Book Review American Studies in China BROADENING THE INTERNATIONAL STUDIES CHEN Lemin Wang Jisi ed., Civilization and International Politics: Chinese Scholars¬ð Response to Samuel Huntington¬ðs Theory of ¡°the Clash of Civilization¡± (Shanghai People¬ðs Publishing House, 1995) International politics seems to have become increasing a ¡°celebrated subje c t¡± in China since the end of the cold war. More people have interested themselv e s in it, and written a great deal. Theoretical survey in China and foreign count ries (the latter in particular) and the new approaches from various quarters hav e attracted wide attention. Animated discussions are going on, and a vigorous at mosphere has prevailed. This shows that students keen on international politics do not rest content with descriptions of events any more, no matter how detailed the depiction may be; they focus their interests mainly on the possible develop ment of the international situation and the human society as a whole. The old pa tterns having been broken, what the new one (if there is going to be one) will b e something each country, nation, political force and politicalª²minded person c a n not but take serious concern in. In this sense, one may say that international politics has become a subject of the general public. The international politics has thus greatly expanded. Formerly, we used to view the world events mostly from the political meaning, as struggles of a polit ical nature. In the 50s and 60s ideology was usually used as the yardstick to me asure the issues between the East and West, and countries and personages were ju dged by the attitude they took in these confrontations. Such was the standard ta ken by the East and West alike. In China, the political stand of opposing imperi alism, revisionism and reaction was firmly urged. Without doubt, Chinese over the age of fifty to sixty still clearly remember ¡°the great polemics in the int e rnational Communist movement¡± in the 60s. The international studies gradually e x panded in the 70s, the most significant factor contributing to this being the in creasing part of economics in international politics, for a new technological re volution was deepening the interdependence in the economic field. Before people was prepared to it, a sustaining new industrial revolution had begun to give ou t signals that will have a profound influence on international politics and huma n society, while all this time China was busy with the ¡°great cultural revoluti o n¡± resulting in bringing about a historical retrogression in this country. Esta b lishing diplomatic relations with a number of Western countries had not led to o pening up new horizons for China, and the globe was still locked in the ¡°lifeª² andª²death¡± political struggle among the several ¡°worlds.¡± However, the human society has quickened its forward step, and things can n o longer be viewed in the old light. In China reform and opening up have fundame ntally changed people¬ðs way of judging the world. Students of international pro b lems have managed to catch up with the world evolution in a few years and are be coming to be adept in systematically integrating politics with economics in thei r studies. In recent years, since the 500th anniversary of the ¡°great geographical di s covery¡± the Chinese scholars have stridden further ahead in their research and l inked their study with the world history. Over and beyond the specific questions they found it necessary to search for an answer to the future of human society. The discussion of the question of ¡°globalization¡± is an indication of this ne w development. The research has been extensively broadened, particularly in theori zing. Along what orbit is the history of humanity moving? Where has it reached i n this orbit? These questions raised by Chinese and foreign great thinkers in th e past have been put forward again with a newer vision and on a much higher leve l. At about the same time, Chinese scholars read the article ¡°The Clash of Ci v ilizations? by Samuel Huntington, in the American quarterly Foreign Affairs (the summer issue of 1993). This article has evoked a wider and deeper response in C hina even than Fukuyama¬ðs The End of History a few years ago. The book I am wri t ing this ¡°Preface¡± for1 contains part of the response of the Chinese scholar s. I will not comment on Huntington¬ðs article itself here, for there lack no good p o ints in this book. What draws my interest is that the Chinese scholars have not only noticed the combination of politics and economics, but have taken internati onal politics together with the history of civilization of humanity. Making a hi storical and comprehensive study of the international politics in the framework of the history of civilization of humanity has not started today in the West, bu t only in recent years, especially since Huntington¬ðs article, have we begun t o take an intensive notice of it. That is because we are accustomed to equalizing , wittingly or unwittingly, ¡°international politics¡± with the ¡°current intern ati onal affairs¡± or the practical solutions of specific questions. The question un d er discussion now is to conduct more inª²depth research, make it more analytica l and try to overlook the yesterday, today and tomorrow of the world from the height of t he overall world civilization. This will be a new theoretical experience to us. One may feel unnatural at the start to deal with ¡°international politics¡± in c on junction with ¡°civilization,¡± the ¡°civilization¡± in even Huntington¬ðs artic le be ing clearly a politicized (or ¡°ideologized¡±) version of ¡°civilization.¡± Some of the articles in the book mention this point several times. However, since ¡°civi l ization¡± has made its appearance in ¡°international politics,¡± we must take a firm hold of it and make a serious study. I have long held the view that international studies should be put in the f ra mework of world history and that of human civilization. In this bigger framewor k, the international politics in constant changing is but plays and episodes i n history, subtle reflections of the development of human civilization and sprays churned out o f the long, great river of human civilization. What relationship civilization (c ulture) has with international politics needs to be studied from this very ¡°riv er¡± . A linkage is required between ¡°civilization¡± and ¡°international politic s,¡± and only history can serve this purpose. It is civilization that creates history , and international politics is but a ¡°part¡± of the overall world history. In ot her words, a given civilization gives rise to a given history. ¡°Civilization,¡± l ike an intangible huge hand, remolds the society, props up nations, sways and de cides the history of humanity, and thereby influences the international politics in history. (It stands to reason that in the universities of certain countries international politics is a section in the department of history. Nanjing Univer sity in China also places international politics under the history department.) So, indeed, civilization covers a vast area and is omnipotent and allª²incl u sive. Honore de Balzac said that the hostile groups in society are canceling out the strength of one another, but are leaving their ¡°entire power¡± to ¡°civili zat ion¡±¡ª¡°the great queen¡± who has replaced the king, ¡°the old horrible image a nd th e picture Saviour humanity has created between the Heaven and himself¡±! I fairly like the summarization of Francois Pierre Guillaume Guizot, the noted Fr ench historian in the 19th century. He maintained that ¡°civilization¡± in essen ce can be interpreted as the principle and synthesis of the social and moral d eve lopment of humanity; it, therefore, resembles ¡°a stretch of ocean, which create s wealth for a nation; and in which all the factors needed in the life of this na tion and the strength this nation¬ðs existence depends on are all held in store.¡± T he duty of historians is ¡°to single out the dominating thoughts, i.e., the princi p les universally applied, in each century and each form of civilization, for it i s them which have brought about fortune or misfortune to generations of people u nder their sway, the influence of which can affect even the destiny of the futur e generations.¡±2 These ideas of Guizot can be said to contain roughly three levels of meaning : 1. Civilization is the sum total of material and spirit. 2. Civilization, as a product of historical processes, is a process itself. 3. Civilization is linked with the growth of nations. Oswald Spengler advanced his cultural morphology, a nd Arnold Joseph Toynbee expounded this theory and carried it forward. Though di fferent in their way of representation, they shared the same thoughts. From this , one can infer that, civilization being no universal civilization of humanity t hat transcends time and space, all civilizations have their inherent basis and l aws of natural growth and development. In reference in with the historical conce ption of the ¡°longª²term historical rationality¡± of Mr. Ray Huang, an American hi storian of Chinese origin, this generalization should be applicable to the histo ry of civilization as well. Besides, all civilizations have properties of expansion. The more humanity enters the civilized period, the deeper this expansion will be felt. Different c ivilizations unavoidably repel or absorb one another when they meet. Mutual repu lsion shows that civilizations have individuality difficult to change, while mut ual absorption indicates that changes and modifications are inevitable. So no im mutable civilization exists in the historical processes, and neither is it imagi nable that a civilization should change completely at a definite period. Thinkin g along the properties of expansion of civilization, one will discover that the mankind has long been embarking on the road of ¡°universal interdependence of na t ions¡± in place of ¡°the old local and national exclusion and selfª²sufficienc y.¡±3 The above rambling thoughts can be brought to a guiding thread about the ci vilizations, and expressed in form of a following ¡°formula¡± within the world h is tory: civilization ¡ª nations ¡ª international politics ¡ª process of globalizat ion; which is to show the prospects of human being. This guiding thread coincide s with Immanuel Kant¬ðs observation that the human society develops rationally from a lower to a higher stage: ... It (this guiding thread) can serve not only for clarifying the confuse d play of things human, and not only for the art of prophesying later political changes (a use which has already been made of history even when seen as the disc o nnected effect of lawless freedom), but for giving a consoling view of the futur e (which could not be reasonably hoped for without the presupposition of a natur al plan) in which there will be exhibited in the distance how the human race fin ally achieves the condition in which all the seeds planted in it by Nature can f ully develop and in which the destiny of the race can be fulfilled here on earth .¡±4 Obviously, this guiding thread from low to high is by no means straight. Hum anity in its long travel has to experience violent percussion, conflicts and fus ions of various civilizations. In many cases, such conflicts are conducted among people or groups of people in different regions under the name of ¡°civilizatio n ¡± for their own interest and power. However, if the political intentions and co n siderations regardless of civilization are excluded, there will exist only diffe rences and resemblances among civilizations, and differences do not necessarily mean headª²toª²head conflicts. The ¡°clashes of civilizations¡± people say today is in fact political conflicts provoked under the pretext of ¡°civilization,¡± or p ol itical conflicts mantled in ¡°civilization,¡± or in the words of Kant, ¡°the con fused play of things.¡± When all these are ¡°clarified,¡± one will see that the coe xis tence, interchange or covergence of various civilizations in different degrees a nd at different levels conform to the general law of the history of the civiliza tion of humanity, if one proceeds entirely from the very features of the civiliz ations themselves or look at their history of development as such. Some might say that this amounts to advocating the ¡°global culture,¡± and it is utterly empty talk since it is entirely divorced from realities. To question s like this, categorical answers of either yes or no will not do. It is neither a question of whether someone wants to advocate something. The thing is, judging by the development of human civilization, the portion of universal civilization is bound to increase day by day, and not vice versa. In fact, the spread of sci ence and technology to various regions and nations and the application of the la w and mechanisms of market economy in various countries and regions are producin g a tremendous impact on interpersonal and social relationship, values and peopl e¬ðs way of thinking, thus gradually but markedly shortening the distance among regions, nations and different groups of people. Accordingly, two aspects of things must be brought in sight: the aspect of the evolution and that of dayª²byª²day realities. One shouldn¬ðt be blinded by onl y one of the aspects. As Prof. Li Shenzhi put it, when he spoke about the questi on of ¡°globalization¡± in a meeting: ¡°We must not see only that the world is b ese t with confrontation, contention, conquest and slaughter. Humanity has, in fact, entered upon the period of globalization. The convergence of different cultures has begun. From the knowledge humanity has possessed, it has been inferred that human being as a species must have originated from the same sources. In the sub sequent tens of thousands of years, they spread to various parts of the world fo r survival and developed their own cultures separated from one another. This sit uation seemed to resemble what has been described in the chapter ¡®Tien Xia¡¯(Un iverse) of the ancient Chinese philosophical works Zhuangzi: ¡®The Dao Shu (principles and learnings) has been disintegrate d by the world.¡¯ But it has not got to the extent that ¡®it has been disintegra te d for ever, never to be reintegrated again.¡¯ With the improvement of the means o f communication and conditions for survival, the scattered groups of people have gradually come together. Five hundred years ago, Christopher Columbus discovere d the New Continent, and people in different parts of the world came to know the exis tence of others. But the interchange could increase only slowly. Now, 500 years later, we can say seriously that the epoch of globalization has begun. Personnel , material, energy and information are being exchanged worldwide, on a growing s cale and at a faster and faster rate. Such interchange will inevitably bring in its wake conflicts and fusions of different nations and cultures. Therefor e, the disintegrated ¡°Dao Shu¬ð will be reintegrated again. Qian Zhongshu, a fa mous c ontemporary Chinese scholar, made a wise observation when he wrote, ¡®East Sea, W est sea, people share the same mind; Southern School, Northern School, the Dao Shu is not disintegrated.¡¯¡±5 That is to say, one must see both the disintegration and integration of the culture of humanity as a process. History can bear witness to this. The Western Christian civilization was not originated in the West; on its way from the East to the West, it fused with Greek and Roman civilizations and took root in Weste r n Europe. In the light of cultural morphology, what people call ¡°the Christian c ivilization¡± is actually the outcome of the early convergence of the Eastern an d Western cultures. Even in the medieval times, the Greek culture, the Arabian cu lture and the culture of Asia Minor had infiltrated to Western Europe close by v ia southern Italy and the southern and northern coasts of the Mediterranean. Ave rroism was one of the links between them. The Italian Renaissance was a historic al event entirely of Western Europe, but its brilliance threw light on the Byzan tine Empire¬ðs Europeanª²Asian boundary and North Africa as well. True, the conf li cts and fusions of the Chinese and the Western culture came several centuries la ter and underwent different courses and took different forms, but it can be said for certain that the history of their separation from each other is gone for ev er. Even though ¡°conflicts¡± have occurred when the two cultures met, the effec ts of such ¡°conflicts¡± contain elements of ¡°fusion.¡± The ¡°conflicts¡± here re fer to the extension of differences, and the ¡°fusions¡± also mean the extension of di fferences. This demands that scholars of the history of humanity must have a historica l perspective of viewing the world history in its entirety. This is by no means an new idea. From China¬ðs On Rites, to the Western utopian communism, to the Ma r xist law of social development, up to today¬ðs ¡°globalization,¡± thinkers of th e p ast and present all study the development of humanity in its totality. True, the ir ideas contain contradictions, for in the future of the world they tend to see that humanity, in both their minds and theories, can not bypass splits, content ions, fighting and chaos of wars. In his rationalist outlook of world history, K ant did take into account all sorts of manifestations contrary to rationalism. B efore ¡°integration¡± can be achieved, ¡°disintegration¡± is a stage that can no t be got around. It must be admitted, therefore, that integration inevitably manifes ts itself in a ¡°process¡± in time and space. This is a question involving hist orical philosophy, political philosophy and international politics. So, two levels of meaning civilization and international politics seem to h ave. 1. Since civilization determines the behavior of a nation, it naturally aff ects (through the ruling group) its thinking, policies and measures in foreign r elations and the mode of international politics. 2. International politics at di fferent times, judging from the longª²range view of the ¡°globalization,¡± is no thi ng but multiª²act plays being acted on the big stage of the history of human civ i lization (a history of conflicts and fusions) in the final analysis. No matter w hat performances are going on on the stage, the ¡°plays¡± are drawing nearer and n earer to the destination of the human civilization. It can be said, perhaps, tha t the former is a proposition of politics, and the latter, of philosophy and ant hropology. It might not be insignificant to review here the ¡°Utopia¡± Kant envisaged: Gradually violence on the part of the powers will diminish and obedience to the laws will increase. There will arise in the body politic perhaps more charity an d less strife in lawsuits, more reliability in keeping one¬ðs word, etc., partly out of love of honor, partly out of wellª²understood selfª²interest. And eventua lly this will also extend to nations in their external relations toward one another up to the realization of the cosmopolitan society, without the moral foundation in mankind having to be enlarged in the least; for that, a kind of new creation (supernatural influence) would be necessary. For we must also not hope too much from men in their progress toward the better lest we fall prey with good reason to the mockery of the politician who would willingly take the hope of man as the dreaming of a distraught mind.6 At that time, Kant could only put his hope on things like ¡°a project of th e Nature¡± and ¡°supernatural influence.¡± With the unceasing progress of science an d technology, however, this ¡°supernatural creature¡± is no longer something mys ti cal and unpredictable, and humanity needs not to seek help from the religious ¡° s upernatural power¡± any more. On the other hand, we should no longer look at all sorts of ¡°Utopia¡± the past thinkers advanced purely as illusionary, for scienc e and technology and the epoch of information have replaced this ¡°supernatural po wer.¡± Generally speaking, in dealing with questions of international politics, co ntradictions and conflicts are the chief concerns for study, and consultation an d negotiation are conducted because there exist contradictions or conflicts. Hun tington¬ðs article deals precisely with the contradictions and conflicts, only t h ey have been mantled in ¡°civilization.¡± But he discards the very nature of civ il izations altogether and defined ¡°the clashes of civilizations¡± as ¡°paradigm. ¡± He , in fact, still focuses his attention on the practical political conflicts of t he moment, and no organic linkage his article has shown with the development of the human civilizations themselves (including conflicts and fusions). However, as I have said at the beginning of this paper, to us students of i nternational politics, the significance of Huntington¬ðs article does not lie in the article itself or in the comments it has brought. What is more important is that Huntington gave us a topic for writing, pushing us to proceed from a corner of international politics to the other edifice of the history of world civiliza tion and greatly widening our horizons. Everybody can write, and each in his own way. Huntington made the beginning, but we do not have to follow in his footste ps. We¬ðll see that watching daily happening international affairs in an isolat e d and superficial way is merely compiling data concerning international politica l (economic) events, while international studies, integrated with civilization, becomes a science which will take current events only as long and short plays in the history of human civilization, and one should stop judging them as they sta nd. F ukuzawa Yukichi, a Japanese thinker in the 19th century, likened civilization to a deer and politics to the shooters. Different shooters have different ways of shooting, but the objective is shooting at and getting the deer.7 Civilization b eing characterized by such unheardª²of vastness an immensity, those obsessed wi t h the arrogant and narrow idea that ¡°people from another clan must be doubleª² mi nded¡± have obviously but an old brain. World history will undoubtedly develop over and beyond the outmoded i deas opposing the East and West and all sorts of ¡°centerism,¡± no matter where they come from. Looking back, I sense that compiling a book of this sort will undoubtedly p romote our theoretical research in international studies. We often say that inte rnational studies is a learning embracing several subjects and linking with lite rature, history, philosophy, politics and economics. If international studies i s to exceed the level of depicting and interpreting the current affairs and ris e to the height of theoretical and analytical study, it simply must take this ro ad in research. I believe the readers will feel some freshness in reading the articles in t his book. The contributors consist of people from all parts of China, most of th em young or in the middle age. This shows our research in international politics is entering an unprecedented ¡°golden period.¡± This ¡°Preface¡± I am asked to writ e seems like the feet added to the drawing of a snake; it is really unnecessary. NOTES 1 Wang Jisi, ed., Civilization and International Politics: Chinese Sch olars¬ð Response to Samuel Huntington¬ðs Theory of ¡°the Clash of Civilizations¡± (Shanghai People¬ðs Publishing House, 1995). 2 Translated from Francois Pierre Guillaume Guizot, The History of Eur opean Civilization (French edition, Hachette, 1985), pp.30, 31. 3 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Collected Works (Lawence & W ishart, 1976), Vol. 6, p.488. 4 Immanuel Kant, ¡°Idea for a Universal History from a Cosmopolitan Point of View,¡± Kant on History (The Library of Liberal Arts, In dianapolis, 1984), English edtion, p. 25. 5 Li Shenzhi, ¡°Distinguishing Similarities and Differences and Integrating the Eastern and Western Cultures: Perspectives of the Chinese Culture,¡± E ast, 1994, No. 3, p. 8. 6 Immnuel Kant, ¡°An Old Question Raised Again: Is the Human Race Constantly Progressing?¡± op. cit., p. 151. 7 Fukuzawa Yukichi, An Introduction to Civilization (Commercial Press, Beijing, 1982), Chinese edition, p. 41. (Translated by Wang Huaiting)