The rise of China has been a heated topic recently throughout the world. It is not only a theme that Chinese must study on, but also a topic that arouses great interests in the rest of the world. Both policy makers and scholars are debating the nature and the consequences of the growing fact with the others, but no firm conclusions are possible as there remain highly dynamic and potentially unstable change, both internally and externally. The 3rd round of the Six-University Symposium, which was named “Northeast Asia—North America Dialogue: the Rise of China and Its Implications” and scheduled October 5-7, 2005, was co-sponsored this year by the School of International Relations and Public Affairs, and the Center for American Studies at Fudan University.

Because of unpredicted miscommunication, University of British Columbia of Canada, one of the six universities was absent from this year’s conference. The other five universities all attended and they are American University, Fudan University, Korea University, Monterrey Institute of Technology, and Ritsumeikan University. Altogether there are 25 registered participants as well as several dozens of students from Fudan University. Professor Yan Shuang, vice president of Fudan University addressed the opening ceremony and extended warm welcome to the participants to this symposium as one of the significant events for the Centennial Celebration of Fudan University.

The dialogue covers various aspects of the international relations and perspective foreign policies. On the first session, professor Yoo-soo Hong, a visiting professor at Korea University and a emeritus research fellow at the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, addressed on the “Industrial Development in China and Korea: Dynamics of Competition and Cooperation”, while professor Ryoji Nakagawa, a professor of international politics from Ritsumeikan University, addressed on the “Beyond the ‘Politically Cold, Economically Hot’ Phenomenon:  Sino-Japanese Political and Economic Relations”.

Professor Hong made comparisons of the development models, performance and strategies of China and Korea. Although China has followed typical process of industrialization, its model has some unique characteristics and much difference from Korea. From a Korean perspective, professor Hong obvious worries about the challenges of the economic development of China on Korea. While pointing out the challenges facing China such as less effective ‘exchange market for technology’ strategy, inefficient enough Northeast Asian technology cooperation, allocation of capital, it also referred to the “hollowing-out” of the Korea manufacturing industry as implied by the shift of Korean production facilities to China, the narrowed technological gap, as well as institutional development difference. Although synchronization with and dependency on the Chinese economy may have dual effects on the Korea economy, ie. co-prosperity vs. contagion, professor Hong holds that the positive effects will dominate as long as the Chinese economy keeps growing.

Professor Nakagawa reviewed the Sino-Japanese relations and used the phrase “politically cold, economically hot” to explain the current state of the bilateral relations. After pointing out the concept, professor Nakagawa analyzed the factors from which this phenomenon stem, and the responses to it. Contrasting changes in the bilateral trade dependency of Japan and China also indicates that the economic ties is not so hot to China as to Japan. With contrast to economic relations, Sino-Japanese political relations are rapidly worsening especially in the recent years. Reasons contributing to the chill politics include Japan’s bid for the permanent member status on the UN security council, the authorization of the history textbooks edited by conservative academicians, the homage to the Yasukuni Shrine as well as the two-plus two discussion of the US-Japan Security Consultative Committee. What is most concerned is that the chill politics is now having bad effects on the once hot economic relations between the two countries as demonstrated by the slowdown of invest, FDI in China. Professor Nakagawa finally concluded that the phenomenon is not a temporary one, but a structural one, because of the strategic collision between the two countries, Japan’s domestic political evolution, strong economic complementarities. Facing this, he agrees with another scholar that principles such as separation of politics and economy, solving concrete problems individually, and avoiding one political problem ignite the other political problem should be adopted.

On the session II, Professor Quansheng Zhao of American University addressed on the more heated topic: “America’s Response to the Rise of China and Sino-US relations”. Professor Zhao examines American’s response to the rise of China and its impact on Sino-US relations by putting it in the context of the overall Asia policy of the Bush administration. With the help of the Power Transition Theory, he first analyzed the Bush administration’s global strategy and the place of Asia policy in the hierarchy of US foreign policy  which are helpful for the understanding of the development of Sino-US relations in the new century. He then pointed out the Bush’s Asia policy, especially policy toward East Asia are quite different from those guiding US actions in other parts of the world as it pursues a multilateral institutional approach for major events in the region,  particularly the North Korea nuclear crisis, while stressing unilateral action, preemptive military action and the enforcing of regime change.in the Middle East. He argues that East Asia is placed lower than Iraq for the time being in the US global strategy perceptions and strategies. Professor Zhao also discussed about China’s reactions to the Bush foreign policy, Beijing’s Asia Pacific strategy as well as scenarios for a possible changing of the tide that may reverse the relatively favorable international environment Beijing currently enjoys. He summed up the Sino-US relations as a relationship of “wary interdependence” in the new century (one existing and one rising)

Also on session II, Professor Victor Kerber of Monterrey Institute of Technology addressed on the “Mexican concerns about China’s competitiveness in the world economy”. Professor Kerber analyses China’s insertion into the world markets and its impact on Mexico’s share. He draws upon rich data from authorized investigations about China and the world economy in the presentation. China is seen as a rival, but also as a challenge to Mexican interests. Even though Mexico responded to the challenge with timely reforms in the 1990’s and with the start up of NAFTA in 1995, it is currently confronted by the need of additional reforms to keep competitiveness in shape. Professor Kerber thinks that Mexico needs to reinforce his position as a North American partner, to uplift the protectionist barriers against Chinese products, as well as to trace a long-term strategy to keep the pace of the Mexican industrial and commercial dynamism.

As one of the hosts of the symposium, Professor Shixiong NI of Fudan University presents Chinese views on the “China’s Peaceful Rise and its Implications”. Professor NI, together with the co-author Dr. Wang Yiwei, puts forward three key points. The first is the rationality of China’s rise: rise in peace. This means that the China is rising amid a peaceful environment, such as the economic globalization and the vigorous development of regionalism, as well as the peaceful ascent of Asia as a whole. China has been seeking to solve disputes with neighboring countries through peaceful negotiations. The second key point is the legitimacy of China’s rise: rise by peace. This means that the approach China has adopted and will adopt is inevitably peaceful. Rather than choosing the road of external expansion like some big powers in history, China has chosen the mode of combining self-reliance with opening up for developing its economy, as well as rising from soft power and global contributions. The third is matching objectives of China’s rise: rise for peace. The goal of China’s rise is to build an all-round well-off society internally and to maintain world peace and promote common development externally. As a conclusion, professor Ni thinks that China’s peaceful rise is a logic development and it conforms to the trends of our times. It is an active contribution to the world peace and stability. This is such a provocative topic that encounters many questions from the commentators such as the uniqueness of China for its peaceful rise, etc.

The symposium continues into the second day with two roundtable sessions. On the first roundtable session, professor Sung-Hoon Park of Korea university talked about the “increasing sub-regionalism within APEC and the Bogor goal: stumbling block or building block”. Bogor Goal means the “trade and investment liberalization by 2010/2020” which was adopted in 1994. In his presentation, professor Park tries to elaborate on the possible ways of achieving the Bogor Goals. He also investigates the potential contribution of the open regionalism to the Bogor Goals. He finally suggests to achieve the Bogor Goals through expanding FTA initiatives, ie. Making APEC’s sub-regionalism a building block towards the goal and developing APEC into an FTA. Professor Dingli SHEN, Executive Dean of the Institute of International Studies of Fudan University, talked about the controversial topic: “how difficult are the difficulties of the Six-Party Talk?”. He argues that the difficulty of the Six-Party Talk lies in three factors, namely, the scope of the talk, the sequence, as well as the verification. Professor Keiji Nakatsuji talked about the Sino-Japan Relations. This talk is somewhat particular as he spoke in place of professor Tomozo Morino, a professor of the Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University, who passed away unfortunately from the sudden brain bleeding just several days before his planned trip to the symposium. Professor Nakatsuji not only summarized professor Morino’s submitted paper on the “Sino-Japan trade” from 1945 to 2004. He also expanded the topic to the overall Sino-Japan relations and analyzed the reasons for the Sino-Japan difficulties from the Japanese position.

Professor Stephen Cohen of American University and Dr. Laura Carballido of the Monterrey Institute of Technology addressed on the roundtable session II. Professor Cohen talked under the topic of “the rise of China and the rise of China-US trade frictions: parallels and lessons from three decades of Japan-US trade frictions”. China’s rise is very much linked to the rapid increases in the size and international competitiveness of the Chinese economy. Professor Cohen focuses on one important aspect of China’s economic success: unprecedented increases in exports to the United States as well as the aftermath of this increase. Dr. Carballido talked about the “Mexico: Challenges ahead”. Beginning with the introduction of the Mexican politics and economy, she  analyzes the challenges that Mexico faces currently in terms of both foreign and domestic policy. On the one hand, Mexico needs to review its bilateral agenda with the United States, its policy towards South America and the greater presence at the international level of Asian economies, particularly China and India. On the other hand, certain urgent economic problems remain unaddressed by the government, for example, the need to ensure its energy supply. The talk tried to address these pressing problems that Mexico is facing.

The above summary of each talks are not all about the symposium. Heated discussions and Q&A went throughout the symposium, which really made it a dialogue. On the closing session, Professor Xinbo WU of Fudan University and Vice President Enrique Zepeda of Monterrey Institute of Technology both agreed on the success of this symposium. Professor WU then turned over the six nations’ flag tree to Vice President Zepeda, a gesture which signified the next symposium will be hosted by Monterrey Institute of Technology.