General picture of China debates in many parts of the world indicates that an exaggerated hypnotization is underway among political elite about the future of China. This requires an urgent, but well-informed and well-framed discussion on the issue with a special reference to Chinese culture, history and religious history.

Since China celebrated its 30th year of opening up to the world in 2008, the discussion about the possible role of China on global politics is on the rise. As if it was a marking point in history, in the same year China also sent probably the first ever international mission to the Gulf of Aden to combat pirates. Should this action be taken as a sign that China is ready to assume its global role in security, social issues and economy? Or was just a sign of China’s increasing role in economic affairs and thus to be seen as part of an ‘economic initiative’? Whatever one’s take would be, there is a reality that China is rising and debate about its influence in the world will not go away until we find a viable explanation and understanding of China. This article argues that China will not be a global power at least for three generations for various historical and religio-psychological reasons; and the doubts and debates on China are prone to become less meaningful as they focus on something that is likely to exist on surface rather than catching the essence of the issue. This can be analyzed at least from three perspectives. 

Firstly, there seems to be a ‘strategic romanticism’ on China that it will be the next global power. This is the conclusion that many researchers, intellectuals and even laymen reach by looking at the surface such as the yearly 12% of economic development of China. While it seems to be a logical argument on surface, China with its deep-seated civilizational background and history cannot be grasped easily by only looking at surface. There are two reasons for this. First, China is a mystery for many people in the world including decision-makers and intellectuals. China’s history has not been thought in Europe or elsewhere, and there was no real attention on cultural elements until very recently. Second, lack of knowledge about China in the West, coupled with its unexpected economic rise, has created more surprise, confusion and fear in the West and Asia about the rise of China. This, in turn, has led to a rush to understand what has been happening. As the questions is more frequently asked on the future of China and its possible influence, the quick, not-well-researched and daily-explanatory answers are resonated on the air, not only dominating the debate, more tragically and dramatically, shaping the mindsets about China and preventing the other ways of looking at it.

Secondly, no one can grasp China without understanding the history and psychology that are very much behind the ‘strategic mentality’ of China today. History, along with religious belief/philosophy, is the key driving force in every society not only in terms of shaping the psyche that establishes the essence of the way of thinking, but also defines the scope and horizons of such thinking. Therefore, in order to understand the boundaries of Chinese strategic thinking on global issues, one must re-visit the Chinese history and psychology. Historically, China has been a regional power, but never a global power in the way we think today. The most reasonable explanation for this is the Confucian philosophy and to some extent Buddhism. As these two have been the religious/philosophical thoughts shaping the Chinese psyche for generations, it must have left some influence over the society. The most important imprint of those two religions on China today is its sensitivity on regional issues while almost a virtual non-interference approach to global affairs. Confucianism and Buddhism are not imperial religions like Islam and Christianity. They could be called at best as ‘regional’ religions in a sense that their followers have never thought of spreading them over the globe. However, they did so, intentionally or unintentionally, at the regional level either through intra-regional interaction or trade. Religious philosophy creates a psyche unconsciously that also defines the so-called sacred area or the areas which has outmost importance in the mindset. Sensitiveness of China on regional issues in Asia today, while paying little attention to the other areas of the world, can only be explained with an understanding of such religious psyche. Today, every strategist knows that no initiative could be taken in Asia without co-opting China, or at least receiving the silenced authorization of China. Nevertheless, despite China’s obvious status as one of the biggest economic powers, there are still few leaders in the world that feel like asking what China thinks about global issues from an ideational and political point of view. Although some consultations happen, in real sense these are more of a gesture in nature, giving an impression that China is not left out. It is also still clear that the ideas that run the world are still being produced in the west and have been sold to China and others through several ways. Thus, China today is a virtual global power with only a real influence in Asia at political level.

Thirdly, one can rightly ask how to interpret China’s ‘peaceful rise’ and economic development, and what would be the future implications for the world. To answer these questions, one needs to understand today’s China with a reference to above-mentioned history. Today’s China is in a clash with itself. On the one hand, economic development and international systemic reasons force China to act as a global player. On the other hand, traditional and much-deepened Chinese psyche, which is more regional rather than global, indicates otherwise to some extent unwittingly. China has never been faced with the outside world in terms of ideas as it does today. Modernizations efforts in 19th and 20th centuries including the advent of communism and Mao’s cultural revolutions were actually more of a technical encounter with the West rather than an ideational one. In this sense, even China’s opening up policy to the world after 1978 could not really be regarded as an opening in nature until 1990s and mostly 2000s. What China faces today is an ideological clash between its own culture and psyche, and the expected role at global level. Unless this is solved, China will not be able to establish its own domestic order as well as international one. Therefore, so long as this Chinese internal clash continues, China will never be a truly global player. According to Ibn Khaldun’s philosophy of asabiyya, changing a psyche takes not less than three generations in societies and by looking at China from this perspective one can assume that China will keep playing minor roles at global politics in 40-50 years to come. 

What must keep worrying the world and other regional states should not be the current economic rise of China; rather whether (and how) they understand the essence of China and prepare their domestic and foreign policies for a time when (and if) China starts to exert its political influence at least in a half-century time.