It is said that “there is no diplomacy for a weak nation”, which means weak nations, not being strong enough to dicker with superpowers for anything on an equal footing, can only yield to the latter. Taking a broader view of Chinese and foreign history, one will find that though the saying is not perfectly accurate, it is correct most of the time, as evidenced by the late Qing China and the Beiyang government at the Paris Peace Conference.

The very opposite of the saying “there is no diplomacy for a weak nation” is supposed to be “there is diplomacy for a superpower”, isn’t it? Admittedly, strong nations usually gain the upper hand on diplomatic occasions. One example is the US could force the Edo Bakufu to sign the unequal Kanagawa Treaty and end the policy of isolationism of Japan that had lasted for centuries with just few steam-powered warships and without a gunshot. With a big stick in hand, a superpower can supplement it with a carrot so as to make itself successful in every endeavor.

By common sense, having risen to become a superpower, China is at the summit in terms of economic and military strength in half a century in comparison with other countries. As a member of the nuclear weapons club, China has a big stick - DF missiles can reach America; shelling out everywhere around the globe for the Belt and Road Initiative and gifting countries with vaccine against Wuhan pneumonia, China has a carrot. Being tough on the one hand while soft on the other, China should have got every diplomatic task accomplished smoothly. Unfortunately it happened that such a superpower demonstrated to the world what it means by “no diplomacy for a superpower” in a visit to Alaska paid by Wang Yi and Yang Jiechi.

Diplomacy hinges on strength, as well as employment of stratagems. Even though the saying that “the US isn’t qualified to speak to China from a position of strength” is not too far from reality(after all, the ascendancy gained by the US is not overwhelming anymore), hysterically shouting and cursing in public like sharp-tongued women with provocative words like “this is not the way to deal with Chinese people”, “the US should take good care of its own business” , and “we thought too well of the US” to reveal China’s ferocious and savage countenance that was dumbfounding, Wang and Yang made an impression of ancient combative sovereign kings who presented letters of credence to insult one another’s family rather than handled it in a diplomatic manner of being neither servile nor overbearing. The matter concerning who is right and who is wrong aside, showing a wolf-warrior face of premodern times in front of the world, China has lost its image before everything. What’s the point talking about employment of diplomatic stratagems now?

Certainly, anyone who has a superficial knowledge of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) knows that the show put on by Wang and Yang this time is targeted at the masses in China, not least ultranationalists like xiao fen hong(cyber-nationalists) and Maoists. Yang’s remarks, “we have had enough hardship from foreigners”, and the Final Protocol for the Settlement of the Disturbances of 1900 mentioned by party-run mouthpieces have reminded the masses of the hundred years of humiliation. Considering the furious words uttered by Wan and Yang at the venue in rival’s home turf, one will find that it echoes what Mao Zedong said in 1949: “The Chinese people have risen to their feet.” It sounds as if in the new China, the Chinese people will not be done injustice anymore. From the party-state high-echelon personnel to ordinary people, quite a large number of them have got hysterically excited over “the great motherland”. Xi Jinping, who has sworn to be unswerving in his endeavor to make China “strong”, is among them beyond any doubt. It can also be said that the show put on by Wang and Yang was choreographed by him for himself.

Nevertheless, though the era that great powers carving up the world is gone, Empress Dowager Cixi has never left China. Praised by Wang for being “300 years ahead of the West”, Xi’s diplomacy is actually hollow, and presented to be like an imperial decree of the declaration of war against foreign powers issued by the Qing government in 1900, which was imaginary, lame and patronizing. When the world has entered the 21st century where righteousness and the rule of law are held way dearer than before, from the party-state high echelon and young cynics in mainland China, their international perspective still stays with the 19th century where the rule of the jungle prevailed, perhaps because of “the oppressed becoming the oppressor” or “post-traumatic stress disorder caused by imperialism”. With their thoughts being 200 years behind the world, a word with them is definitely too much. How can such a “superpower” engage in diplomacy? Even if China puts forward some diplomatic notions that are fair and reasonable, they will be deemed nonsensical and barbaric when uttered by wolf-warriors with an ugly face. Even having a big stick in hand, China is isolated diplomatically. How is it conducive to the country and the people? At the end of the day, all these just make it convenient for the CCP to “rely on foreign powers to boost its self-worth”, playing the nationalist card to prop up the regime every turn in order to turn people away from the core problems

(Lam Hoi, journalist)

Click here for Chinese version

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play