New York: Oxford University Press, 2022. xii, 311 pp. US$29.95, paper. ISBN 9780197598405.
This volume displays the authors’ masterful command of international relations, political theory, and Chinese and Western culture and philosophy. Richard Ned Lebow and Feng Zhang focus on how foundational and historical notions of justice and related concepts of fairness and equality in US and Chinese thought can aid in the United States and China better understanding one another and also broaden better understanding among other countries, leading to progress toward a more workable and consensual international order than prevails today.
The volume is a follow-up project to the authors’ first book (Taming Sino-American Rivalry, Oxford University Press, 2020), which showed how the authors’ recommended tools of conflict management and conflict resolution might be applied to ease US-China tensions caused by competition for leadership in Asia. This volume is not focused on practical policy applications dealing with immediate problems. It is an avowedly purely intellectual exercise with an important political goal of seeking common ethical ground between China and the United States, thereby providing a foundation for moving toward a more harmonious regional and international order.
Chapter 1 starts the assessment with the judgment that the existing international order is unworkable. The authors say the world requires an order that bridges diverse cultures and practices, accepts the existence and authority of multiple regional orders, and operates more by consensus than great power diktat. The order must value bottom-up contributions as it does top-down ones and undergo a shift in political gravity in the direction of the former. The order’s structure and practices must be negotiated, not imposed. The order must build on a shared, or at least negotiated understanding of justice.
The authors are well aware of the obstacles to achieving such an order. They seek progress in constructing this order by highlighting what they view as the strong common ground between China and the United States in their philosophical traditions upholding equality and fairness as central principles of justice providing the foundation for greater understanding and consensual order.
Chapter 2 provides an impressive exploration of Western concepts of justice. The authors find that all forms of justice build on underlying principles of fairness and equality, and so this chapter focuses on Western ideas and practices of these principles.
Chapter 3 presents the first of two chapters on Chinese conceptions of justice, highlighting important parallels with Western concepts. This chapter focuses on Confucian thinking on these matters while chapter 4 deals with Mohist, Legalist, and Daoist thought. Long the dominant political thought in imperial China, Confucianism was fundamentally challenged and rejected by many Chinese thinkers and leaders in the twentieth century, notably Mao Zedong, who ruled from 1949 to 1976. Nevertheless, the authors highlight a revival of Confucianism in the People’s Republic of China since the 1990s, with Beijing setting up hundreds of Confucius Institutes throughout the world. At the same time, they caution that the Chinese government may be focused on coopting Confucianism for cultural leadership and regime legitimacy and consolidation. They argue that intellectual Confucianism may be at risk if it degenerates into political Confucianism.
Chapter 5 compares Western and Chinese conceptions of justice, focusing on what the authors see as both societies viewing equality and fairness as central principles of order and justice, providing common ground and possible foundations for regional and international orders highlighted in the chapter. The common ground is seen allowing for common action rooted in common ethical principles.
Chapter 6 builds on the assessment of possible common ground and action in the case of US-China relations to argue for major reform in the broader international order. It sees putting together a more peaceful and consensual order as a very formidable task and the authors propose doing so in a piecemeal and drawn-out manner. Progress would involve a number of bilateral as well as multilateral agreements put in place after the widest possible consultation.
Chapters 7 and 8 give the authors’ recommendations along several different pathways to achieve reformed world order. They aspire to do more than reduce the likelihood of international war. The stated goal of the effort is to create more substantial orders that incorporate bottom-up and top-down components and address needs not only for physical security and material wellbeing but also for status and self-esteem.
In particular, chapter 7 develops a framework for Sino-American relations based on mutually acceptable formulations of principles of fairness and equality and shows how this might work in six major areas of contention: status, ideology, security, economy, technology, and society. Chapter 8 moves from bilateral to multilateral regions and extends the discussion of order to the global level. It explores possible orders and pathways to them.
The conclusion in chapter 9 briefly reviews the book’s exploration of principles of justice in China and the United States, finding common ground for a more productive and peaceful relationship. It argues that the implications of improvements and accommodation in Sino-American relations are substantial for the world order.
Overall, these expert authors with impressive command of the broad range of relevant social science, historical, and related literature needed for this book have done a remarkable job in making their case for improvement in US-China relations and the broader world order. They fully recognize that recent developments, notably the Russian invasion of Ukraine, add to the salience of realist assessments stressing realpolitik, which they strongly disagree with. The prominence of realism and realpolitik often comes at the expense of the authors and others seeking paths to greater mutual understanding, common ground, and cooperative actions resulting in a more productive and peaceful relationship and a more broadly accepted and consensual world order. This adverse situation seems unlikely to change any time soon.
Robert Sutter
George Washington University, Washington, DC