Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (3rd L) attended the 11th China-EU Summit in Prague, Czech Republic, May 20, 2009. (Xinhua/Ma Zhancheng)

By Cong Mu
 
In the wake of the debate among scholars and observers as to whether the US and China, the so-called Group of Two (G2), will monopolize world affairs in the future, Premier Wen Jiabao dismissed the claim as groundless Wednesday, seemingly drawing a line under the argument.

"Some say that world affairs will be managed solely by China and the US. I think that view is baseless and wrong," Wen told reporters at the end of a China-EU summit in Prague, according to a Xinhua report.

It is impossible for a couple of countries or a group of big powers to resolve all global issues, Wen said. "Multipolarization and multilateralism represent the larger trend and the will of the people."

China is committed to an independent foreign policy of peace and pursues a mutually-beneficial strategy of opening up, Wen said. "China stands ready to develop friendly relations and cooperation with all countries and it will never seek hegemony."

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said the EU welcomes China's role in tackling major global issues such as the financial crisis, climate change, energy and development, Xinhua reported.

Not seeking hegemony

"Neither politicians nor scholars have given a clear definition to G2, but this time, Wen made clear in the international arena that the notion doesn't include the monopolization of world affairs by the two countries," said Niu Xinchun, a researcher at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR).

"This is helpful to relieve the worries, of the EU and other countries, on China's rise. It is also in line with China's traditional foreign policy – never seeking hegemony," he added.

The notion was invented by some US scholars, including Fred Bergsten, director of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Bergsten wrote an article in Foreign Affairs in July, proposing that China and the US should form a 'G2' to share the leadership of the global economy and make China partially take over the status of Europe.

The proposal didn't draw much attention at first, but as the global economic crisis worsened, the notion resurfaced as a hot topic in world politics, with some prominent politicians such as Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski promoting the idea.

However, many Chinese officials, scholars and Web users dismiss the notion. Outlook Weekly magazine, published by the Xinhua News Agency, rebuffed the idea, as it "would do harm rather than good."

Daniel W. Drezner, a professor of international politics at Tufts University, writing on the Newsweek website Wednesday, said Americans were made jittery by China's moves over the past two months, which "could be interpreted as a challenge to the American-led economic and financial order."

"For now, however, China's GDP is still less than half that of America's. It will be some time before Beijing catches up to Washington," Drezner wrote.

"The suggestion of China ruling the world with the US is highly impractical, and such a suggestion will only lead to negative consequences," Niu said. "China has neither the power nor the will to rule the world."

"Sino-US relations are extremely important, but they are not the whole picture," echoed Yang Bojiang, a professor at CICIR, adding that the improper connotation "will mar China's diplomatic relations with the world's major nations, neighboring countries and the developing world."

An online survey of 2,778 participants yesterday on Huanqiu.com showed that more than 80 percent don't believe the G2 will rule the world, and fewer than 10 percent believe China will take over the current position of the US.

China a responsible player

"Worries over China are unnecessary, as the country has taken actions to show it's a responsible and active player in maintaining a healthy world order. For example, the nation didn't dump its dollar assets during the financial crisis but decided to purchase more US Treasury bonds," Niu said. "Besides, China is active in preventing protectionism."

Greg R. Lawson, a blogger at intellectualconservative.ning.com, wrote, "The US needs China to buy our debt in order to fund our domestic spending habits while they have required us to purchase their exports to maintain high employment so as to avoid political unrest."

Lawson described the Sino-US relationship as "strange and symbiotic" but also the core for "a new global architecture that will keep economic integration from breaking apart due to political contingencies."

"Most of China's recent actions have actually been quite modest in scope" and "do not constitute a real threat to the US; indeed, to the extent that China helps boost the economies of the Pacific Rim, they are contributing a public good," Drezner wrote in his article.

"Some of the stories have been hyped beyond the actual data," he explained. "The doubling of China's gold reserves, for example, does not demonstrate diversification away from the dollar. Since the total value of China's foreign-exchange reserves has increased ten-fold during the same time period, the percentage of its total reserves in gold has fallen to 2 percent. Beijing has actually diversified away from gold."

Guo Qiang also contributed to this story