随着中国发展壮大及其对外经济关系不断迈上新台阶，以美国为首的西方国家频繁抹黑中国与亚非拉国家经贸合作，炮制所谓“新殖民主义”等谬论。西方的媒体和政客有哪些伪善的地方？中国的崛起推动世界大国关系发生了怎样的变化？
近日，丹麦奥尔堡大学国际关系学教授、广东国际战略研究院特聘教授李形做客《大变局》节目，基于其在西方学术界30多年的经验对相关问题进行了深入分析，主要内容节选如下：
访谈视频
Diplomacy Talk: You've been engaged in teaching and research at a Western university for over 30 years. In your opinion, what changes have occurred in the Western perceptions of China?
Li Xing: I moved (from China) to Denmark in 1988 and have lived there for 36 years. I have worked with a university there for 30 years. I experienced major global changes during and following the Cold War. I witnessed the zenith of the Western confidence in the post-Cold War era. At that time, the West was very inclusive and confident, embracing people from around the world who came to learn about its ideas, culture, and system.
At the same time, I witnessed the significant achievements China has made through its reform and opening-up. I then observed a shift in the mindset of Westerners, with their declining confidence. Over recent years, this confidence has reached its nadir. Anything related to China is now perceived as a threat. This is a sentiment I've deeply felt recently. This shift has also impacted my professional work in the West.
Diplomacy Talk: Having spent a considerable amount of time in the West, what do you perceive as the hypocrisies that exist in the Western media and among Western politicians?
Li Xing: I've observed notorious double standards in the Western media. For instance, when the Ukraine crisis began, Western nations readily embraced Ukrainian refugees. However, there has been much more caution and reluctance when it comes to Palestinian, Syrian, or Afghan refugees. This double standard is evident in the behavior of the Western media and politicians.
Diplomacy Talk: But there are also different voices in the Western media.
Li Xing: Yes, for example, I wrote articles to challenge some of their actions. However, they recognize that my voice serves a dual purpose. One is to showcase their democracy and freedom. They will say, "Look, we allow different voices." But they know well that my articles and my opinions can never represent their mainstream viewpoints.
When they are criticized for wrongdoing, instead of addressing the issue, they rationalize the criticism, framing it as appreciation of their free and democratic society. They transform the criticism into an endorsement of their system.
Diplomacy Talk: You just mentioned double standards. For example, the U.S. promotes its "democratic system" worldwide. However, China's exchanges with other countries on governance experiences are intentionally misinterpreted by the U.S. as China forcibly exporting its political model. What is your view on this?
Li Xing: I believe that any rising or established power will inevitably exert external influence. However, I see two distinct processes. One is the Western model, exemplified by Europe and the U.S., which involves economic activities like trade and investment but with additional conditions. In this case, if you wish to engage in trade, economic cooperation with the West, or receive investment and aid from the West, you must undergo a series of political reforms, such as adopting a multi-party system or establishing non-governmental organizations. This is a Western approach.
On the other hand, China's model, in my opinion, is a form of "benefit spillover" or "value spillover." In this model, China's successful development itself is attractive. Many people are studying why China's model has been successful, and they are very much interested in it.And this interest itself represents an export of the model or the value. However, the Chinese government has never imposed any additional conditions on the cooperation. For example, the investments under the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative come without any attached conditions and are based on the principle of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits. For instance, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank explicitly stipulates that there should be no political conditions attached. So, in this regard, I believe there is certainly external influence, but it is based on a spillover effect rather than a forced process.
Diplomacy Talk: In the cultural sphere, the U.S. has consistently exported its values through its media, movies, and music. However, when China promotes its culture, for example, through Confucius Institutes, it is perceived by the U.S. as a form of "cultural infiltration." Do you think the diversity promoted by the U.S. is genuine?
Li Xing: Confucius Institutes primarily focus on teaching the Chinese language and Chinese culture, which are both apolitical. However, in recent years, they have faced various unwarranted accusations, such as being tools for "cultural infiltration." This reflects a lack of confidence in the West. If the West truly values diversity and believes in the strength of its culture, it shouldn't fear Confucius Institutes.
Despite some Western countries beginning to reject or close Confucius Institutes, I can confidently say that in Africa and especially in Latin America, where I have many academic contacts, they told me there is a long queue of applications to establish Confucius Institutes. This indicates a strong interest in these institutes from developing countries, particularly in the Global South. The fact that Confucius Institutes are so popular in these regions represents a spillover effect, showcasing their keen interest in China's development model.
Diplomacy Talk: We see some Western countries, led by the U.S., continuously accusing and smearing China, claiming that China's investments in Asia, Africa, and Latin America constitute "neo-colonialism," "neo-imperialism," and a "debt trap." How do you view this phenomenon?
Li Xing: Colonialism refers to the era when Western powers forcibly occupied regions in Africa and Latin America, often bringing local populations to their territories as slaves. Neo-colonialism suggests that, despite having gained independence formally or politically, these countries continued to rely on the former colonial powers economically, financially, or in various other aspects. This is evident in "unequal trade exchanges," where colonial countries export high-value-added finished products while importing raw materials from Africa and Latin America. Consequently, most of the added value goes to the Western countries.
Now, this concept is being applied to China. China's trade with Africa and Latin America indeed involves exporting high-value-added finished products and importing raw materials. However, this is not a colonizing process but a natural result of the global division of labor. We must not forget the massive industrial transfer from the West to China during the period of China's reform and opening-up. A considerable portion of these industries moved from the West to China due to lower production costs, inexpensive labor, and high quality of the products. Consequently, China has become the world's factory.
Since China is the world's factory, producing products for the entire world, it needs raw materials, which it imports from Africa and Latin America. Numerically, it does seem that China exports finished products and imports raw materials. However, as I mentioned earlier, this is part of the global division of labor. It has resulted from the broader Western deindustrialization process, where industries were transferred to China.
China exports finished products and imports raw materials not only in its relations with Africa and Latin America but also with many developed countries. Recent data on China's trade with Australia and New Zealand reflect this trend. For instance, the prime minister of Australia recently visited China, promoting agricultural products and raw materials like wine and lobsters, not industrial goods. China is a major exporter of industrial products. It is the same case with China-New Zealand relations.
Recently, I've read many articles, including analyses of Sri Lanka and its debt situation. It's important to note that China accounts for only 10% of Sri Lanka's debt. A 10% share is not sufficient to create a "debt trap." Therefore, it seems that there is a deliberate attempt to stigmatize China's overseas investments in such discussions.
Moreover, which country owes the most money to China? To which country is China the largest creditor? The U.S. Why does no one mention a "debt trap" between China and the U.S.? Why is the focus on the "debt trap" between China and the developing countries? And the debt owed by the U.S. to China is much larger than the debts owed by African and Latin American countries to China.
Diplomacy Talk: Now that China has become the world's second-largest economy, how optimistic are you about the Chinese economy?
Li Xing: I'm not a pure economist, so I can't make any definitive judgments about China's economy. However, having lived in Denmark for 36 years, I've witnessed numerous allegations of "China's economic collapse." The most amusing example was that a Chinese-American author called Gordon G. Chang wrote a book titled "The Coming Collapse of China." He predicted a collapse of China within 10 years, which did not materialize. Many people questioned him about this, and he failed to provide a satisfactory answer, only stating that more time was needed.
My confidence in the country is based on China's political and economic system as well as its society and people. I've observed a well-integrated relationship between the state, the market, and the society. For instance, in China's political system, when a policy is formulated and implemented, if something wrong is detected, the system allows taking it back for adjustments. However, in the U.S., once a policy is implemented, it's rarely retracted. Even if President Biden wants to reverse it, it's often not feasible. In contrast, China's political system allows the reevaluation, readjustment, and reimplementation of policies when issues arise. This political system enables China to use the state as leverage to address economic challenges.
So, with that, I am very confident. This ability for macro-control is something other countries lack.
That's why some in America envy and hate China's model because they understand the power of the state. Many people mock President Biden, saying that he has learned a lot from China, particularly regarding grand projects and infrastructure. He has buckled down to the national planning as he is aware of the significant role the state can play in the economy.
Diplomacy Talk: How do you believe China's rise has reshaped the dynamics among major countries?
Li Xing: China is now the world's second-largest economy and, measured by purchasing power parity, it is already the largest. Some scholars discuss concepts like "co-governance by China and the U.S.," "joint management by China and the U.S.," or the "G2." While some Chinese scholars support these concepts, I personally don't agree with them. I believe these concepts are fraught with traps. Why? Because they immediately place China in the category of superpowers on par with the U.S. It will complicate China's relationships with many developing countries, positioning China as a superpower rather than a partner of other countries in the Global South.
Moreover, these concepts open the door to the potential for "neo-colonialism" or "neo-imperialism." If considered a superpower, China would no longer be perceived as a part of the Global South. If China remains a member of the Global South, there's no possibility of "neo-colonialism" or "neo-imperialism" between countries of the Global South because they are considered equals.
President Xi Jinping has stated that China is a natural member of the Global South. However, should China become a superpower like the U.S., it might lead to different relationships with other countries of the Global South. So, I think these three concepts come with traps, and we must approach them with caution.
文章来源：习近平外交思想和新时代中国外交网站
