China’s Influence: Balancing Soft Power And Sharp Power?

While the United States has the largest economy in the world, valued at US$ 28.78 trillion, China stands second with US$ 18.53 trillion and an unmatched capacity to produce. China has the largest active army in the world and the US the largest defence budget.

While the United States and China are locked in this battle of who has more and who has less, global supremacy cannot be attained on the lines of economy and military alone. A third component is required to establish great power stature in the world today - 'soft power’ or the ability to persuade and co-opt. 

China Then

The American victory in the Cold War that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union was one not derived from active combat but rather through the winning of an ideological war that positioned liberal democratic politics and capitalism as the best systems to organise the world. This ideological war helped America generate a unanimous consensus and belief in their ideas that went beyond battlefields and boardrooms.

This war used culture, ideas, and diplomacy to persuade people, rather than arm twisting, into submission. Blue Jeans, Bruce Springsteen, McDonalds, and Coca-Cola were as important to the war as the number of nuclear warheads. 

Joseph Nye, the prominent American political scientist, consolidated this concept of co-option and called it 'soft power’. Borrowing from the philosophies of Hans J Morgenthau, Ray Cline and Klaus Knorr, the concept elucidated that power could be wielded with the use of culture, values and foreign policy. Along with coercive tactics such as CIA-backed coups, gunboat diplomacy and military interventions, soft power was integral in expanding its global influence.

The Great Power rivalry between the United States and China today should also be seen through a similar lens.

While the world was familiar with the US, its engagement with China has been fairly recent. Deng Xiaoping’s decision to open the Chinese economy in 1978 allowed the world access to China. This was further consolidated by Xi Jinping’s aspiration to see the national rejuvenation of Chinese culture globally, or what he calls the China Dream.

China under Jinping has displayed a consistent effort to engage with the world and assert Chinese supremacy, especially in the economic domain. A leader with a strong nationalist agenda and an aspiration to see Chinese supremacy established globally, Xi Jinping has transformed the manner in which China engages with the world.

He wants China’s story to be heard.

This need mostly arises from the negative image that China has developed in recent times due to its decaying relations with the United States, amongst other factors. 

China Today

China’s operationalisation of soft power is not textbook. The Western-centric conceptualisation of soft power does not always account for the approaches adopted by non-Western nations.

China does not demarcate in absolute terms between soft power and hard power. It believes that its ability to generate soft power is contingent on its technological and economic prowess. While it is interested in the world thinking better of it, however, its priority still remains its people at home and the upkeep of a positive image of the Communist Party of China (CCP).

China’s methods on asserting soft power today stand on three pillars: Confucian Institutions (CI) that promote linguistic and cultural engagement; economic projects and aid development that allow it to integrate with other countries; and control over media institutions to effectively manoeuvre narratives surrounding it globally. 

The Chinese have skilfully demonstrated their diplomatic skills through trade agreements, expanded official development assistance (ODA), engagement with multilateral forums, and the establishment of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in 2001.

The establishment of the Belt and Road Initiative, a large infrastructure project in regional connectivity, and a strong focus on south-south partnerships through aid development packages in South and Southeast Asia, are instruments of economic control that China wields today.

Chinese investments in countries of Africa and the Pacific Islands not only give it economic clout but also narrative control through the control of media institutions, especially in nations like Naru, Kiribati, Nigeria, South Africa, and Kenya, among others.

China has media presence in over 30 countries. Xinhua — the official news agency of China, Global Times and China Daily, along with China International Radio, have been instrumental in establishing Chinese influence in the media.

China shares close ties with Hollywood companies and has produced a plethora of Chinese pop icons and music stars in recent times. However, much of this influence hasn't yielded positive results.

China’s track record with freedom of speech is egregious, given its limited scope domestically and the firewall that keeps Chinese nationals from reaching the rest of world. Given the vast media network it has established in recent times, including state-backed international media houses, China is accused of manipulating and distorting information across these platforms.

Social media platforms have been tampered with through computational propaganda and algorithm interference. However, it is important to note that the United States owns most social media giants, raising questions about the global reach and control of information flows. Negative sentiments and opinions are turned into positive testimonies.

China has also been accused of meddling with elections and started disinformation campaigns used to shape global narratives on the Chinese state.

In the economic sphere, the BRI has not delivered the promises it had made and countries engaged in the project are seen to be subject to mounting debt. Internal affairs and aggressions including human rights and labour rights violations has resulted in limited engagements with the Chinese in recent times. 

Is China’s Influence Truly Soft Power?

Can one then say that what China wields in today’s times is indeed soft power? Can soft power be generated through manipulation rather than persuasion? Joseph Nye’s concept of soft power was contingent on the country being a democracy. China is an autocratic regime based on socialist values.

This autocracy has seeped into its agenda for wielding power globally. Rather than adopting strategies of persuasion and manufacturing a global opinion that is positive about China, it uses deceit and manipulation to change opinions and sometimes facts. The lack of independent verification of state narratives raises concerns over the credibility of China's claims.

China then wields what scholars on international relations have called ‘sharp power’. The use of selective information sharing, using technology to selectively target highly vulnerable local organisations especially media outlets, and the ability to generate support amongst the autocratic regimes of the world is what China does best.  

Sharp power is wielded by authoritarian regimes to influence or manipulate perceptions in democratic nations. China uses images, stories, text and increasingly, Artificial Intelligence, to distort information and impede its free flow. This is not persuasion but manipulation.

Soft power, on the other hand, is the ability of the world to be on your side. China, sadly, does not find this to be true. While the United States does not fare well on global favourability, its allies still hold considerable sway. China and its allies like Russia and North Korea appear to be the renegades of the global order, not its architects.

While Chinese influence cannot be denied, one must understand that this influence is not based on consensus but rather manipulation and deceit. It participates in the weaponisation of technology and promotes censorship to influence public discourse and dissuade people from democracy. 

China is strengthening its global influence, a fact that cannot be disputed. However, that influence is based largely on manipulated information and severe censorship. This cannot be soft power. The ability to persuade or co-opt is redundant when there is a lack of transparency. Supporting China or agreeing with its vision of the world becomes a hard ask, given the lack of trust in the information they provide.

China’s use of media control, establishing cultural institutions and language centres, and even using economic projects to create a favourable image in the world should be seen with extreme caution. China has still been unable to create a similar level of consensus in the global order, similar to the post-Cold War period that allowed American hegemony to cement itself.

The Chinese century is upon us, but for how long, given the economic slowdown, rising public discontent due to reduced purchasing power in China, and the international isolation that China faces due to the numerous embargos on Chinese products, is a question we must keep asking ourselves.

(The writer is a research analyst at Advanced Study Institute of Asia, focusing on South and Southeast Asia. Views are personal)