Why does not China form solid alliances like the U.S. or other powers?

At first glance, it might seem strange that China, which currently is the only reliable challenger of the American global dominance, has chosen not to form solid military alliances following the paradigm of the U.S. and other great powers in history.

To put everything on perspective, Washington has signed several formal defense treaties like NATO, established in 1949, the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance for the Americas, signed in 1947, the ANZUS Treaty for the Pacific region, signed in 1951. Additionally, has signed defense pacts with South Korea, 1953, and Japan, 1960. Beyond formal treaties and pacts, the U.S. has strategic partnerships with other countries like the Major Non-NATO Allies which enhances defense cooperation with states that are not NATO members, and the Security of Supply Arrangements which offers access to military technology between the U.S. and its partners. Finally, the U.S. have operational over 800 military bases around the globe which enhances the American global reach and projection of power.

At the same time, China has only one formal military alliance which is the 1961 Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance with North Korea. In this regard, the Sino-Soviet Treaty signed in 1950 expired in 1979 without renewal. Moreover, China has only one operational military base abroad in Djibouti, but Beijing is trying to boost its military logistic footprint in other states and regions.

Nonetheless, China engages in strategic partnerships with other states and participates in multilateral organizations like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. However, those are mainly political and economic partnerships without binding military commitments.

Consequently, is safe to argue that China is avoiding signing treaties that lock the country into defending other states. But why China avoids those binding obligation with other nations? Why does Beijing not follow Washington? Because the Chinese approach to international relations emphasizes strategic autonomy and flexibility.

The perspective of History

To answer this question, we must study the Chinese history, especially of the 20^th century. Thus, during the Cold War, China had a significant military alliance with the Soviet Union. In theory, the two communist powers were close allies and against the West, but this partnership collapsed in the 1960s mainly because the Soviet Union started treating China not as an equal but a lesser ally. This chasm led almost to an armed conflict between the USSR and China. The war was avoided but the Chinese leaders learnt a valuable lesson: that even the ideologically aligned powers can turn hostile while a solid alliance can limit the freedom of action.

From that crisis, China has changed its course of action in the international arena. In 1982, officially

declared that the country will follow an independent foreign policy of peace. This policy shift meant that from that point China would not join any military blocs or alliances. This policy of staying independent became the cornerstone of the Chinese foreign policy until today.

Strategic Flexibility

Besides history, another significant reason for the non-alignment policy is the country’s strategy itself. In this regard, the Chinese leaders have decided that it’s better for China to have the freedom of movement in the global arena. All formal alliances and pacts, like NATO, come with severe obligations. For example, Article 5 of the NATO Treaty indicated that one member state is attacked, the others must come to its defense. This is the obligation of collective security which means that the U.S., as the greatest power withing the alliance, can be dragged into unintentional wars. If not, the American prestige could be severely damaged by not keeping its obligations towards its allies. China on the other hand wants to avoid these obligations. It prefers strategic partnerships which offer cooperation on trade, security, diplomacy but not formal alliances and the legal requirements of action in case of conflict. Thus, China has numerous partnerships with states like Pakistan, but nothing involves mutual defense clauses. This ambiguity offers China the room for strategic movements according to its interests.

Independence, sovereignty

For the Chinese leadership independence and sovereignty is everything. The Century of Humiliation is still fresh in the memories of the Chinese people and their government. As a result, external and internal control is the biggest concern of the Chinese Communist Party which has learnt its lesson from the mistakes of the Soviet Communist Party which led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Regular alliances usually require the states to coordinate in military planning, share intelligence and provide access to foreign military forces. Beijing is not comfortable at all with the requirements as it seeks total control of its own forces and territory.

That is why also Beijing is warried of the U.S. alliances and pacts in the region. From the Chinese perspective, the presence of American military bases in Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and possibly elsewhere, undermines the sovereignty of the host nations. So, by not signing solid alliances China avoids other countries influence on its security decisions.

The different World order according to China

Washington perceives military alliances as the way to keep its leadership over states and regions. On the other hand, China sees this system as an outdated relic of the Cold War-style system. The Chinese and Russian leaders have argued intensely about the rise of a new world order, a multipolar world, in contrast with the unipolar dominance of the United States. From this perspective, solid alliances and pacts divide the world into blocs in an “us against them” mentality just like the Cold War.

Instead, China is building its influence in different ways. The first step is the Belt and Road Initiative, which is investing huge amounts of money into infrastructure across Asia, Africa and even parts of Europe. Moreover, via the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Beijing is cooperating with significant powers, like India and Russia, on economic but also security issues without forming solid alliances or military blocs. China is shaping the international system by its own terms without copying the American or the European playbook.

No commitments offer more options

Today, China has only one active alliance with the fragile dictatorship of North Korea which means that Beijing can talk and negotiate to everyone. In other words, China has diplomatic relations with states that are enemies with each other, like India and Pakistan, Israel and Palestine, Iran and Saudi Arabia. This can be achieved because China has not signed formally alliances and thus can act as a meditator when it suits its interests. Alliances from the Chinese perspective are weaknesses which restrict flexibility. Also, according to the Chinese Communist Party’s propaganda, China is rising on its own strength without any help.

Can this change due to the U.S.?

Today, as the U.S. has declared China its main rival for global dominance, Beijing is closer to Moscow without declaring a Sino-Russian alliance. Instead, the Chinese leaders have used the term no-limits partnership, which sounds significant but is ambiguous with no legal obligations.

However, this strategy might change in the future, especially if China felt more threatened by the U.S. and its coalition in the region. Nowadays, seems that the Chinses leaders are confident that being non-aligned and independent is the right course of action.