China expands Tianxiaism along the modern Silk Road

The quintessence of the Modern Silk Road, nowadays referred to as One Belt, One Road (一带一路, yidai yilu, hereafter OBOR), is the expansion of the Chinese view on world order as a normative target. The concept of the Modern Silk Road is an example of China’s foreign policy in the wake of globalization and the emergence of a new multipolar world order or, in other words, the reflection of the vision called Tianxia.

By creating a negotiation platform, OBOR may be a flagship of international cooperation in the 21st century. After the unipolar ‘90s, there is a normative search for a new model of international cooperation. As unipolarity is fading, there is a shift toward multipolarity, although this still means polarized interests. The lack of unipolarity does not necessarily mean the existence of poles. This “poleless” [See: Bremmer–Roubini] vision (or in other words global partnership) was express by Xi Jinping when he stated that „Not only should China adhere to the peaceful development road; but other countries must also commit themselves to the peaceful development road”. In the long run, peaceful coexistence cannot be an outcome of a dictum by strong actors toward smaller ones on the norms of behavior. The normative fundamental principle of peaceful cooperation is that all actors, independently from their potentials, are unified in their commitment to maintaining a global infrastructure that ensures peace. Even if it may sound utopic “that China’s commitment to ‘peaceful development’ is now premised on other countries’ reciprocal commitments”, it reflects the Chinese vision of existence in the world described by the term Tianxia.

The expression Tianxia (天下) has several translations to English. It literally means sphere below the sky or all under heaven, but it may either refer to the country, China itself (usually as the Chinese Empire) or the world. Contemporary Chinese philosopher and researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Zhao Tingyang, describes the following three separate meanings of Tianxia [See: Gao]:

1.    Universe: This meaning highlights the totality of the (known) civilization and its China-centered attribute; meanwhile, the source of the ruler’s accountability is a supreme moral force in contrast with Western principles.
2.    Hearts or general will of the people: The ruler may only be successful if supported by the people, or, in other words, when the emperor’s practice is the realization of good governance.
3.    Harmonic and peaceful coexistence: This concept is a utopian ideal in which the whole world is described as a single family or brotherhood, and all the relations among the actors are similar to family relations.

This third approach shows important similarities with the Christian tradition where Jesus encourages to “love your neighbor as yourself” [Mt 22:39]. If the whole world constitutes a family, there are no identical differences among the actors, therefore, all people are equal, and this equality may be measured by the love they receive and give. The Vatican may be seen as the first attempt to set up a world institution, a prototype for global governance which supervises the ongoing processes without having a concrete physical infrastructure to influence it. The same concept is reflected in the Tianxia system: to involve all fragmented actors in a holistic cooperation which is unified by ethics and the realization of common interest, and in which the ruler’s power gains legitimacy by perfectly transmitting the harmony of nature.

Tianxia is a heterogeneous expression that reflects the classic Chinese heritage: Its modifications may describe the impacts of historical periods and may represent an answer to threats around China’s role in international relations in the 21st century.

One extreme understanding of Tianxia is the celebration of the totality of Chinese tradition and power. The other radical endpoint is a simply contemplative behavior, an actor who, instead of following self-interests, remains passive to represent the harmony of the world and therefore merely assist ongoing shifts. Classic Chinese tradition (that Tianxia belongs to as well) clarifies the moderate Chinese position. This may be described by the invention of Confucius, who made the positive meaning of virtue normative. His conservativism was not pure, since it did not aim simply at keeping old traditions but also developing them so that may they become the expressions of harmony, peace, and justice in the political community—the original source of these goals being nature. Without having a formal system of checks and balances, the emperor’s power was still controlled by this philosophy, namely, by the Mandate of Heaven.

„If the Emperor strayed from the path of virtue, All Under Heaven would fall into chaos. Even natural catastrophes might signify that disharmony had beset the universe. The existing dynasty would be seen to have lost the “Mandate of Heaven” by which it possessed the right to govern: rebellions would break out, and a new dynasty would restore the Great Harmony of the universe.” [Kissinger, 2011: 15–16]

Consequently, the moderate Chinese position emphasizes the previously discussed partnership. OBOR may be a significant step toward establishing the unpolarized arena of interests, and in this sense, OBOR is a reflection of classic Chinese virtue and the power-sharing efforts of the 21st century at the same time. This recognition means that there is an existing bridge between Chinese tradition and the modern global concept of distribution of power, and, furthermore, that this bridge is the theoretical background of economic policy planning. This link may be summarized as the understanding that common global interests are the source of competitiveness.

Opening pic by Shutterstock