China-ASEAN cooperation requires a common ground of knowledge

Scholars from China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have a shared challenge of getting to know each other and transcending the existing Western knowledge system while jointly developing a new knowledge system that will promote bilateral amity. This is important because guiding ideas from scholars are equally important as efforts from politicians and entrepreneurs.

In fact, when we came to know each other in the past, we more or less relied on the knowledge of Southeast Asian studies and China studies, which were compiled by Westerners, and that subtly affected our judgment and understanding of each other. This conclusion isn't meant to deny the Western knowledge system of Southeast Asia or China, but to point out the flaws in it.

On my flight to Jakarta from Shanghai, I read a book about the history of Southeast Asia; it was written by a Westerner. As a scholar, my knowledge kept me alerted to the bias against Southeast Asia in the book. But I was also worried because regular readers may be unable to spot such prejudice and their recognition may be biased.

Edward Said criticized the Middle East studies in the West, saying that the West studies the Middle East while sticking to the Western views of values, history and the world, resulting in many misinterpretations and prejudices. He referred to such biased knowledge as Orientalism.

Likewise, we could say that Southeast Asia studies and Sinology in the West may also be biased. Now Southeast Asian scholars rely more on Western-compiled Sinology to know about China, while Chinese scholars to some extent rely on the English-based knowledge about Southeast Asia to understand the region. To end this embarrassment, we should turn to greater cooperation during which we get to know each other directly.

For example, Southeast Asian scholars are heavily influenced by John K. Fairbank's description of the tribute system. But my own studies show that it is improper to use the concept of "tribute system" to describe the relations between China and its neighboring countries. This deeply rooted concept sends China's neighbors into worries that China would restore this hierarchy once it regains its strength. But in my opinion, China's relationship with its neighbors was more an order of coexistence.

Similarly, as we studied Southeast Asia, we conclude from reviewing Western material that Southeast Asia is a barbarous, uncivilized place. But in fact, the civilizations of Southeastern Asia and its history are profound. Therefore, Southeast Asian scholars should sort out this type of knowledge and write their own history of brilliance.

Transcending Western-based Southeast Asia studies and Sinology requires voluntary ideological emancipation from both parties. With this regard, I think much has been done. Chinese diplomatic philosophy stresses "unite and rule." China supports Southeast Asian countries to seek unity and joint governance, in which ASEAN member countries play an essential role, which represents a path that meets their own conditions.

I think this diplomatic philosophy is worth everyone's research and elaboration. By contrast, if we take without discretion the Western-proposed "divide and rule" theory, bilateral cooperation, as well as that within ASEAN, is doomed to be wrong. Everyone knows that the "divide and rule" idea characterized by colonialism has caused pains and tragedy across the world.

ASEAN has provided its own experience and knowledge for regional cooperation. The idea of interconnectivity proposed by ASEAN, I think, is more suitable than that of the European integration. The same applies for ASEAN's own development and its bilateral ties with China. Chinese President Xi Jinping has said on many occasions that he is in favor of boosting interconnectivity. ASEAN has the wisdom to either transcend or bypass the problems of the European integration and carry on with its own interconnected path.

I myself also support developing regional interconnectivity to strengthen ties. In this regard, the actual effort for boosting interconnectivity should be gradually carried out in all levels and aspects.

In this aspect, the two sides can cooperate to develop common knowledge. The ASEAN member countries and China could jointly develop the neutral thoughts and systems in international laws. To sum up, China and ASEAN countries are entering a period when we have to transcend Western Sinology and South Asian studies in order to decide our joint future and fate. China-ASEAN cooperation already features many achievements in concrete projects but it still lacks a shared knowledge system as a theoretical backup. Therefore, scholars from both sides should take on the mission to complete what is missing in this common knowledge.

The writer is a professor with the School of International Relations and Public Affairs at Fudan University.

The article was translated by Chen Boyuan. Its original version was published in Chinese.

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.