While China hardens its nationalist rhetoric and multiplies military provocations on its borders, especially in the Taiwan Strait, the latest work by Jean-Pierre Cabestan, China tomorrow: war or peace?, sheds a welcome light on the potential conflicts that the Middle Empire could provoke.
Jean-Pierre Cabestan, China tomorrow: war or peace? Gallimard, 288 p., € 22
Chinese propaganda no longer fools many people on the international scene. The rhetoric of ” peaceful ascent “And development” win-win Repeated by Beijing is now denied by its diplomatic aggressiveness and military posturing. Strategic rivalry with the United States, tensions with Japan around the Senkaku Islands, territorial claims in the China Sea, military clashes on the Indian border, threats to Taiwan and its strait… The risks of open conflict have never been so numerous .
The general tone of the publications on China echoes the growing concern over Beijing’s bellicose attitude. In a few weeks thus appeared, in France alone, this book by Jean-Pierre Cabestan, but also another by Pierre-Antoine Donnet, former AFP correspondent in Beijing (China, the big predator, L’Aube) as well as an IRSEM report entitled Chinese influence operations.
In this volatile and somewhat anxiety-provoking context, the educational approach of Jean-Pierre Cabestan, a specialist in the Chinese political system and China-Taiwan relations, allows for a dispassionate analysis of the situation. The researcher examines successively the various areas of tension: Taiwan, the islets in the South China Sea, the Senkaku Islands and the Indian border. For each, it first sheds historical light, which allows us to better understand the claims of the various protagonists. A particularly useful reminder in the case of the China Sea, which sees six states claiming pieces of land, and six others trying to enforce the freedom of navigation.
The author then undertakes a meticulous inventory of the military forces present and of the various alliances which govern the relations of the countries involved. It is sometimes a bit tedious, especially for non-specialists in intermediate DF-26 type missiles, DF-31AG type intercontinental missiles, or even ” Jiangkai-type PLA frigates repainted in white “. But this has the merit of precision and weapon enthusiasts will find their account there.
Finally, there is the analysis of the risks of direct confrontation in each of these areas, with a presentation of the different possible scenarios and an assessment of their probability. Even if the hypothesis of armed clashes is never completely ruled out, Jean-Pierre Cabestan does not believe in a catastrophic scenario which would inexorably lead to a clash between China and the United States. According to him, the two countries can avoid the “ Thucydides trap Who would like a power transition to almost inevitably lead to a conflict between the world’s leading power at the moment and a rival emerging power. ” We are therefore not witnessing a power transition, but rather the establishment of a new bipolarity, characterized by an asymmetry, in my opinion, lasting. », He specifies.
Above all, China seems for the moment to favor the exploitation of ” gray areas More than military force to push its advantage. In the Taiwanese case, Jean-Pierre Cabestan mentions in particular the massive use of cyber-attacks (Taiwan suffered 200 million in 2018!) And disinformation, and he mentions the strategy of “ front uni ”Deployed by China to try to influence the Taiwanese population in its favor. On this subject, barely touched on by the academic, the IRSEM report offers a very detailed analysis of the functioning of the United Front, its actors and its operating methods, with a specific study of the case of Taiwan.
Whatever the means employed, military forces or strategy of influence, China is clearly testing the limits of the international community, and of the United States in particular. The incursions of Chinese military planes into the Taiwanese air defense zone have never been so numerous: 380 in 2020, more than 600 since January 2021, with record activity in early October. On the Indian border, men died in 2020 during military clashes: this had not happened since 1975. In early 2021, China promulgated a law authorizing its coast guards to use their weapons in case of violation or ” imminent threat of violation Of what Beijing considers its sovereign rights. In the South China Sea, this law is synonymous with increased risk of military incidents.
So, war or peace? “ Unlikely war, impossible peace », Answers Jean-Pierre Cabestan, taking up Raymond Aron’s formula on the cold war. The academic predicts “ the emergence of a new cold war quite different from the first »: Espionage and ideological competition will be part of the game, but in a context of economic interdependence and the race for new technologies which did not exist in the second half of the XXe century.
« Can China win this cold war of a new kind? », Asks Jean-Pierre Cabestan in conclusion. To answer this question, the researcher leaves his reserve and calls Europe, despite its “ relative inability to weigh […] on the balance of power in the world To take a firm stand against China. ” It is not for us to abandon our policy of engagement “, He emphasizes,” but it is essential for us to make this commitment more selective, more conditional, that is to say to constantly adjust it according to Beijing’s behavior towards us and our interests. “. Thus, according to him, the European Union should better protect its economy and its technologies, exclude Huawei from 5G, pass more warships through the Taiwan Strait, reduce its economic dependence on China, especially in strategic sectors. It should also reaffirm its commitment alongside the United States: “ despite the differences we may have with the Americans, we are their allies and share their values. There is therefore no question for us of adopting any position of neutrality or even of mediator between the two great powers. “. The submarine crisis which has just strained relations between France on the one hand, the United States and Australia on the other, should not encourage a change in this position.
–
