Copyright © 2011 by Chester B. Cabalza. All Rights Reserved.
Based from the Executive Policy Brief "Will China and India Lead the Asian Century?" penned by Prof Chester B. Cabalza
“Both China and India are on the fast track of economic and social development, demonstrating to the world bright future of the two countries and the promise of a revitalized Asia” – PM Ju Hintao, People’s Republic of China
“I reiterate India’s commitment to work with Asean and other East Asian countries to make the 21st century an Asian century” – PM Manmohan Singh, India
Background
ASIA is vast. It is the largest and most populous continent in the world. Given its size, complexity, longevity and diversity, Asia is more a cultural/political concept incorporating its four geographical regions than a homogenous physical entity. Culturally, four earliest great civilizations developed interdependently in Asia with the rise of: Sumerian/Mesopotamian civilization in West Asia; the Indus civilization in South Asia; the Sinitic civilization in Northeast Asia; and the agrarian/maritime civilization in Southeast Asia. But two longest geographical centers in Asia survived by the Indus (Indian) and Sinic (Chinese) civilizations are now re-emerging in the 21st century, reversing the tide and centrifugal force in trade and commerce, power and wealth, and leveling off the playing field in a fast globalizing world.[1]
China today is the world’s oldest continuous civilization but its official policy on peaceful rise must be inferential. However, India had ‘Indianized’ almost all countries in Southeast Asia from 1st to 15th century common era (CE), transporting their culture by way of religion, language, governance, and civilization – now injected in its look east policy as they renew their engagement with Asean.
For fifteen centuries, China and India prior to western conquests of Asia in 16th century were the world’s economic and military superpowers. At the height of the Han dynasty in China and the Maurya dynasty in India, both affluent and powerful oriental countries traded with occidental’s Roman empire, with remnants of the infamous “Silk Road” as part of their commercial trades in ancient times.
Western scholars concede that Asia has enjoyed technological leadership in the past, especially in China, which was the world's most advanced country a thousand years ago. The Chinese invented paper around 105 CE. Government Service exams were established in 154 BC. As for China’s technological innovations, the compass came about 1100 CE, gunpowder around 1000 CE, block printing about the same time and silk by 1300 CE.[2]
The past ‘triumvirate’ of China, India, and Rome’s pax Romana in the past when translated in today’s political dynamics in international system has the re-emergence of China and India on the side with the United States’ pax Americana as the successor of the western power’s past glory.
At present, we live in a uni-multipolar world with the US remaining to be the lone superpower in terms of hard and soft powers but is now challenged by developing yet emerging great powers such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRIC) including the lone suprastate of the European Union (EU).
But now we see revitalized China and India or Chindia [3] as the “new Asian drivers of global change” that are becoming global players that can forcefully alter the relationship between the industrialized and the developing countries. More so, both leaders of these two continental Asian argonauts are pronouncing positive views in their re-emergence.
Issues in the Re-emergence of China and India
1) What would be the tone of Asian security supercomplex in succeeding decade when China and India emerge as global powers?
2) What other security implications that China and India will have to confront in their current competition to hegemony in Asia?
3) Will the US-China-India tripartite relationship becomes the most challenging endeavor that Asia-Pacific region is facing to define their roles in the future?
Realpolitik in Asian Security Supercomplex
“Let us work together to enhance China-India strategic and cooperative partnership, build a world of enduring peace and common prosperity and create a bright future for our two countries and two peoples” – PM Ju Hintao
Professor Kenneth Waltz, one of the foremost proponents of Structural Realism or Neorealism deems that, “the desire and relative abilities of each state to maximize power results in a ‘balance power’ that shapes international relations. It also gives rise to the ‘security dilemma’ that all nations face.”[4]
Asian countries, particularly China and India, despite of their friendly pronouncements and policies toward its neighbors and with each other, have tendencies to realpolitik – a foreign policy based on pragmatic concerns and political expediency rather than ideals and ethics. Thus, as influential actors in the security dynamics of Asia and the world, they both focus on the balance of power among nation-states.
By definition of great power, [5] Asia actually houses two great powers, namely, China and India. However, it also contains five nuclear-weapon states (NWS) that include China, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Iran. Plus three nuclear-threshold states, like Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. [6]
These two competitive Asian countries when combined together in population comprise about 40 percent of humanity. China is the world’s largest communist country while India is seen as the globe’s largest democratic country to date. But despite of their increasing multilateral engagements [7] – both sides have been cautious and suspicious of each other. In fact, the last war fought by India and China was in 1962. They have past upheavals and misunderstandings due to issues on territorial disputes, political and cultural differences, nuclear capabilities, and economic competition.
There has been no resolution to the issue over remote and heavily militarized territories in the Himalayas in spite of numerous rounds of negotiations and tensions that have flared recently. The intention of China’s policy is to befriend all its neighbors. But China fears escalation of conflicts in Kashmir over India and Pakistan’s claims. However, some Indian analysts see that China behaves differently by building strategic vantage points around India’s neighbors as China keeps founding several naval projects from Pakistan to Bangladesh to Sri Lanka to Maldives as “quiet encirclement of India.”[8]
The Archaeology of Chindia – PH Relations
There is a debate in the academe whether which country first discovered the Philippines. However, the word “discovery” must not be equated with “colonization”. This new glimpse of our prehistory is currently in circulation now whether the Indians or Chinese first discovered the Philippines. Spain called our country, the Philippines, in honor of King Philip. As a matter of fact, it was Spain as the first western power that colonized and integrated our islands, as they aptly called this colony then as, “Las Islas Filipinas”.
F. Landa Jocano would suggest that Filipinos should retrace our prehistoric culture as one of the fundamental preconditions for having a better understanding of the contemporary Filipino society. This prehistoric past is the foundation of our present society. It is also the least known and understood aspect of Philippine studies.[9]
As scholars unearth the archeology of international relations of Philippines with China and India, pieces of archeological findings have shown that based from Chinese records, Chinese chroniclers called Mindoro as Ma-i.
Ancient Chinese records from the Song and Ming dynasties which spanned more than six centuries suggested that Chinese dealt not only with tradesmen from Ma-i but also from Sulu (where the finest pearls of imperial China came from), Puduan (Butuan where the trademark balangays first built), Sanmalan (Zamboanga), Bauiper (Babuyan), Balouyou (Palawan), Liyin (Lingayen), Shahuchong (Saiton in Negros Oriental), and Malilua (Manila).[10]
In June 1993, based from the Palawan archeological discovery, the wreck of a 15th century Chinese junk yielded thousands of artifacts including jars, ceramics, and coins bearing the date of ‘1414’ that coincided with the time frame of Admiral Zheng He’s expedition as he circumnavigated the world. These artifacts are now displayed prominently in our National Museum.
That according to Ming dynasty annals, some of Zheng He’s ships were more than 140 meters longs, larger than Santa Maria, the largest of the three ships of Columbus sailed almost a century later. From 1401 to 1433, under the great Admiral He, seven large naval expeditions some carrying as many as 28 thousand soldiers sailed throughout the China sea and Indian ocean.[11]
Filipino diplomats, however, suggested that it was during the Ming dynasty (1368-1644) that Philippine-China friendship reached its peak. In one of the accounts of Sino-Sulu relations narrated in the Ming annals, it was recorded that the Sultan of Sulu, Paduka Patara, visited China in 1417 where he was royally received by the Chinese emperor. On his way home after a 27-day visit, the Sultan was stricken ill and died in the city of Dezhou in Shandong province. The emperor honored the Muslim king with the title of Kong Ting (brother) and ordered the building of a handsome mausoleum to mark the tomb of his Filipino friend – the only tomb of a foreign monarch in honor of the 15th century Sulu Sultan.[12]
However, if we expand the context of prehistory in Southeast Asia, particularly on the discovery of the Philippines, Southeast Asian region was entirely Indianized except for Vietnam. The Philippines boasts scattered sophisticated ‘baranganic organizations’ predated prior to the coming of the western powers. But again, those who led the so-called ‘barangays’ carried Indianized political titles such as ‘rajah’ or datu. Therefore, the presumption that Indians first discovered the Philippines is possible; or perhaps maritime Indianized kingdoms in insular Southeast Asia.
Some historians and anthropologists speculate that the Philippines was for a time part of the Sri Vijayan Empire [13] from 4th to 10th centuries, which has been described as Hinduistic in culture, prior to the entry of Islam in Sulu archipelago in 13th century and Catholism in the Visayas island in 16th century. Hence, the ancient Filipino alphabet originated or copied from India.
About twenty-five percent of the words in the Tagalog language are Sanskrit terms. [14] The rich Indian literature also has a share to Filipino literature and folklore. The Maranao epic Darangan is Indian in plot and characterization. The Agusan legend of a man named Manubo Ango, who was turned into stone, resembles the story of Ahalya in the Hindu epic Ramayana. The tale of the Ifugao legendary hero, Balituk, who obtained water from the rock with his arrow, is similar to Arjuna's adventure in Mahabharata, another Hindu epic.[15]
Several Chindia’s Bilateral and Multilateral Engagements
China’s Good Neighborliness
Bilateral: Free trade Agreement (FTA) with each of the ten-member countries of Asean which prospered to become China-Asean Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA)
Multilateral: ASEAN-China Joint Cooperation Committee (ACJCC); Asean Regional Forum (ARF); Asean Plus Three (APT); Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM); Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC); China-Asean Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA); China-Asean Summit; East Asia Summit (EAS)
India’s Look East Policy
Bilateral: Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) between India and Singapore; Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with Thailand
Multilateral: Asean Regional Forum (ARF); Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Economic and Technological Cooperation (BIMSTEC); Indo-Asean Summit; East Asia Summit (EAS); Kunming Initiative (KI); Mekong Ganga Cooperation (MGC)
Policy Recommendations
1. That the Philippines should engage equally to China and India as both countries aspire to becoming superpowers from their current great power positions. This is to strengthen nascent cooperative security to manage the security supercomplex in the region.
2. From 1st to 15th century, China and India were the world's major economies with the Roman empire’s pax Romana as the counterpart in the West. Now and in the coming decades, China and India will re-emerge as the planet's plausible economic superpowers, co-existing with the United States' hard power, however, declining pax Americana will still represent the West, posing a continuous triumvirates in the coming decades. The Philippines should calibrate its alliance with both re-emerging Asian neighbors while balancing its continuous engagement with the United States – as its strongest western ally.
3. As a host country to migrant Chinese and Indian workers and expatriates, some of their nationals have already been assimilated in our society and culture, the Philippines must take advantage of our good relations with both Asian giant countries as we gauge cooperation in science, research, technology, higher education, in agriculture, defense infrastructure, industry development, and the business process outsourcing.
Conclusion
China and India (Chindia) are the “new Asian drivers of global change” becoming global players that will forcefully alter the relationship between the industrialized and developing countries. The re-emergence of China and India as both economic and political actors is having, and will have far-reaching impacts over the next decade and beyond as Asians realize the new Asian century.
Endnotes
[1] Chester B. Cabalza, The Rise of China and India, page 82 in Political Dimension of National Security (International), e-MNSA, NDCP, 2010.
[2] Gary Schilling, Productivity Growth and Prospects for Asia, pages 75-76, in Julian Weiss (Ed), Tigers’ Roar: Asia’s Recovery and Its Impact, Armonk: New York and London: England, An East Gate Book Publication, 2001.
[3] Chindia is a portmanteau word that refers to China and India together in general.
[4] In his book, Theory of International Politics, page 250, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979.
[5] Great powers are states that have capabilities to play major role in international politics with respect to security-related issues. They must possess global military reach and have the ability to project force around the globe, and as a result, they can intervene in any regional security complex whenever it suits its interests.
[6] Barry Buzan and Ole Waever, Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[7] China now views multilateral institutions as useful diplomatic platforms that can be utilized to advance its own foreign policy objectives while India wants to foster closer economic ties with its neighbors with strong emphasis on renewing political and economic contacts.
[8] Col PS Rajeshwar, India-China Relations: Its Implications on the Asean, NDCP (thesis), 2008.
[9] F. Landa Jocano, Filipino Prehistory: Rediscovering Precolonial Heritage. Quezon City: Punlad Research House, Inc., 2001.
[10] Samie Lim, Reclaiming the Philippines Entrepreneurial Heritage, page 24, BizNews Asia, April 2011.
[11] Fidel Ramos, China Rising, US Falling Behind? BizNews Asia, February 2011.
[12] Salvador Laurel, China Update 2000, Manila, PDM Press, 2000.
[13] It is argued that the early Filipinos carried on trade with Borneo, Celebes, Java, Sumatra, and other countries of Southeast Asia. And through Sri Vijaya and Majapahit, they received India's cultural influences. The early contact between India and the Philippines was decidedly indirect via Malaysia (arguments found at http://www.geocities.com, but others speculate that The Indian influence on Philippines is explicable by the fact that it was for 150 years a colony of a Java-based Hindu Empire of Sri Vijaya (speculations found at http://www.asiafinest.com. Both websites are accessed on June 2007 and 2011.
[14] Explained at http://www.asiafinest.com, last accessed on May 2011. Among such popular words are still in use today are: dala (fishnet), asawa (spouse), diwa (thought), puri (honor), lakambini (princess), and wika (language).
[15] Chester Cabalza, A Preliminary Study on Early Indian and Chinese Influences in Philippine Ethnomathematics, page 6, UP CSSP
References
Barry Buzan and Ole Waever, Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Chester Cabalza, The Rise of China and India, in Political Dimension of National Security (International), e-MNSA, NDCP, 2010.
Chester Cabalza, A Preliminary Study on Early Indian and Chinese Influences in Philippine Ethnomathematics, UP Sinag CSSP, 1999.
F. Landa Jocano, Filipino Prehistory: Rediscovering Precolonial Heritage. Quezon City: Punlad Research House, Inc., 2001.
Salvador Laurel, China Update 2000, Manila, PDM Press, 2000.
Samie Lim, Reclaiming the Philippines Entrepreneurial Heritage, BizNews Asia, 2011.
Fidel Ramos, China Rising, US Falling Behind? BizNews Asia, 2011.
Col PS Rajeshwar, India-China Relations: Its Implications on the Asean, NDCP (thesis), 2008.
Gary Schilling, Productivity Growth and Prospects for Asia, in Julian Weiss (Ed), Tigers’ Roar: Asia’s Recovery and Its Impact, Armonk: New York and London: England, An East Gate Book Publication, 2001.
Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979.
No comments:
Post a Comment