Introduction
It is a cliché to say that the relationship between China and the world has become complex, multidimensional and interdependent. But that does not mean that we fully understand the complexity of the Chinese attitude towards globalization nor its interdependence with the world in general and the Western industrial democracies in particular, with the implications thereof. The thesis that we develop in this article argues that economic interdependence greatly strengthens Chinese authoritarianism in its ability to politically influence the attitude of States and civil liberties in Western democracies, rather than the reverse. It contradicts the usual thesis that Western democracies can successfully push authoritarian in developing countries towards democracy by establishing economic ties with it. In addition, our thesis is a problem for specialists of Comparative Political Studies and Chinese policy because it challenges some fundamental paradigms that shape our understanding of economic reform in China and the resulting implications for its relations with the world. Most studies concerning China's rise were much interested in the material aspects of this process, the economy, trade, the military, and in some cases to the technological development. An even more often applied approach to the study of the emergence of China is one of Realpolitik, which focuses almost exclusively on the challenge this emergence to the current powers and their national interests. (Galiani and Torrens, 89)
Literature overview
There is a widespread notion that integrated in the world economy state will inevitably become democracy. This alleged incompatibility between trade liberalization and democracy would probably surprised that Caporale wrote in the Autocracy, Democracy And Trade Policy" that "It is almost a general rule that wherever there are soft manners, their commerce; and that wherever there is commerce, there are gentle manners "for Montesquieu, international trade, far from being an instrument of" economic war "and despotism, as perceived by the mercantilist tradition, would strengthen peace and democracy, However, this famous passage in the Spirit of Laws cleverly circumvent some questions that remain, even today, no undisputed answer the "almost" Montesquieu reveals a hesitation (Galiani and Torrens, 76). This is it not quite a rule as the combination of gentle manners and trade with some exceptions. On the contrary Minzner in his work "China After The Reform Era". does not further resolve the issue of causality that continues even today to question the political sciences, history or economic: is the development of trade that promotes democracy or vice versa? Both developments are they not, moreover, the result of a third cause, climate, geographical, historical and institutional heritage, or other determinants still delivered to the thinking of analysts? From the perspective of the action, on which levers act and for what purpose, "forcing" democracy in some mercantilist aim to increase trade and promote trade to encourage political liberalization? In 1989, there are just 20 years ago few would have imagined that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its institutions would still be in power for more than two decades later, still less that this regime would increase its influence in the world point gain international scale. At that time, world communism collapsed, first in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, and some Western intellectuals proclaimed the "end of history" theory assuming the ultimate victory of the market and the democracy on the long path followed by humanity. In China, the senior CCP leaders were widely condemned both within the country and abroad for the bloody suppression of democracy protests in Tiananmen Square; calls for democratic change in China were silenced by tanks and machine guns, but the regime has paid a huge political price for his actions because its legitimacy was therefore more widely and severely challenged before. All major industrialized democracies have imposed economic sanctions on China, thus moving the heart of the Cold War that was the arms race between Washington and Moscow towards a political and ideological confrontation between the West and China. However, the winds turn and with them the political climate. As we approach the 20th anniversary of the military crackdown in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese regime remains, as it always has, that such action was necessary and legitimate. He apparently convinced, which is a new development, the Chinese and the world - including Western democracies - to accept this argument rather than that which dominated in 1989 and wanted that China also needs democracy. During this relatively short period of time, relations between China and the world have transformed from top to bottom, mainly due to the globalization of the market economy and beneath shadow hovering on foreign democracies.
Theory
This strategic line of reasoning is of course useful to better understand the Chinese and global contemporary politics, but it is insufficient if we neglect the political values that are at stake in the emergence of China and if we ignore the impact of Chinese domestic institutions on the global political economy. And even when Western researchers address the issue of "soft power" Chinese, their analysis and research are more interested in competing powers for their popularity in the world, national image and cultural influence to the principles moral and institutional governing their political, economic and cultural life. Yet the world powers may rely on those principles to have an impact on the freedom of human societies. Thus, it may well feel admiration or awe watching the rise of China, but the moral implications of the phenomenon remain unclear. This article, among others, is trying to remedy this shortcoming in the field of China's behavior studies with respect to the world. We will analyze how the success of China's economic development has had a negative impact on public freedoms and democracy practiced in the West, and we will wonder about the reasons for the growing economic interdependence between China and global economy allows China to influence political attitudes of the great democracies and not the reverse. From an empirical point of view, my article will examine a number of China's behavior in its relations with foreign countries that allow the Middle Kingdom to use its economic exchanges with the Western democracies to guide the political attitude interior and exterior thereof. The pressures on the Dalai Lama is one example. Then we mayl highlight how the economic interests related to the Chinese market make them vulnerable multinationals to Beijing political pressure and we will try to analyze the reasons why the international capital is so easily manipulated to cooperate with the Chinese government in its repressive business restriction of freedoms within and outside its borders. We may use mainly examples of Wal-Mart and Yahoo, and analyze them through informational and material links that large multinationals have helped to set up between China and the world (Minzner, 129-143).
Empirical Data
The first is the complaint of Europeans regarding the widening trade deficit between China and Europe. It has continued to grow during the 1990s while China- ECC exchanges were surplus for the EEC at the beginning of their commercial relationship. (Caporale, Sova and Sova 261-273) The following tables depict the inexorable widening trade deficit of the European Union:
This deficit is the result of a very rapid increase in European imports (they are multiplied by 2.65 from 1995 to 2000) while exports are growing at a much slower pace (they are multiplied by 1.72 over the same period). If Europeans denounce the insufficient openness of the Chinese market and a climate unfavorable to investment, these results also reflect the European weaknesses with China in economy and trade: low investment, exports and the attractiveness of European products. (Caporale, Sova and Sova 261-273)
On the other hand we see the change of China GDP according to World bank data and the change of political freedom level.
Many observers have described as poor protection of Human Rights In China. These observers are, in particular the States - particularly the Western democracies - as well as international organizations and NGOs.
Activists denounce violations of human rights past, especially during the Great Leap Forward, a policy that has killed twenty to thirty million Chinese malnourished or after demonstrations in Tiananmen Square 1989 during the repression that followed and that made 400-2 000 deaths and 7 000 to 10 000 injured (estimated). Although the Chinese government has recognized the existence of major breaches [ref. required], he says that the situation of human rights is progressing and it is now better than ever. He says the concept of human rights must take into account the living conditions, health and economic prosperity. He added that some events were perceived as unfair by groups or nations outside China, while the Chinese government considers necessary to respect public order and social stability.
The conjunction of the 2008 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing, and the protests in Tibet that began a few months ago and have been severely repressed, were an opportunity to put at the forefront of the international scene the violation of rights Man in China. In July 2015, a hundred lawyers of human rights are removed and examined as part of an unprecedented campaign, and more than ten of them are still imprisoned at the end of September 2015 (Galiani and Torrens).
Conclusion
In previous parts, we hitched to two questions: First, we analyzed a new phenomenon appeared recently in relations between China and Western industrial democracies parallel to the emergence of China's economic power. This is the intentional manipulation by Beijing of its economic power for political purposes. In particular, the use of economic power is often used to undermine the political autonomy of democratic states in the conduct of their foreign policy and to interfere in their policies and practices of civil liberties, such as freedom of religion for example. China's political influence, based on strengthening its status in the world, is also found in its ability to adopt foreign companies, including major multinationals, behaviors directly inspired by his own authoritarian or repressive practices. The Chinese regime and forces companies are in pursuit of profit and business opportunities to interfere with human rights in China and to damage the image of democracy in general. While China is involved increasingly in globalization, it is also becoming more aggressive than in the past in exporting its authoritarian political values, norms, and behaviors. Indeed, its intensive trade, investment and other economic ties with democracies and Western companies provide it with the capacities unprecedented in this regard. This is new because China has never had this flexibility at a time when its economic power was lower. Rather, it was the Western powers which then used their economic power and trade with China to push it to improve its record on human rights, particularly in the aftermath of tragedy Tiananmen in 1989. With its economic growth, China now takes his revenge by reversing the connections between business interests and political values, and guiding its relationship with the West in a direction favorable to the values, standards and policies driving Beijing.
Works cited:
Caporale, Guglielmo Maria, Anamaria Sova, and Robert Sova. "Trade Flows And Trade Specialisation: The Case Of China". China Economic Review 34 (2015): 261-273. Web.
"Changes In China's Main Economic Indicators". China & World Economy 23.5 (2015): 123-124. Web.
Galiani, Sebastian and Gustavo Torrens. "Autocracy, Democracy And Trade Policy". SSRN Electronic Journal n. pag. Web.]
Minzner, Carl. "China After The Reform Era". Journal of Democracy 26.3 (2015): 129-143. Web
