An opinion piece in today’s People’s Daily applies Confucian principles, especially the idea of benevolent government, to foreign policy issues, particularly those of the US.  The basic idea is: if powerful countries concentrated on a "policy of benevolence," and avoided "rule of force by dictators," then the chances for world peace would increase.

     Something like this does not get onto the People’s Daily editorial page without authorization of the Communist Party.  So, it seems that they are arguing that the unilateral action of the US in Iraq puts it in the category of "rule of force by dictators," and, therefore, immoral and uncivilized. However, while they might be correct that the war in Iraq does not pass muster in terms of Confucian ethics (though Confucians may well accept the overthrow of a tyrant), if you take Confucius seriously, then the leadership of the Communist Party needs to look at its own policies, especially its threat of force against Taiwan.

     Confucius is generally understood to be against the use of force in politics, both domestic and international.   "How can you govern by killing," he asked in the Analects (12.19).

     In the first passage of chapter 16 of that book, a story is related about a meeting between Confucius and one of his disciples, who is working as a political adviser to a nearby Lord.  The disciple and another emissary come to tell Confucius that their ruler is planning to attack a neighboring state.   Confucius first blames the counselors for failing to prevent the ruler from making war:

Isn’t someone to blame if tigers and wild bulls escape from their cages, or jewelry of tortoiseshell and jade is crushed in its box?

     But then he goes on to a more fundamental critique of war:

This is what I have learned: leaders of countries and noble houses don’t worry about having too few people [i.e. insufficient military power], they worry about equitable rule; and they don’t worry about the people living in poverty, they worry about the people living in peace.  If rule is equitable, there’s no poverty.  If there’s harmony, there’s no lack of people.  And if there’s peace, there’s no rebellion.

     Just as the People’s Daily editorial suggests, a policy of benevolent government, which emphasizes equitable rule and peace, makes war unnecessary.  Internationally, this could mean decreasing spending on military power and increasing capacities for equitable rule.  And that would be nice.

     But let’s turn this back on China’s current stance toward Taiwan.  If the PRC government practiced benevolent government, it would not be building up its military forces against Taiwan, but concentrating more on the very large problems of economic and political inequality within their own borders.   After all, the official ideology still understands the Party as carrying out a "dictatorship of the proletariat."  And that comes a lot closer to "rule of force by dictators" than imperfect American democracy.

    In fact, I find this rather curious.  It is so easy to turn this back against PRC politics and policy, it makes me wonder if it is the work of some subterranean reformists within the People’s Daily staff.   Hmmm…..