In: Economics
China’s Debate: Keeping a Low Profile (KLP) or Striving for Achievement (SFA)?
This debate can have following points. Below are relevant but not a comprehensive list of arguments which can be given:
For low profile/against striving for achievements:
1. The jiogoistic attitude of Xi Jinping and his political party has attracted a lot of attention of other competitors (US, for example). So keeping a low profile would help China in avoiding strong retaliation.
2. Since it is still a developing country (with great prospects) from per capital income measure, it still has a long way to go to becoming a global powerhouse in true sense. Hence, keeping a low profile would help it keeping the focus on strengthening fundamentals as its debt levels are still high which might pose problems in the future.
3. Recent circumstances, where it was accused of Covid-19, it is prudent to keep a low profile to guard against strong backlash.
4. China has been accused of harsh labour practices and grave human rights violations, so it is imperative that it work those and mend it's broken image.
Against low profile/for striving for achievements:
1. You need to market your achievements and be ambitions to get investors investing in your country. Hence, it is better to strive for achievements so that it signals them to invest and be the part of the growth story. It has done so in the past and got good dividends from it.
2. China is at that inflection point where it has robust domestic market and edge in critical technologies such as 5G and AI, so not striving for achievements may hinder that awesome momentum which it got in past 2-3 decades.
3. In a new multi-polar, deglobalized world, it is important to be a little ambitions as the traditional way of 'exporting the way to growth', may not work and it need to think something different now.
4. It still has demographic dividend which can be used, if utilized properly. Having a healthy and educated labour force still gives them that edge over it's local competitors like India.