This is the most fundamental cultural question facing the West and China at present and in the next century:
To what extent individual human rights and national identity are compatible, or else contradictory, to each other?
The answer to this question will determine the fate of the West and that of China.
Up until the 1950s, strong and positive coexistive energy (perhaps even synergy) between individual human rights and national identity existed in America. The 1950s to 1990s was a transition period. Since then, the society has become more and more fractured. The ever-increasing demand for individual rights has become contradictory to national identity. This contradiction is firstly not about what is morally right or superior, but about practical compatibility in reality. The moral justification is a separate matter, as both can be morally justified or not.
This is something that Americans do not admit, and are unwilling to admit, because there is no clear and easy answer.
Pride blinds. America, like all the Western nations, has forgotten its roots and become even too embarrassed to acknowledge the following fact:
The reason why human rights and national identity were in fact harmonious in America for some time was because of Christianity – both the Christian unity and the Christian forbearance, as both are necessary – not because of the political invention of democracy, which is only a fruit of the tree, not the tree, nor even a branch, itself.
It is a unique character of Christianity, for no other culture has been able to combine the national identity and individual human rights to a comparable degree.
Entering the 2020s, the rejection of true Christianity by the West is nearly complete. The pursuit of human rights has largely lost its spiritual basis. Without the spiritual truth as its foundation, the pursuit of human freedom has become a self-defeating burden rather than an enabling power to society.
With all these deteriorated spiritual and cultural conditions, the West is now pitched against the China model.
China always puts national identity ahead of individual human rights. Kevin Rudd, the former Prime Minister of Australia, despite being superbly knowledgeable about China, is one of the Westerners confused about the recent shift of China’s international policy toward emphasizing state sovereignty at the expense of human rights.
On June 2, 2022 — Mr. Rudd in an interview titled ‘Understanding How China Sees the World’ examined the ideological underpinnings of China President Xi Jinping’s worldview and how countries can create effective China policies. The conversation is posted on YouTube. The interview was Kevin Rudd at his best. As usual, he was far more insightful than most other commentators on China.
But he still missed the more fundamental culture and value question that goes way beyond politics or geopolitics.
He also seemed surprised by Xi Jinping’s worldview. Why surprised? What China does now is consistent with both Chinese culture and its communism doctrine with Chinese characteristics. The only reason China was not nearly as assertive in the international arena before was because it didn’t feel confident enough to do that previously.
And increasingly, China's putting national identity ahead of individual human rights is becoming not merely a domestic matter but a global one because nationalism, at a larger scale, always develops at the expense of others. Such is unnecessarily a subjective intent by China, but nevertheless an objective result, because a value system always has consequences – either positive or negative, all according to the nature of the value, whether intended or not.
The big question for China, and about China, is the same above: can China develop a strong nation without individual human rights?
It is not only a philosophical question but also an economic, as well as political one. The philosopher may not even want to acknowledge the legitimacy of this question. The philosophy retorts: without human rights, what’s the point of having a strong nation, even if it is possible?
But this is far more than a philosopher’s question. Whether you like it or not, that’s what China tries to do and will continue to try to do. If the West always starts with individual human rights as a standalone principle, it will not persuade China.
But can China develop a strong nation without individual human rights?
Resist jumping to axiomatic conclusions. Assume not too much, especially not from any superficial sentiment. At least in China’s view, national strength and individual well-being are two different things and may not have to coexist.
But how can a bad authoritarian country be strong? Well, it depends on how you define ‘strong’. Historically, it has been common for a bad nation to rise to become a strong nation, at least for a period of time, to dominate and devastate other nations that were more civilized and moral. China itself was a victim of that process more than once. Remember the conquering of China by Genghis Khan’s Mongol Empire.
Still, the value matters. A people that love freedom should always prefer democracy and the rule of law to authoritarianism, and also prefer a market economy to other models such as a nationalist economy and oligarchy economy, not because the former is believed to be more efficient, but more importantly because they support better values.
But every value belief will be tested and required to measure up in actual strength. Merely arguing for individual human rights is not strength. Strength requires at least diligence and respect for the laws of nature, and may extend to other characters such as integrity, sacrificial love, and purposefulness.
It may be too early to tell how China is doing. But it is quite clear that the West is not doing well. The question of salvation will again fall upon Western civilization. It will require a wakening that subsists humility and repentance, because sin is always at the root of weakness.
Sin tends to feature self-centeredness, self-indulgence, disregard of natural laws and reality, and disrespect of divine mandates, all leading to weakness. But if the West would become increasingly undiscerning with respect to the nature of sin, not only accepting it but even glorifying its manifestations, there could be no hope of a strong nation in the West. America will be no exception.
This is not to assert that Chinese culture is more moral or less sinful, but if God could use an ungodly king Nebuchadnezzar to devastate Israel, a nation closer to him, He can do it again in an allegorically similar context today.
Company-as-a-Product (CaaP) strategist & builder ? IP architecture & buildCompany-as-a-Product (CaaP) strategist & builder ? IP architecture & build
Published •
Kevin Rudd at his best. Far more insightful than most other commentators on China. But still, this did not point out the most fundamental question facing the West and China at the present time and the next century:
To what extent individual human rights and national identity are compatible, or else contradictory, to each other?
The answer to this question will determine the fate of the West and that of China.
Kevin Rudd on Understanding How China Sees the World
ZURICH, June 2, 2022 - On Thursday, June 2, 2022, Asia Society Switzerland and Credit Suisse hosted the Hon. Kevin Rudd, President of Asia Society and former Prime Minister of Australia, at Forum St. Peter in Zurich for a conversation on China’s worldview with Nico Luchsinger, Executive Director of Asia Society Switzerland.
Our key takeaways
Xi Jinping’s worldview in ten concentric circles. Understanding how China sees the world is not just an idle academic reflection. What is unfolding underneath our feet is profound change. Xi has changed China and broke with the path of evolving continuity of his predecessors. He has taken Chinese politics and economics to the left, and nationalism and foreign policy to the right. It is vital to understand Xi’s worldview, to be able to respond to it. His ten priorities are:
Keep the Party in power, and himself as its leader, at all costs.
Secure national unity as was done in Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong, and will be done in Taiwan.
Grow the economy.
Do so in an environmentally sustainable fashion.
Modernize the military into a world class force that can fight and win wars.
Have at least a benign relationship with the 14 neighboring states, but preferably have them be compliant.
Push the U.S. back by securing maritime influence in the Pacific and undermining American alliances in Asia.
Convert Eurasia into a zone of economic opportunity that becomes increasingly dependent on China.
Become an indispensable partner to the rest of the developing world.
Change the nature of the international system, making it more compatible with China’s worldview.
Xi inserted Marxism-Leninism back into China’s economy. It is surprising how Xi Jinping has profoundly changed the economic growth model of China. Why would you change a model that for forty years delivered double-digit growth? A model which increased opportunities for the private sector, decreased the role of state planning and expanded economic integration with the rest of the world. Now, expected growth is in the low single digits.
The reason for the change is Xi Jinping and his strong Marxist-Leninist politics. The previous model created a whole bunch of new elites — people like Jack Ma. Xi sees these guys as ultimately being a challenge to the rule of the Communist Party, so he reigned them in by, for example, forcing mergers between successful private companies and weak state firms.
China wants to become indispensable to us all. Beijing’s grand strategy is to ensure that our economic, corporate, and individual wellbeing depends on access to the Chinese market. Up until 2017, there was a reasonably effective strategy in place to reach that goal, which included the Belt and Road Initiative and the 16+1 grouping tying Central and Eastern European countries to China. These developments were all making China an increasingly indispensable power on trade and capital markets.
Things went wrong because of classic overreach, which is Xi Jinping’s core failure. He has gone too far, too fast, too early, by adopting coercive economic diplomacy and direct wolf warrior diplomacy as tools to get countries to comply to China’s wishes. This has not advanced China’s interest.
The five parts of an effective China strategy if you’re not a superpower. These criteria make for a good way to manage the complex relationship with China:
Never take a step back on human rights as they’re defined in the Universal Declaration of 1948, to which China is a signatory. Anchor your position on human rights in international law.
Never step back from being an ally of the U.S. if you are one now.
Maximize your economic engagement with China as appropriate.
Work within the global governance system.
If you pick a fight with China, and you’re not a superpower, be sure to not go at it alone.
For an example of how these criteria work in practice, look at Japan. It has managed its relationship with China through its own robust principles. The economic relationship between the two nations is still strong, even though Japan hasn’t taken steps back on its human rights principles or its alliance with the U.S. and is constantly building partnerships with others—most recently in the Quad—to effectively deal with China.
Don’t feel too flattered if China calls you special. Switzerland may think it has a special relationship with China, but Beijing says that to every country, except the U.S.
China has deep respect for Switzerland as an incredibly successful country. But the simple truth is: when China thinks about Europe, it thinks about Germany. The German view of how to engage China is scrutinized intimately in Beijing.
The war in Ukraine does not change things regarding Taiwan. Russia’s underwhelming performance in Ukraine, although we must suspend judgement until we know what will happen in Donbas, does not change China’s timetable for reunification with Taiwan at all.
Xi Jinping wants this to happen in the late 2020s, early 2030s. Until then, China is preparing itself by building a strong, decisive military force and a more dominant, resilient economy. If anything, China would tell Russia it should’ve better prepared itself before invading Ukraine. Better preparing itself is exactly what China is doing now.
Kevin Rudd in Zurich. Photo: André Hengst
Kevin Rudd is President and CEO of the Asia Society, and inaugural President of the Asia Society Policy Institute. He served as 26th Prime Minister of Australia (2007 to 2010, 2013) and as Foreign Minister (2010 to 2012). He is Chair of the Board of the International Peace Institute in New York, and Chair of Sanitation and Water for All – a global partnership of government and non-governmental organizations dedicated to the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 6. He is a Distinguished Fellow at Chatham House and the Paulson Institute, and a Distinguished Statesman with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He is also a member of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization’s Group of Eminent Persons.