While this article has some interesting points. It is unfortunately not too accurate when it talks about Europe and Asia.
“No matter how blonde you dye your hair, how sharp you shape your nose, you can never become a European or American, you can never become a Westerner,” Wang said.
Lol! Love this quote from Wang Yi. Tell that to the Japanese and South Koreans.
As it happens, Asia is a much more fiercely nationalistic region than Europe. This is because its ideology, even for the democracies, is not universalist or premised on ‘shared values’. Rather, a history of colonialism, combined with unresolved conflicts with their neighbours, have left Asian nations with a more lingering sense of security and defensiveness. This makes them patriotic, as opposed to the idea of embracing a ‘common heritage’.
While it is true that nationalism is very fierce in Asia. I disagree that it is more so than in Europe. European nationalism is legendary. We all know that.
For example, does it bother European nations that aspects of their own heritage and culture are derived from the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome? Of course not, this is a shared ‘European’ sentiment. But in Asia, the idea of a shared cultural heritage, even when it is explicitly obvious, is taboo. Koreans react with rage whenever China lays claim to anything in their culture or dares to argue they invented it.
This is quite misleading. Yes, most Europeans don't mind sharing a 'shared heritage' from Greece or Rome. But that hasn't stopped Europeans from hating one another in ways that only very few in Asia can rival. Hasn't the author observed European history for millennia? How many wars were fought in Europe. Wars for land, glory, religion, royal ego, and race? Two of these were World Wars. Europe was a hostile place for thousands of years. The current relative peace in Western Europe is only about 80 years old. It's a just brief period compared to the entirety of European history.
In the Euro-Atlantic region, NATO functions because it utilises Western universalism in the name of ‘shared values’. But in East Asia, this is simply non-applicable as it is every nation for itself.
The only reason the Europeans stopped fighting is because they were exhausted by the two world wars. Sure, there is that American leadership, and the Soviet menace. But the Europeans only agreed to follow the American lead because they were a spent force.
EU and NATO did keep some semblance of peace in Europe, until it doesn't. Even after 80 years, this relative European peace is not looking too good already. Today, Eastern Europe is on fire. Western Europe don't look as united as they were 30 years ago. There was that Brexit, and disputes happening in the EU and NATO.
Right now, NATO unites the Western nations because there are 'enemies' to beat up together with America's backing. America is that frame that holds NATO together. When America finally loses its power and influence to control Europe, I think Europe is gonna return to it's old self.
Anyway, it is also wrong to assume that China is seeking to create it's own 'NATO' in Asia. China does desire its own hegemony, but not in the form of NATO. China desires to return to being the centre of gravity in Asia, not as the domineering and cruel hegemon like the US.
China of course would very much like to create a shared notion of ‘Asianness’ in the value sense in order to expel the US, but it has not been effective at all in doing this. It will have to do a better job to persuade them that it is not a return to Qing Dynasty Tributary arrangements. Otherwise, the US can exploit these divisions perpetually to maintain its presence.
China becoming the centre of gravity of East Asia where other smaller states become tributaries is actually the natural order of things. The main reason why that is not happening now is because of the balance of power.
When China was the main power in East Asia. Korea, Japan, and Vietnam were tributary states. When China disappeared, the Europeans, and then the Americans filled up that power vacuum with their imperialism. Now when China is coming back, these ex-tributaries are using the US to balance China out, thus keeping what's left of the privilege that they've accumulated when China was down.
But the day will eventually come where American power declines in Asia. These tributary states will have little choice but to eventually flock back to China. This is what the balance of power does. I disagree that China should have to convince them that it is not the Qing Dynasty. But China should be proud to tell them that it is the exactly the new Qing, or Ming, or Han Dynasty. What was so horrible about the old tributary system? It was nothing compared to the colonialism of the Western powers and Imperial Japan.
China shouldn't worry about how whether these ex-tributaries wanna rejoin the tributary system. China should just worry about beating the US. When he US is out of Asia, these tributaries will eventually rejoin the tributary system.
