Early in 2011 I wrote a Diplomat feature asking whether China had patterned its diplomacy on that of Otto von Bismarck, Germany's Iron Chancellor. The verdict is in, and the answer is no. Bismarck was a coldhearted man, devoted single mindedly to preserving and advancing German imperial power. But he knew the diplomatic value of self-restraint. Situated amid fellow great powers, newly united Germany had to convince prospective rivals it had no claims on their territory, lest they combine against and overpower the Reich. The chancellor also deftly encouraged competition among Germany's rivals. The upshot: a "hub-and-spoke" system in which Berlin was on better terms with each potential competitor than they were among themselves.
Bismarck, then, was the consummate alliance breaker — or, more accurately, alliance preventer. These days Chinese diplomacy could hardly be less Bismarckian. After waging a rather impressive charm offensive for some years — after pursuing a subdued diplomacy in which the Iron Chancellor would've taken pride — Beijing has wantonly squandered the reserves of goodwill it accumulated in Asian capitals.
If further proof were needed, China's Defense Ministry generously supplied another bit late last week when spokesman Yang Yujun confirmed that PLA Navy warships have conducted patrols near the contested Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands. Yang disgorged what appears to be Beijing's boilerplate on the dispute, namely that the islets "have been an inseparable part of Chinese territory since ancient times." Thus naval and law-enforcement ships had a perfect right to police the waters around the Japanese-administered archipelago. Shades of "indisputable sovereignty" over the South China Sea — another non-negotiable position Beijing has carved out for itself in recent years, seemingly ruling out compromise.
Far from reassuring fellow Asian nations or stoking frictions among them, Beijing has given them reason to make common cause — both among themselves and with their balancer of first resort, the United States. But if not Bismarck, there is a German ruler whose erratic, reckless diplomacy foreshadowed China's. His name was Kaiser Wilhelm II. He frightened Germany's neighbors, isolated his nation, and united a hostile alliance against it. He also marched Europe over the precipice in 1914. That's what we call self-defeating behavior.
One hopes the Kaiser isn't the new face of Chinese foreign policy.

Yelrekazaf
An intriguing analysis.
It reminds me of Robert Massie' excellent book Dreadnought and its wonderful description of the build up to the first world war.
If you haven't had the pleasure I can highly recommend it. The similarities between Britain and Germany's relationship and that of the United States and China is striking – and disturbing.
talking points
the professor is misinformed.
the so called patrol of Chinese navy ships, happened at 80 nautical miles west of Diaoyu Island. well, that is between the islands and Chinese mainland shore, it is closer to Chinese mainland shore than Diaoyu island.
notowar
How about the Chinese navy ships a thousand miles from china patrolling the Spratly?
Bankotsu
You prefer China patrolling the gulf of Mexico?
Errol
If it makes Beijing feel better, go ahead. The Soviets used to do that a lot. Washington never stopped those excursions.
Matt
Not even the Kaiser was dumb enough to claim an entire body of water as his imperial territory as China has done with the South China Sea. Could you imagine the reaction of Great Britain to Germany claiming the North Sea as their "indisputable territory"? Would the Grand Fleet not have proven such an outragous claim to be rubbish as soon at it could sail and defeat such a rank amateur's delusional ambition?
Bankotsu
I don't know about comparisions about China and Bismarck, but I feel that U.S and the Kaiser is closer to the mark.
Who will win this battle of the spheres of influence?
Emmanuel Todd:
Most apparent is how clumsy the US has been to date, and how far they have moved away from any notion of universality. They don't see the world as it really is anymore. They are failing in any balanced and fair approach to their allies. All of this reminds me of Germany under Wilhelm II. The US is losing allies steadily. One gets the impression that an office somewhere in Washington has been tasked with the duty to daily prepare a scheme to develop new enemies for the US.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4381.htm
Tseng Kin-Wah
This article is written with a jaundiced eye. There was peace in the region until the American decided to “pivot” back to Asia. This action encouraged the Philippines, Vietnam & Japan to be more assertive & aggressive thereby breaking the status quo. In the face of such assertiveness, it is only natural for China to state its claim as doing otherwise would indicate acquiescence. If you care to note, China's position is merely that it has as valid a claim to the disputed island groups as anybody else, as is borne out by written records.
I wonder whether the author have mixed up the country in his ardour. Through its disastrous "War on Terror" the US brought chaos to Iraq and Afghanistan, further destabilized the Middle East, alienated Muslims everywhere and has made the world a far more dangerous place. On the other hand, Beijing's interaction with the rest of the world has been a model of peace and civility over the past decade or so when lined up against Washington's. So who’s like Kaiser – you tell me.
Errol
I'm always amazed at the knee-jerk reaction of Chinese commenters whenever a criticism is leveled at China. The US is guilty too… Look at the US… American exceptionalism!.
The article is about frigging China, not the US. There are TONS of articles about US blunders in the international arena. A lot of them are from Americans themselves. People can go to those articles and add their comments there. For the sake of a clear discussion, keep the comments on mainland China.
And China being a model of peace in the last decade? You're kidding, right? China's disregarding international conventions and other countries' EEZ's just so it can lay claim to the whole SCS and islands in the ECS. Add the fact that ships, whether military or para-military are being sent, and add in a populace that has been brain-washed and what we're looking at is a gunpowder keg that may explode soon.
Bankotsu
If the west can write things attacking China, others can also attack the U.S.
I consider that to be fair.
Errol
True, God knows anyone objective have a lot of criticism for the US, but that's not the point here. The article is about China and its actions. Mentioning the US here is the same as diverting attention, or changing the topic. As I said, you can provide your criticisms of the US on articles that pertain to and about the US.
Let's keep things clear and simple here.
RL
Obviously, Errol is an American. How can the US be off the hook and not mentioned here? What diversion of issue are you talking about? You are the one who tried to divert attention away from US aggression worldwide. If Finland is mentioned here, then you can say there is diversion of the issues here as Finland has nothing to do with Asean militarily. But the US is right in the middle of the action, with ALL of the Asean counties and even non-Asean counties like Australia and New Zealand. involved AND much, much more all the encirclement of China from Japan, South Korea, India, Afghanistan and all those Central Asian countries.
Why don't you Americans go back to school and learn how Hawaii became US property and 50th state. Pure gun diplomacy. Do you really think others are so naive to think Uncle Sam is so innocent as what you want to potray here? Stop your "holier than thou" nosense, won't ya?
Errol
It's actually interesting to go back to previous comment posts.
@ RL
Actually, I'm a Filipino. And I'm not defending America. What I was saying is stick to the point. Read the article above. It talks about China and Bismarck's strategies. It doesn't talk about the US at all.
PanatagPH
model of peace and civility? like what China is doing to Tibel and the muslim regions? and will soon in West Philippine sea?
mary pham
No! You are wrong. There has been no peace in the South China Sea and land borbers with China at all during the last 40 years and Chinese are the only known aggressor, no one else even comes close:
1. In 1974: at the end of US-Vietnam war, China took advantage of the retreating South Vietnamese army/ US ally and attacked Paracel islands.
2. In 1979: trying to rescue the Khmer Rouge from Vietnam, China launched a brutal attack across the borders aiming at encircling Hanoi only to be driven back months later.
3. In 1988:previously having no possession in the Spratly islands, China attacked and took control of 8 rocks/islands from Vietnam against unarmed civilians.
4. During the last 10 years, numerous incidents of Chinese provocations against Vietnamese fishermen and survey ships.
So, don't blame the recent US's pivot back to Asia as encouragement for Japan, the Philippines or Vietnam to confront China and don't excuse China of merely having a claim to the disputed islands like everyone else: China baselessly wants to own 80% of SCS, militarizes islands and showboating its upgraded navy to bully neighbors.
China is no model for peace and civility.
Leonard R.
Excellent analysis. The closest modern China has come to Bismarck would probably be Deng. Hu Jintao OTOH, has single-handedly restored America's reputation in the Asia-Pacific. That is an astonishing accomplishment.
—–
@Prof. Holmes: "But if not Bismarck, there is a German ruler whose erratic, reckless diplomacy foreshadowed China's. His name was Kaiser Wilhelm II. He frightened Germany's neighbors, isolated his nation, and united a hostile alliance against it. He also marched Europe over the precipice in 1914. That's what we call self-defeating behavior."
John Chan
I don’t think Bismarck will be a nice guy if every his neighbour wants a blade on his beloved Germany by claiming some kind of fabricated self-righteous reasons like what Japan, the Philippines and the Vietnam are doing to China.
Nothing happens in isolation, Kaiser Wilhelm II did the dirty work to make sure none of his neighbours dared to claim something they did not entitle to, he made sure their geed will get punished appropriately. Kaiser set up the stage for Bismarck to perform his charm.
China has made the mistake by getting Kaiser and Bismarck’s action order reversed. China took Bismarck’s approach first, but its conciliatory approach in the international affairs is viewed by his neighbours and the maestro of sowing discord as weakness and God sent opportunity to take advantage on China.
If Deng has studied German history he probably won’t propose “shelving the disputes” policy at all; now China has to pay heft price to assert the integrity of its sovereignty.
Rujia
Bismarck came before Kaiser Wilhelm II. Kaiser WIlhelm II destroyed what Bismarck created. In fact, it was Wilhelm II who dismissed Bismarck due to their clashes concerning most things.
China should have always followed the principle of realpolitik. It is the only foriegn policy that has proven its effectiveness in the long run.
notowar
john chan, you can fabricate a million lies about the south and east china sea issues on sovereignty but you could not hide the fact that your China is the agressor here.
John Chan
@notowar,
We have been hearing the same distorted self-righteous exceptionalism for nearly half a century, the aggressors (USA and its lackeys) claim the victims at fault, then bomb and kill the victims into total destruction in the name of doing good for the victims as a gift from the civilized West.
Thick skin and rewriting history with creative revisionist talent can not change the fate that Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam and the USA are the aggressors.
filipino defender
An army of millions and arsenal of nukes and an aircraft carrier that was intended to be a casino that was really and became a flag ship of an evil empire and your calling us what? hahahahahaha that's a story that not even the most gullible of childern would believe that why people think your a joke
Errol
Philippines is an aggressor? Ha! We never had a history of sending our troops to occupy another country. You call us aggressors because we lay claim to the islets next to our shores. Those islets are too far from you and your governemnt's claims to them are tenuous and worst, fabricated.
The righteous, as much as I hate to use the word, have nothing to hide. How come Beijing refuses to lay down its cards properly? Why the vague comments and the refusal for the UN to arbitrate? Issues of sovereignity? That's funny. That's the mindset of a TRUE aggressor. And a thief. A thief looks at all the items in the world as his, and to a thief, everyone else a thief.
Keep your paranoia and your viewpoint to yourself. And yet you wonder why China doesn't have much soft power.
slim
John Chan's entire world view is based on falsehood. He couldn't make an honest comment even in the of-chance he wanted to.
joseph enry
@John Chan:
The CCP lines of " peaceful rise ", " indisputable rights ", " ancient discovery "… are getting tiredly old and win no external admirer so far. It's only good for Chinese domestic consumption. Name-calling everyone US lackeys, also shows how desperate and isolated you and your party bosses are. Very soon, you will have to add Korea, India, Australia… to the list. Oh, don't forget ASEAN is coming with their COC discussion next month. Just be very careful of your words and actions.