About The Name Of Their Country, They Told Him They Had No Such Name, And That They Used The Name Of The Ruling Dynasty, Which At That Time Was The Great Ming Dynasty. On The Other Hand, The Term China Entered Western Languages Through Circuitous Routes, Starting From The Influence Of Marco Polo, Who Named It Cathay, To Translations Derived From The Indian Word Sina, Used To Describe Chinese Entities.
The Name Zhongguo, Which We Translate Today As China, Did Not Become The Official Name Of The State Until Nineteen Twelve With The Founding Of The Republic Of China. However, Even This Term Carries Numerous Dilemmas; It Literally Refers To The Middle Kingdom Or The Central State, And Was Used In Ancient Times To Refer To The Central Plains Or The Imperial Court, Rather Than Designating A Nation-State With Clear, Defined Borders In The Modern Sense. Historians Point Out That The Manchu Qing Dynasty Invented A New Meaning For China To Justify Its Legal Claim To Rule A Multi-Ethnic Empire, Equating The Qing World With China. This Merging Of The Terms Zhongguo And The Great Qing State Helped Forge A Modern Chinese National Identity, Even Though Many Later Chinese Nationalists Viewed The Qing Dynasty As A Foreign Occupation.
The Dilemma Of Names Extends To Include A Japanese Term Used To Refer To China, Namely Shina. Xu Guoqi Explains That This Term Was Not A Japanese Invention, But Rather The Japanese Pronunciation Of The Word That Originated In India. Initially, The Chinese Themselves Used This Term To Refer To Their Country Without Any Negative Connotations; Emperor Xuanzong Of The Tang Dynasty Even Used It In His Poetry. Chinese Thinkers In The Late Nineteenth And Early Twentieth Centuries, Such As Liang Qichao And Sun Yat-sen, Used The Term Shina Routinely. However, Following China’s Defeat By Japan In Eighteen Ninety-Five, And With Growing Japanese Invasion And Dominance, This Term Acquired A Pejorative Character, Becoming A Means For The Japanese To Insult The Chinese And Belittle Their Country. By The Nineteen Thirties, The Chinese Government Officially Demanded That Japan Cease Using This Word And Replace It With The Republic Of China. Following World War II, Defeated Japan Was Forced To Revert To Using The Term Chūgoku (The Middle Kingdom).
The Struggle For Identity: When Others Claim To Be The Real China
The Question Of Defining Chinese Identity Gains Additional Complexity When We Realize That Other Neighboring Countries Claimed, During Certain Historical Periods, To Represent Authentic Chinese Culture More Than China Itself. The Koreans, For Example, Believed They Were The True Heirs To Chinese Culture And Civilization After The Manchus Seized Power And Established The Qing Dynasty. Korean Confucian Elites Considered The Qing Dynasty To Be Merely A Barbarian State, And That The Essence Of The Idea Of China Had Transferred To Them. This Belief Led The Korean Court To Continue Using The Ming Dynasty Calendar And Wearing That Dynasty’s Official Attire For A Long Time, Even Erecting Shrines Honoring Ming Emperors. Similarly, Some Japanese Thinkers Claimed That Japan Inherited The Core Values Of Confucianism, Especially At A Time When These Values Were Under Fierce Attack And Criticism Within China Itself. They Believed That The Real China Based On Traditional Culture Was Destroyed When The Mongols Took Control Of It, And That Japan Took Upon Itself The Duty To Preserve Authentic Chinese Civilizational Values.
The Crisis Of The Idea Of China Is Starkly Manifested In The Glaring Contradiction In Which The People’s Republic Of China Lives Today. It Calls Itself New China, Yet Its Territory Actually Relies On The Borders Of The Multi-Ethnic Qing Empire. To Bolster Its Legitimacy, The Government Has Recently Attempted To Don The Mantle Of Traditional Values And Confucian Heritage, Which It Once Tried To Uproot During The Cultural Revolution Under Mao Zedong. Meanwhile, The People Of Taiwan, Many Of Whom Prefer The Autonomy Of Their Identity, Carry The Official Name Republic Of China—A System That Boasts A Longer History Than The People’s Republic Of China As Official China. This Contradiction Compels Us To Ask Rightfully: Who Possesses The Authority To Define China? And Who Has The Right To Decide Who Is Chinese And Who Is Not?
The Language Crisis And Character Wars
Alongside Names And Regional Identities, Language Remains One Of The Most Prominent Challenges That Have Faced And Continue To Face The Idea Of Chinese Identity. The Writer Notes That The Chinese Language Expanded Significantly In The Late Nineteenth And Early Twentieth Centuries Through Importing Terms Expressing Modern Concepts From The West Via Japan. Words Like Revolution, Society, Constitution, And Others Were The Product Of These Cultural And Linguistic Interactions. Amid The New Culture Movement In The Second Decade Of The Twentieth Century, Intellectuals Demanded The Abandonment Of Classical Chinese In Favor Of Vernacular Chinese To Modernize The Country. Some Radicals, Such As Qian Xuantong And Chen Duxiu, Even Demanded The Complete Abolition Of Chinese Characters And Their Replacement With An Alphabetic System, Viewing The Traditional Language As An Obstacle To Progress Representing Infantile And Uncivilized Thinking. In The Nineteen Fifties, The People’s Republic Of China Simplified Chinese Characters Under The Pretext Of Facilitating Learning, Which Led To Severing The Direct Link Between New Generations And Ancient Cultural Heritage Recorded In Traditional Characters Still Used In Taiwan And Hong Kong.
The Author Returns To Emphasize That Understanding China Requires Delving Into Its Past In A Methodical And Explicit Manner. Nation-Building, As The French Historian Ernest Renan Observed, Requires A Great Deal Of Forgetting And Even Historical Errors, Making Deep Historical Research A Potential Enemy Of Simplified National Narratives. The Chinese Communist Party Has Made Tremendous Efforts To Rewrite History To Serve The Present, Omitting Pivotal Events Such As The Great Famine And The Tiananmen Square Incident, In An Attempt To Create A Harmonious And Monolithic Version Of The Idea Of China. However, Shared History, Which Studies Cultural, Diplomatic, And Political Interactions Between The Chinese And Others Across The Ages, Is The Only Tool Capable Of Dispelling This Fog And Revealing The Rich And Complex Plurality Of What It Truly Means To Be Chinese.
The Dilemma Of The Constitution And Attempts To Restrain Absolute Power
At This Stage Of His Deconstruction Of The Concept Of China, Historian Xu Guoqi Moves On To Address One Of The Most Complex Dilemmas That Faced The Modern Chinese State: The Question Of The Constitution And The Transition From The Imperial Autocratic Model To The Model Of A Nation-State With A Constitutional Framework. Historically, China Did Not Know The Concept Of A Constitution In The Modern Western Sense That Places Strict Legal Restrictions On The Ruler And Guarantees Fundamental Rights To The Ruled. Instead, Legitimacy Was Derived From The “Mandate Of Heaven” And From Adherence To Confucian Rituals And Virtues. However, With Successive Military Defeats Before Western Powers And Japan In The Nineteenth Century, Chinese Elites Realized That The Secret Of Western Power Lay Not Only In Military Technology, But In The Political And Institutional Organization Provided By A Constitution.
Thus Began The First Faltering Attempts To Draft A Chinese Constitution In The Late Qing Dynasty, In A Desperate Effort To Save The Crumbling Empire From Collapse. However, These Attempts Were Formalistic In Essence, Aimed At Consolidating The Power Of The Royal Family Rather Than Empowering The People. With The Fall Of The Empire And The Founding Of The Republic Of China In Nineteen Twelve, China Entered Sheer Constitutional Chaos. Constitutions And Constitutional Drafts Followed One After Another, Yet They Remained Ink On Paper Amid The Dominance Of Warlords And Ongoing Military Conflicts. The Author Argues That The Problem Was Not The Absence Of Texts, But The Absence Of A Constitutional Culture That Makes The Law A Supreme Authority Superseding That Of Individuals And Parties.
This Constitutional Crisis Did Not End With The Victory Of The Communist Party And The Founding Of The People’s Republic Of China In Nineteen Forty-Nine. Although Contemporary China Possesses A Written Constitution, Actual Political Practice Places The Communist Party Above The Constitution And Above The State. In This Context, The Book Discusses Frequent Constitutional Amendments That Reflect Shifts In The Balance Of Power Within The Party Rather Than An Evolution In Civil And Political Rights. Perhaps The Recent Constitutional Amendment That Abolished Presidential Term Limits Is The Most Prominent Example Cited By The Author To Demonstrate That The Idea Of China Politically Still Revolves In The Orbit Of Absolute Power That Rejects Institutional Limits, Making The Constitution A Malleable Tool In The Hands Of Political Leadership To Pass Its Own Vision And Secure Its Continuity, Rather Than A Stable Social Contract Between Ruler And Ruled.
The Predicament Of Confucianism: From Radical Prohibition To Political Functionalization
If The Constitution Represents The Political And Organizational Challenge To The Idea Of China, Confucianism Represents Its Deeper Spiritual And Ideological Challenge. Xu Guoqi Dives Into The Turbulent History Of The Modern Chinese State’s Relationship With Confucianism, Explaining How This Philosophy Transformed From Being The Backbone Of The Empire To The Primary Enemy Of Modernity, And Then To A Soft Power Instrument In The Twenty-First Century. For Thousands Of Years, Confucian Teachings Formed The Basis Upon Which Chinese Bureaucracy Stood, Regulating Social And Political Relations Based On Concepts Of Obedience And Hierarchical Harmony. However, By The Turn Of The Twentieth Century, Particularly During The May Fourth Movement Of Nineteen Nineteen, Reformist And Radical Intellectuals Launched A Fierce Attack On Confucianism, Holding It Responsible For The Backwardness And Weakness Afflicting China.
This Hostility Reached Its Peak During The Cultural Revolution Under Mao Zedong, Where Fierce Campaigns Were Wage To Smash The “Four Olds,” Destroying Confucian Temples, Humiliating Thinkers, And Burning Traditional Books. The Idea Of New China In That Era Required A Complete Break With The Past, And A Total Erasure Of Any Ideological Reference Competing With Marxism-Leninism And Mao Zedong Thought. However, This Spiritual And Moral Vacuum Left Behind By The Cultural Revolution, And The Subsequent Sweeping Capitalist Economic Opening, Created A Severe Identity Crisis In Chinese Society.
Here, The Author Brilliantly Observes The Astounding Pragmatic Shift Led By The Chinese Leadership In Recent Decades. Confucianism Has Been Summoned Anew And Rehabilitated, Not As A Religion Or Philosophy Restraining Power, But As A National Heritage Boosting National Pride And Supporting Social Stability. The Government Began Promoting Confucian Values Such As The “Harmonious Society” To Justify Political Authoritarianism And Reject Western Democracy As Incompatible With “Chinese Characteristics.” This Functionalization Extended To Foreign Policy Through Constructing Hundreds Of “Confucius Institutes” Around The World, Aimed At Spreading Chinese Language And Culture And Improving The Country’s Image Internationally. This Stark Contradiction Between Destroying Confucianism Yesterday And Sanctifying It Today Clearly Reflects How “The Idea Of China” Is Constantly Tailored And Resewn To Fit The Immediate Political Needs Of The Ruling Class.
Shaping National Identity: One Chinese Nation Or Multiple Ethnicity?
The Book Next Touches On The Dilemma Of Ethnic And National Identity, A Problem That Continues To Cast Its Heavy Shadow On China’s Domestic Politics Today. Historically, The Chinese Empire, Especially During The Manchu Qing Dynasty, Was A Cosmopolitan Entity Encompassing Diverse Peoples And Cultures, Such As The Han, Manchu, Mongols, Tibetans, And Uyghurs, Where The Idea Of Identity Was Not Based On Ethnicity, But On Subjection To The Emperor And Engagement In The Cultural Framework Of The Middle Kingdom. However, With The Collapse Of The Empire And The Rise Of Modern Nationalism, Chinese Elites Faced An Existential Challenge: How Could This Vast, Multi-Ethnic Empire Be Transformed Into A Cohesive Modern Nation-State?
The Writer Explains How The Thinker Liang Qichao Formulated In The Early Twentieth Century The Concept Of “Zhonghua Minzu” (The Chinese Nation), An Ingenious Linguistic And Political Innovation Aimed At Smelting All Ethnic Groups Existing Within The Borders Of The Former Qing Empire Into A Single National Identity. Although This Concept Was Officially Adopted, Practical Application Was And Remains Full Of Contradictions And Tensions. On One Hand, The State Officially Recognizes Fifty-Six Ethnicities And Grants Some Regions Nominal Autonomy; On The Other Hand, The Overwhelming Majority Of The “Han” Ethnicity Exercises Absolute Dominance Over Power, The Economy, And Culture.
The Author Analyzes How The Idea Of China Undergoes A Real Test In Regions Like Tibet, Xinjiang, And Inner Mongolia, Where The Official National Narrative Promoting Harmony And Integration Clashes With Local Communities’ Desires To Preserve Their Distinct Linguistic, Religious, And Cultural Identities. Policies Of Resettlement, Mandatory Mandarin Instruction, And Strict Security Surveillance In These Regions Reflect Not Only Security Concerns, But Embody A Frenzied Desire By The Center To Forcibly Unify “The Idea Of China” And Erase Any Alternative Narratives That Might Challenge The Monolithic Vision Of A Homogeneous Chinese Nation.
Transnational Extension: Overseas Chinese And The Complexities Of Loyalty
Xu Guoqi’s Analysis Is Not Confined To China’s Geographical Borders, But Extends To Encompass The Idea Of China Outside Its Borders By Highlighting The Phenomenon Of “Huaqiao” Or Overseas Chinese. For Centuries, Millions Of Chinese Left Their Country And Settled In Southeast Asia, The Americas, And Europe. In Ancient Imperial Times, These Emigrants Were Viewed As Traitors Abandoning Their Ancestral Home; Yet With The Founding Of The Republic, Sun Yat-sen Recognized Their Vital Importance, Dubbing Them “The Mother Of The Revolution” Due To The Immense Financial And Political Support They Provided To Revolutionary Movements.
With The Founding Of The People’s Republic Of China, The Emigrant Question Became More Complex. During The Cold War Era, They Were Viewed In Host Countries As A Potential Fifth Column Loyal To Beijing, Exposing Them To Persecution In Several Nations. In Response, Beijing Abandoned The Principle Of “Jus Sanguinis” (Right Of Blood) In Granting Citizenship In The Nineteen Fifties, Encouraging Emigrants To Integrate Into Their New Societies. However, China’s Rise As An Economic Superpower Has Entirely Reshaped This Dynamic. Today, The Chinese State Actively Seeks To Attract Brains And Capital From The Chinese Diaspora, Promoting The Idea That Belonging To The Chinese Nation Transcends A Passport To Become An Inseparable Cultural And Spiritual Affiliation. This Policy Currently Sparks New Geopolitical Tensions, As Fears Materialize In Some Countries That Beijing Might Weaponize This Cultural Belonging To Achieve Strategic And Political Gains Beyond Its Borders, Making The Idea Of China A Transnational Phenomenon And A Direct Challenge To Traditional Concepts Of National Sovereignty.
Between The Imperial Order And Westphalia: Clashing Visions In The International System
At The End Of This Part Of The Analysis, The Author Links China’s Internal Dilemmas To Its Vision Of The International System. For Long Periods, China Did Not View Itself As A Nation Among Nations, But As The Center Of Civilization And “All Under Heaven” (Tianxia). This Universal Imperial System Relied On The Tributary System, Where Neighboring States Acknowledged The Moral And Cultural Superiority Of The Chinese Emperor In Exchange For Protection And Trade Relations, Without Recognizing The Concept Of Equal Sovereignty Established By The Treaty Of Westphalia In Europe.
China’s Forced Entry Into The Westphalian International System In The Nineteenth Century Through Western Cannon Muzzles Constituted A Major Civilizational Shock. Throughout The Twentieth Century, China Sought To Adapt To This System, Sometimes Rejecting And Revolting Against It As In The Mao Era, And Sometimes Integrating Into It And Exploiting Its Institutions As In The Reform Era. However, With Its Growing Comprehensive Power Today, The Author Points Out That China Has Begun To Summon Its Ancient Traditional Concepts Of Its Centrality In The World. Major Initiatives And Ambitions To Reshape Supply Chains And Global Architecture Express Not Only Economic Interests, But Carry An Implicit Desire To Redraft The Rules Of The International System To Conform To “The Idea Of China” As A Dominant Civilizational Power, Rather Than Merely A Conventional Player In The International Framework.
Internal Contradiction: The State-Society Duality In The Digital Age
At This Stage, The Analysis Moves Toward Deconstructing Deep Internal Contradictions Afflicting Efforts To Unify And Package “The Idea Of China” In The Modern Era. While The Ruling Elite Insists On Imposing A Monolithic, Rigid Narrative Equivalating Nation, State, And Party Categorically, Chinese Society—Driven By Decades Of Economic Openness—Is Experiencing Accelerating Dynamics And Interactions Characterized By Extreme Diversity And Complexity. This Deep Gap Between The Rigid Official Vision And Moving Social Reality Creates A State Of Constant Tug-Of-War Threatening Internal Stability. To Counter These Challenges, Central Authority Resorts To Employing Advanced Technology And Comprehensive Digital Surveillance Tools, Not Merely To Preserve Traditional Physical Security, But To Impose Strict Control Over Cultural Narratives, Historical Memory, And Outlets Of Expression, In Pursuit Of Monopolizing The Right To Define National Identity. This Techno-Authoritarian Approach Fundamentally Conflicts With The Flexible Historical Nature Of The Concept Of China, Which Has Long Expanded Across Ages To Accommodate Multiple Cultures And Visions, Raising Serious Theoretical And Practical Questions Regarding The Sustainability Of This Rigid Centralized Model In A Globalized Society Inextricably Entangled With The Outside World.
The Soft Power Dilemma And The Rigidity Of The Ideological Model
These Internal Contradictions Are Directly And Severely Reflected In China’s Capacity To Exercise What Is Known In International Relations As Ideological Attraction Or Soft Power. Despite Possessing Major Material And Economic Capabilities Capable Of Inducing Huge Geopolitical Transformations And Altering Global Trade Maps, Beijing Faces Extreme Difficulty In Crafting A Global Cultural Or Political Appeal Capable Of Competing Sustainably With The Western Model. China’s Insistence On Presenting Its Model As A Purely Exceptional Case With Closed “Chinese Characteristics” Hinders Its Ability To Pitch A Transnational Universal Message Attracting Peoples Outside The Realm Of Pure Investment Interests. While Ancient Chinese Empires Managed To Integrate Neighboring Peoples And Expand Their Influence Through The Appeal Of Core Confucian Values and Civilizational Achievements, Contemporary China Finds Itself Captive To A Narrow Nationalist Discourse Tendential To Exaggerate Historical Victimhood And Direct Its Messages Domestically In The First Place To Bolster Legitimacy. This Rigidity Limits The Effectiveness Of Its Diplomatic Tools, Rendering Its Relations With International And Regional Powers Restricted Mostly To The Language Of Commercial Exchange And Immediate Benefits, Without Rising To The Level Of Organic Value-Based Alliances.
