Entrance

During the coronavirus pandemic, many articles and opinions were written about the relationship between the United States and China and its impact on the pandemic, especially those that talk about how the shape of the world began to change with the spread of the coronavirus pandemic, and they were divided into two main sections, the first section believes that the Chinese rise could be hindered by the pandemic and that the United States will take advantage of it to attack Beijing, and another section believes that China could seize the opportunity and remove the United States from world leadership. Another section believes that China can seize the opportunity and remove the United States from world leadership. As a result of these perceptions and opinions, it is important to discuss these ideas and try to anticipate the possible shape of the post-Corona world and its effects on China's relationship with the United States and the Arab world.

We can say that the research issue in this paper revolves around identifying the reality and shape of the potential world after the Corona crisis and the impact of the pandemic on strategic interests and the war between the United States and China for world leadership, and it was crystallized in the form of the following question:

Will the Chinese project be positively or negatively affected by the new situation created by the coronavirus in light of the dispute with the United States?

From this main question, a set of sub-questions related to the Chinese project and others related to the coronavirus crisis, as follows:

1. What are the main features of the Chinese project?
2. How did China manage and externalize the coronavirus crisis?
3. How will U.S.-China relations be affected by the coronavirus crisis and where are they headed?
4. Will the world be pro-China or anti-China?
5. How could China's rise affect our Arab and Islamic region?

As for the limitations of the research, the most prominent of them lies in the fact that the event under study is still not clearly defined and is in the process of crystallization, and this makes it difficult to conceptualize it accurately and judge it and its consequences. Therefore, in the absence of definitive information, this paper will adopt an analytical approach through Reviewing the most important available sources of books, articles, reports and official statements, extrapolating positions, events and opinions and analyzing them within a logical and temporal context, and taking into consideration the most famous theories that tend to anticipate the confrontation between China and the United States of America, namely the theory of offensive realism by John Mearsheimer.

It is important to review here the most important articles related to the topic of the paper, which are not exhaustive, but rather reflect the most prominent opinions that have been put forward in the topic, in order to be guided and benefit from them in the discussion of the topic.

Many analysts see the inevitability of this confrontation even before the time of the coronavirus pandemic, as in Edgar Glad's article titled "Coronavirus: Has the time come for a confrontation between China and the United States?", where the writer argued that as the world returns to normal, the great powers will devote themselves to the process of assimilating the coronavirus crisis and employing it in strategic interests.

In his article, the author explains that it is no longer just Coronavirus, but the redrawing of international political and economic balances for the post-virus phase, pointing out that the relationship between China and the United States has never been easy, as it has always been characterized as a cautious relationship that did not reach the level of enmity, nor did it reach the level of an alliance.

The author believes that China has been and remains a strategic threat to Washington because it has become a formidable military power that competes in the field of technology. This is not new, but the complexity of the relationship and its geostrategic framework makes the American view of it more cautious and complex, and the author concludes in his article that the virus may be a pressure tool for political investment, but military confrontation is still theoretically possible. ^[1]

The study aimed to answer the question "What is the nature of Sino-US relations and how did these relations turn into a trade war, and will the Coronavirus affect Sino-US relations?" The study assumes that whatever the volume of cooperation and trade exchange between China and the United States, it remains within the framework of competition, and Washington will not accept the presence of a partner in the international system, as it seeks to remain the first superpower in the world economically, militarily and politically, and wants to rule the world without any rival.

The study concluded that the spread of the coronavirus failed any recent partial trade agreement in resolving trade disputes between the two countries, as the two parties reached a paper of understanding on tariffs to organize a trade exchange exceeding 700 billion dollars annually, which soon collapsed its positive atmosphere after the emergence of the coronavirus pandemic crisis.

In the meantime, China has emerged as a military superpower, regionally, and is now seeking the leadership position it believes it deserves. ^[2]

In an article published in Rai Al-Youm by Omar Naguib entitled "The impact of COVID-19 delinquency on the struggle for a new world order. The writer concluded that US-China relations carry elements of conflict as much as elements of cooperation and that each of the parties will try to direct the relationship to achieve the maximum possible interests in light of the elements of strength available to them and their ability to mobilize and employ them, taking into account the weaknesses they suffer from, which the other party may also seek to deal with and employ them to serve their interests and goals.

Thus, it is possible that US-China relations will not reach the point of military confrontation with the existing considerations of interdependence, as well as not in accordance with the nature of the contemporary reality in which the degree of suitability of military power to deal with new crises decreases. Thus, what can be envisioned in light of these data about the future of US-China relations is that they will range between the points of conflict and cooperation, approaching and moving away depending on the nature of the interactions that will occur at the points of balance of strength and weakness, within a framework of interdependence.^[3]

Researcher Mona Hani Mohamed, in her research entitled "Power Transformation Theory and the Potential for Conflict between the United States and China," argued that U.S.-China relations are part of a transitional phase whose interactions will eventually shape the contours of the world order in the twenty-first century, due to the relative weight of both the United States and China, as the United States is so far considered the only superpower among a group of major powers, and China with its steadily growing demographic, economic and military weight seeks to be a great power and play a prominent and influential role in the movement of international interactions

The researcher pointed out that both the United States and China are engaged in a long-term competition for economic leadership, as China's economic growth is much faster than that of the United States, and then the conditions necessary for the hegemonic process to occur are fulfilled, and the acquisition process is likely to take place between the years 2025 and 2035, and thus this change may make China reach parity with the United States and replace it to become the dominant force in the international system as its gross national product increases and its population swells.

Beijing continues to develop its nuclear arsenal, which could bring it to parity with the United States "in terms of military superiority." If China reaches its full potential, it will become the leading country in the international system in 2075.

Will Beijing challenge the existing international systems or lead the international community? Will the transition be peaceful, as it happened with the United States after its arrival as the dominant power after Britain, or will there be a war like the one Britain waged against Germany in the early 20th century and the First and Second World Wars?

The key to answering this question, according to the author, is "Is China a satisfied or dissatisfied state in the present and in the future?"^[4]

Jamal Mashrouh, a researcher at the Policy Center for the New South, believes that the novel coronavirus pandemic has revealed some of the secrets of the tense relationship between the United States and China and accelerated the pace of its deterioration, and Mr. Mashrouh indicated in an article recently published by the Moroccan Think Tank entitled "Towards a Second Cold World War" that The pandemic brought the existential geopolitical tensions between Uncle Sam and China to the surface, and accelerated the deterioration of relations between them in terms of its own dynamics and its global effects, which increased the severity of the deep contradictions between the two global powers and plunged them into a spiral of mutual tensions and provocations.

Over the past decade, China has been able to make accelerated strategic progress in almost all areas to catch up with the first global power in terms of international trade, 5G technology, artificial intelligence, or even naval power.

The current Sino-US tensions must be seen as part of a long-term process, rather than as the result of a circumstantial factor or electoral calculations, noting that the geopolitical rift between the two countries has recently widened dangerously and threatens to plunge the world into a second Cold War.

The consequences of the "Cold War" would be dire for a multipolar system on the verge of collapse, highlighting the importance and necessity of establishing intermediary pathways that play a role in the international strategic debate that, unfortunately, has been reduced to a ping-pong table, Mr. Mashrouh said.

Today, Europe and Africa must work for the emergence of collective leadership at the global level that is inclusive and constructive, not coercive power, not soft power, not smart power, but human power.

The bet lies in sparing the world the damage of the so-called new Cold War and focusing resources and energies to confront the global challenges that are on the horizon, including the coronavirus and climate change, to name a few.^[5]

Introduction

Covid-19 is one of a series of coronaviruses that can cause disease in animals and humans, and a number of them cause respiratory diseases in humans, ranging in severity from the common cold to more severe diseases, and Covid-19 is an infectious disease caused by the last discovered virus of the coronavirus strain.

There was no knowledge of the existence of the new virus and its pathogen before the outbreak began in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019, which has now turned into a pandemic affecting many countries around the world.^[6]

At first, the United States and the administration of President Donald Trump accepted and underestimated the virus, and followed a policy of questioning the information issued by the Chinese government about the coronavirus and accusing it of lying, then Trump started calling the virus "Chinese" and questioning Beijing's deliberate production of it.

In a press statement, the US president claimed to have seen evidence proving that the coronavirus originated in a laboratory in the Chinese city of Wuhan, and when asked if he had seen anything that gave him a "high degree of confidence" that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was where the virus originated, Trump replied: "Yes, I did." "It's something that could have been contained at the place of origin and I think it could have been contained very easily."

Trump's attack didn't stop at accusing China of inventing the virus, he went on to accuse the World Health Organization of working to serve Beijing's interests, telling reporters, "The WHO should be ashamed of itself because it's like a public relations agency for China."

He said the United States pays the World Health Organization nearly $500 million a year while China pays $38 million and "they shouldn't be making excuses when people make terrible mistakes that cause hundreds of thousands of deaths around the world," referring to China.^[7]

Trump also hinted at the possibility of using the pandemic to put economic pressure on China when asked about the possibility of his country not paying back its debts to China as a retaliatory measure, "I could do it differently, by imposing tariffs," as he has done in the past during the trade dispute between his country and Beijing.^[8]

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said he believes the world will make China "pay a price" for its role in the pandemic, adding, "Everywhere I go, every foreign minister I talk to, they recognize what China has done to the world. "I'm very confident that the world will look at China differently and interact with China differently than it did before this terrible catastrophe."

Pompeo pointed to China's alleged cover-up and complicity in hiding information about the virus with the World Health Organization, noting that it did not properly engage with the world around it, did not initially report the risk of the virus becoming a pandemic, and declined to allow other countries to participate in research into the origins of the virus or even provide assistance, which would have given Chinese efforts transparency.

But according to Pompeo, the CCP chose the WHO to achieve what he described as a "cover-up," which led to the spread of the virus, hundreds of thousands of deaths and trillions of dollars in global damage as a direct result of the CCP's decision, he said.^[9]

The US has also criticized Beijing for its abuses in Hong Kong and against the Uyghur Muslim minority in Xinjiang, not to mention its practices in the South China Sea, which has been interpreted as the US exploiting the pandemic to exert more pressure.

The United States' exploitation of the crisis prompted China to warn of a "new Cold War" in the words of Foreign Minister Wang Yi, describing the remarks as a "political virus" that compels US officials to constantly attack his country. ^[10]

This further exacerbates the already tense Sino-US relationship, which has been strained for two years against the backdrop of the Trump administration's trade war and the imposition of tariffs on Beijing.

This arena of conflict was not limited to the economic and epidemiological aspect, but extended to the attempt to bring India into the conflict and polarize it by the United States, as the Financial Times published a report that talked about how Trump's deep alliance with India raised Beijing's concern, which contributed to the increase in border tensions between China and India, indicating that "India has been active in many US plans that target China, and if it joins the small circle that China views as an imaginary enemy, Sino-Indian relations will deteriorate."^[11]

Some also believe that the United States needs India to weaken China's influence and spread regional geopolitics in its favor, and draw India to its side to spite China and Russia. New Delhi for the United States is a profitable strategic partner that it needs to join the alliance with Japan and Australia, and Washington also believes that by strengthening the trade and economic partnership with India, it can deal a strong blow to China's position in the region. ^[12]

Key features of the Chinese project

The Chinese project derives its most important objectives from the heritage of this ancient country, which has been subjected to several thousand years of regime changes, shaping its personality and the identity of its inhabitants, with its vast area, enormous wealth and geopolitical geography, which has established in the hearts of its children that it is the home of civilization and the center of the world. Throughout its history, it has been resistant to invaders, either by defeating and conquering them, or by containing them and making them part of it, as it did by ruling the Mongols more than once, but the 19th century was a milestone in this process, which witnessed the arrival of Western Europeans and Americans to the region and their control over it through the first and second opium wars and the ignition of civil wars. This was a major reason for the collapse of the imperial system, which was unable to protect China, and the emergence of national and social liberation movements such as the Communist movement, which made it one of its most important goals to get rid of colonialism, get rid of the legacy of Confucianism, build a new social system that overcomes all the legacy of backwardness, and restore China to its historical role as a center of civilization.^[13]

The goal was to acquire enough power in quantity and quality to ensure that China's humiliation would not be repeated, and to regain its role in leading the world, with a target date of 100 years since the founding of the People's Republic of China.

In order for this to happen, it has a set of conditions, the most important of which are:

• Maintaining unity and internal stability
• Not getting involved in foreign conflicts
• Maintain an economic growth rate between 10-7%
• Pursuit of technological advancement

China became an effective role especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union and contradicted the expectations of many that its collapse would be the next, and managed to rise and continue while retaining the communist political system. The economic development that took place in China was accompanied by the modernization of military and nuclear power, which during the period from 2009 to 2013, placed it among the five largest arms exporters in the world.^[14]

Economic development accompanied by military modernization has boosted the expansion of China's regional and global influence. At the same time, it has increased the chances of strained relations with the United States in the future, and made them move from cooperation to conflict, with the expectation of confrontation if the struggle for hegemony continues and Washington tries to limit Beijing's project.^[15]

Contemporary China's transition to the policy of reform and opening up began in 1978, and this policy practically meant reform at home and opening up externally, reforming the basic structures in the economy, and opening up to most countries of the world, and as of 2004, China had diplomatic relations with about 87% countries.^[16]

China ranks first in the world in terms of growth and foreign exchange reserves, second in terms of military spending, according to its announced figures, and in terms of attracting investments, surpassing the United States, third in international trade, fourth in terms of GDP, fifth in terms of the number of nuclear warheads, and one of the countries with an advanced space program.^[17]

Between 1978 and 2004, GDP went from $147.3 billion to $1.65 trillion, multiplying about 11 times with an annual growth rate of about 9.4%, the volume of foreign trade rose from $20.6 billion to about $1.5 trillion with a growth rate of 16%, foreign direct investment rose from $1.8 billion to about $60.6 billion, and the country's hard currency reserves rose from about $167 million to about $700 billion.^[18]

China has moved from a position of neutrality on international issues to the stage of making decisions that affect those issues, which is reflected in the international arena. These positions are based on the principle of independence and initiative, and China determines its position and policy in all international affairs based on the fundamental interests of the Chinese people, and believes that it is not subject to any external pressure.^[19]

One of the major projects through which China is trying to position itself geostrategically is the "Belt and Road" initiative, one of whose goals for China is to promote stability and build political confidence regionally with neighboring countries and globally with the major powers, but this project faces many issues, especially border issues, whether land or sea, with most neighboring countries, and some of which amount to crises and conflicts, as is the case with India on land or in China's East and South Seas, which the United States is exploiting to counter China's influence.

Launched by Chinese President Xi Jinping during his visit to Kazakhstan in 2013, the initiative has become the main driver of China's domestic policy and foreign diplomacy, and was officially included in the government's action plan in 2014.^[20]

How China is managing the coronavirus crisis and employing it externally

The United States has consistently expressed concerns about China's ambitions and concerns about China's military modernization and its use in regional conflicts to achieve its demands, especially in the South China Sea, where Washington has a strong military and security presence.^[21]

Despite the development of bilateral relations between the United States and China, they are experiencing tension as the U.S. administration and Congress are questioned on how to respond to China's rise, strategic expansion, and threat to U.S. interests.^[22]

The coronavirus pandemic has emerged as an arena that can be exploited in the confrontation between the two sides, and attempts to limit Washington's influence or expand Beijing's hegemony, and questions have emerged about China's handling of the virus and how it has capitalized on it to achieve gains.

During its handling of the Corona crisis, China demonstrated administrative capabilities that aroused much admiration, taking advantage of its strictly centralized system and its ability to manage society and state institutions, at a time when its counterparts in European countries such as Italy, Spain, Britain and even the United States were in a state of confusion, which helped the spread of the virus, amid a sense of helplessness and the emergence of disputes over ways to deal with the pandemic and even blame others, while the Chinese success in overcoming the crisis prompted the question: Should the administrative and governance model in China be used and imitated?^[23]

This question was reinforced by the fact that countries that followed China's example of harnessing the administrative and security power of the state and blending the two, such as Singapore, South Korea and Israel, were able to achieve similar success, thus making the traditional question about the legitimacy and morality of using these security methods, which are usually categorized as violating individual privacy, recede and an argument related to the necessity of sacrificing some of the fruits and aspects of individual freedom and democracy to preserve the survival of the human species emerges. The traditional question about the legitimacy and morality of using these security methods, which are usually categorized as violating individual privacy, has receded and an argument related to the inevitability of sacrificing some fruits and aspects of individual freedom and democracy to preserve the survival of the human species has emerged, and here the Chinese model began to transform from a disturbing model for many to an ideal or at least understandable model, which is a great victory for the Chinese mental image.^[24]

The coronavirus is a good example of how the government in Beijing has internalized the unprecedented health crisis, not only in terms of its medical, administrative and political capacity, but also in terms of enhancing its diplomatic leverage, improving its international image and challenging the dominant position of the United States as a global healthcare role model.

Beijing pursued "policies of generosity" with countries in light of its early successes in the coronavirus response, especially with Eastern and Southern European countries, and achieved international successes, while the United States was witnessing the late mobilization of President Donald Trump's administration against the virus, chaos and divisions in the European Union, and each country was preoccupied with its own domestic health crisis.

The CCP views its battle against the coronavirus in the context of deep economic and geostrategic competition and a "new Cold War" with the U.S. This new Cold War differs in one important respect from the old war between the West and the Soviet Union: China is now part of the global economy and the level of economic, social and human interdependence between this country and the rest of the world is much higher than the Soviet Union.^[25]

From the United States, China has taken advantage of the globalization system to increase and crystallize economic, geostrategic, and ideological competition, and has helped Beijing increase its power and prestige to the point where it is seen as a future alternative power to Washington.^[26]

U.S. allies in both Asia, especially Japan, South Korea, and Australia, and Europe cannot ignore this new bipolar geostrategic environment while trying to maintain a working relationship with China, especially in the face of the pandemic.^[27]

This planetary health crisis has highlighted the extent of the world's dependence on China, not only in terms of medical and pharmaceutical products but also in the administrative aspect, prompting the United States and its allies in particular to try to minimize this dependence and compensate for political losses due to the "selfishness" that countries have used in helping each other, especially the European Union countries, whose dealings with Italy are an example of this policy that hit and strengthened the rift between countries, and the European Union and the United States are trying to make increased efforts not only to manage the pandemic at home but also to help poor countries shake the pandemic.

While controlling the pandemic domestically, the Chinese government launched an unprecedented international campaign asking its diplomats to proactively highlight the superiority of China's one-party system over "Western" democracies and persuade authorities and elites in the country where they work to praise China for its handling of the crisis.^[28]

It has also tried hard to present itself as a model disciple of the World Health Organization, emphasizing the fact that it informed it without delay about the emergence of the pandemic, as well as showing itself as a role model in terms of cooperation with the United Nations and existing international organizations, which the United States is trying to deny.

Overall since early March, Chinese diplomacy has been fully geared to serve the fight against the virus and show China's solidarity with the entire world as well as its leading role in this battle, promoting itself as an experienced "big brother" to help other countries understand the virus and quickly provide masks and other personal protective equipment.^[29]

China's assistance to Italy, the first EU member state to be hit hard by the virus, was perhaps the most sensational. Germany and France were simultaneously blocking the export of masks and other medical materials to Italy for allegedly "national security" reasons, but Beijing sent an experienced medical team and delivered a large amount of equipment to Rome and, more importantly, used this assistance in its propaganda, both in its own media and on the Twitter accounts of diplomats.^[30]

While Italy was highly critical of the behavior of Germany and France, its media praised China's support and expressed its gratitude to Beijing, which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) greatly benefited from to promote its role in supporting countries in the face of the pandemic in light of the Western countries' failure to do so.^[31]

Other EU countries, such as Spain and Hungary, and candidate member states such as Serbia have also benefited from China's "face-mask diplomacy," decrying the EU's lack of interaction and solidarity, to the point where Serbia openly declared that China was more helpful than the EU in its fight against the virus.^[32]

The virus has come to be seen as a new "vector" for China's influence, and overall, China's timely assistance has contributed not only to dividing the EU but to highlighting its unwillingness to help its own countries and the divisiveness and chaos in which it finds itself.^[33]

How the coronavirus crisis has affected U.S.-China relations and where they are headed

As mentioned earlier, China has exploited the coronavirus pandemic to serve its strategic and political goals, and turned the health crisis into a media tool, taking advantage of the global confusion caused by the pandemic, and this has increased US concern about Beijing's moves, which will push the US administration towards thinking and searching for methods and plans to confront Chinese expansion.

There are two schools of thought in dealing with China: the containment school, which calls for strengthening the relationship with China until interdependence makes the Chinese threat to the West a threat to the self as a result of the economic overlap between the two parties, and the confrontation school, which has sought to isolate China and cut off its path to rise.

Since coming to the White House, US President Donald Trump has clearly adopted a policy that tends to promote national identity and self-interest at the expense of even the closest allies such as the Europeans and Japanese, pressuring them to stop what he calls "Free Riding", demanding that they pay their due share as partners and beneficiaries of NATO and stop free riding on US power to ensure their security while they spend the money on non-military purposes and place the entire financial burden on the US.^[34]

On the Asian front, he canceled the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement (The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPPwhich his predecessor, President Obama, signed with a group of Asian countries, giving them preferential terms to lure them away from China, which could offer them economic inducements. This created a deep rift in trust between these countries and the United States, and he soon ignited a trade war with China in violation of Free Trade Organization regulations, accusing it of espionage, intellectual property theft, and manipulating the value of the yuan, calling on it to adjust the heavily imbalanced trade balance in Beijing's favor.^[35]

This position seems to fit with Trump's right-wing orientation, which is characterized by the slogan "America First" and a tendency to turn inward, which was evident from the moment he took office when he announced a ban on the entry of nationals from six Muslim countries into the United States and a wall with Mexico to block migrants.^[36]

The coronavirus came in an atmosphere full of suspicion between the United States and China, each accusing the other of manufacturing the virus and harming the other, despite the unproven validity of this claim, in order to blame the negligence and inability to confront the virus on an external force that wants to destroy American civilization, which fits the arguments of the right usually, and a colonialist threat is not excluded, in the case of China.

Today, more opinion leaders around the world are convinced that a major confrontation between the two countries will take place in the foreseeable future, as a result of the sharpness of US statements that no longer hide their discomfort with the Chinese rise and call for putting an end to it before it is too late, but they differ in the form, size, timing and effects of this confrontation, and they believe that Corona may be an accelerating factor for this upcoming confrontation, the first precursor of which will be the harsh trade war between the two parties.^[37]

The U.S.-China rivalry is different, with more than $700 billion worth of trade between the two countries annually.^[38] American universities host more than 350,000 Chinese students, and before the coronavirus pandemic, millions of Americans and Chinese enjoyed tourism in the two countries, and the two countries adopt incompatible economic systems and policies, all of which minimize an all-out confrontation between them.^[39]

The US administration considers the student file to be an arena for Chinese pressure, and has decided to block visas for Chinese graduate students and researchers to enter the United States, arguing that the decision aims to prevent them from "stealing sensitive research," and reiterating its accusations about China's unfair trade practices and industrial espionage, including attempts to steal coronavirus research, and abuse of student visas to exploit American academics.^[40]

Washington is also trying to push for the inclusion of China in future arms control talks with Russia, according to the US president, who emphasized that the US is committed to effective arms control that includes not only Russia but also China, and looks forward to future talks to avoid a costly arms race.^[41]

On the other hand, the scenario of military confrontation between the two superpowers is no longer drawn by Western decision-making circles only, but it has entered China's calculations as well, and a secret Chinese report warned of an unprecedented wave of hostility towards Beijing in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, a hostility that would lead to a new Cold War and possibly a military confrontation in the future.

"Global anti-China sentiment is at its highest level since the 1989 Tiananmen Square campaign," Reuters reported in early May, citing people familiar with the report prepared by China's Ministry of State Security in early April 2020, advising China to prepare for "a military confrontation between the two world powers in the worst-case scenario."^[42]

Beijing believes that the US under Trump is more determined than ever to contain the rise of its power by all means, views Beijing's growing rise as a threat to its national security and a challenge to Western democracies, and is working to weaken the ruling Communist Party by undermining Chinese confidence in it.^[43]

Following the events in Tiananmen Square thirty years ago, the West imposed a package of sanctions on China, including a ban on technology transfer and arms sales, but today China is an economic giant and has developed enormous naval and air military capabilities capable of challenging US military dominance in Asia, and is developing a combat force capable of winning modern wars in a clear challenge to more than seventy years of US military dominance in Asia.

A study by the German Science and Policy Foundation, published in February 2020 in Berlin, emphasized that it is a matter of exploring new balances between the two superpowers, although each of them has its own vision. There are indications that the US president sees superiority, especially military dominance, as a goal in itself, not necessarily a tool in serving certain interests and values, while the Chinese president seems to be driven by a vision of the world order in which Chinese superiority is both a goal and a means.^[44]

The study called for the development of a "non-country" European policy towards China based on a strategy that strengthens European sovereignty. This requires dealing with Beijing with "supranational" tools to assert "strategic autonomy." The study called for achieving a difficult equation based on "preparing Europe for fierce competition, while strengthening social and technological efficiency, without weakening interlocking cooperative relationships." The study called for achieving a difficult equation based on "preparing Europe for fierce competition, while strengthening social and technological efficiency, without weakening interlocking cooperative relationships.

On the other hand, China responds to the accusations against it by working silently and not trying to provoke the major powers, especially the United States, and presents itself as a non-colonial power that seeks to help developing countries and exchange experiences and services with other countries, citing its long history of inward-looking to the point of building the Great Wall of China around itself, strengthening its relations with others by not using military force to settle disputes, economic cooperation based on the "win-win" principle, not interfering in the internal policies of countries, or supporting revolutions and proxy wars as do the countries of the United States.

Will the world tend to turn inward, and how will that affect the Chinese project?

The disruption of transportation lines in the world, as a result of coronavirus prevention measures and "piracy" operations between countries on goods and shipments has highlighted the importance of self-sufficiency in securing the basic needs of countries, or at least keeping them within reach in neighboring countries, and therefore many thinkers believe that this will have a direct impact on the Chinese economy, especially the industrial sector, as any return of industries to the interior will most likely reduce China's share, which is called the "world factory", as Beijing is the largest exporter of industrial products, but this expectation faces a set of challenges, the most important of which is that

The coronavirus contributed to showing the flaws of the current global economic pattern, which is represented by the countries that specialized in the production and export of food and medical protection supplies by placing restrictions on their export, as Ukraine, Russia and Vietnam did recently in the case of food, and the United States, Germany and other countries in the case of medical products, while daily life at the height of the first wave of the virus spread for at least a third of the planet's population, between the place of residence, food and beverage stores, household detergents and pharmacies, as thousands of factories and institutions and tens of millions stopped working overnight.

With this stoppage, the phenomenon of "piracy" of medical goods emerged, as there were accusations between countries in stealing medical shipments, including French and German accusations of the United States of pirating medical shipments at exorbitant prices that French and German entities had previously purchased, and in turn Washington refuses, despite humanitarian reasons, to lift sanctions on providing Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba and other countries with medical equipment to face the Corona pandemic.

In Ukraine, this kind of accusation is also leveled at the Americans, but with the Russians and the French. Ukrainian MP Andriy Motovilovets said on his Facebook page that "our consuls who went to the Chinese factories found their colleagues there from other countries (Russia, the US and France) trying to receive our orders, we paid for our orders in advance by bank transfer and signed contracts, they have more money and cash, we are fighting for every shipment."^[45]

Andreas Geisel, interior minister of the German state capital Berlin, said US officials in Thailand had confiscated medical face masks, accusing the US of "modern-day piracy" and "Wild West tactics".

In a related context, European aircraft manufacturer Airbus has transported millions of medical masks from China to Europe as part of an "air bridge" carried out by the European company to deal with the Corona crisis in light of the scarcity of masks and Beijing's increased production of them.^[46]

US President Donald Trump passed the Korean War-era "Defense Production Act," which allows the president to force industry to produce medical equipment, as well as force US companies to stop selling it abroad.

Asked why the law was being enacted now, he said it would be used to ensure US states have access to masks and other equipment needed to fight the virus.^[47]

The absence of a global crisis cell to mitigate the issues resulting from such measures, despite the existence of the United Nations and dozens of international organizations specialized in economic affairs, exacerbates the crisis. Such a situation would push countries that, under current globalization and the current international division of labor, have reduced the production of their food, medicine and other necessary and strategic goods to return to local production in anticipation of shortages that could lead to hunger and collapses in their health systems.

The list of countries that have abandoned production is not limited to poor and developing countries such as Arab and African countries. It also includes a list of industrialized countries such as Italy, Germany, the United States, and France. This return means that the state is playing a greater role in the real production economy at the expense of the virtual economy of speculation, derivatives, and wild capitalism.

On the other hand, China is working tirelessly to raise the level of per capita income until it reached, according to the latest figures, about 14 thousand dollars, which will lead to the activation of the huge and safer internal market, as an alternative to the external market, which is usually surrounded by difficulties and pressures, in addition to that, China has worked to establish the largest high-speed rail network in the world, which will undoubtedly contribute to tightening the bonds of the country's internal regions, empowering them and activating their potential, and facilitating trade operations through cheap communication with the world, which will give the Chinese economy an additional boost.

It should also be noted that the level of urbanization in China is still less than half of the population, and this is an opportunity for development and growth, and will also benefit the economy in the end. In addition, China today is already seeking to get rid of unsophisticated industries that consume a lot of energy and pollute the atmosphere, and seeks to focus on advanced hi-tech industries and the development of the service sector.^[48]

China, on the other hand, recovered quickly from the coronavirus crisis and got the wheels of production turning again even before other countries woke up from the pandemic.

Many Asian, African, South American and Eastern European countries still see their interest in cooperating with China and benefiting from its economic power, which usually comes free of complex conditions and political pressures, unlike the relationship with the United States and Western European countries, which in turn suffers from an economic crisis that is expected to increase due to the Corona crisis.

While the administration of US President Donald Trump used the pandemic to disavow global integration, the Chinese administration was keen to use the crisis to show its determination to lead the world as the first country hit by the virus, as the American magazine "Foreign Affairs" hinted in a report.^[49]

For three years, the Trump administration has been trying to pressure China to stop its unfair trade practices, using tariffs, negotiations and measures to protect U.S. industries, which Beijing initially strongly disliked, and reluctantly concluded only a "Phase 1" trade deal that addresses a few of these issues. In contrast to Trump's handling of the crisis, which damaged the United States' reputation with its allies, there is a package of gains expected to emerge from the coronavirus crisis.

But all this may take a different turn after the coronavirus crisis, according to the American newspaper "Washington Post" in its report, which indicated that many government agencies and officials are talking openly about China's gains from the coronavirus crisis in multiple fields, and how it will benefit from being the first country to start recovering from the virus to dominate the industries of the future.^[50]

China has a post-virus strategy, which is already underway, and plans to use the economic slowdown in the West to its advantage, as it intends to seek more foreign direct investment, grab market share in vital industries and try to prevent the West from confronting what it calls its "bad behavior."

The Daily Telegraph, in an article by William Hague, said that the coronavirus crisis seemed to work in favor of China's geopolitical advantage. Six months from now, the country where the virus was born and which initially covered up the news of its spread will have many opportunities to be stronger.^[51]

The extraordinary absence of global leadership from the United States is another reason why China will become a major power, noting that President Trump has refused to even encourage states to work together against the virus, let alone organize any coordinated international response.

Since the rise of the United States to hegemony, the world has looked to the U.S. to lead in crises, but this time around, the world was taken aback by the U.S. response, which was characterized by cynicism about the crisis and no clear attempt to work toward a unified international response.

Will the world be pro-China or anti-China?

Since the establishment of the People's Republic in 1949, China's endeavor has faced many difficulties, including internal difficulties represented by the unrealistic systems of administration and governance, and external ones, the most important of which was the conflict with the United States over Korea in the early 1950s, then the dispute with the Soviet Union with the death of "Saltin" and "the arrival of Khrushchev," until the military confrontation between them in 1962.^[52]

With the shift in US policy towards China during the Nixon era, and the adoption of a containment policy that opened the door wide for the development of various sectors of the Chinese economy, especially the industrial sector, in order to employ China against the Soviet Union, and then Deng's return to power after Mao Zedong's death, China began to rise.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union at the beginning of the 1990s, the Western view of China began to shift, seeing China as a rapidly growing and dangerous adversary that could threaten Western hegemony over the world. This view was reinforced by the high growth rates of the Chinese economy and the tilt of the trade balance towards China in most of these countries, which brought back to the Western mind how European colonialism emerged and its control over the world, so it came to see the Chinese rise on the same "inevitable" path according to historical determinations from which it seems difficult to escape.

The Chinese President Xi Jinping launched the "Belt and Road" initiative in 2013, through which it seeks to develop transportation and communication networks in the Asian continent and beyond, by land and sea, which China places in an economic and developmental context: The "Belt and Road" initiative in 2013, through which it seeks to develop transportation and communication networks in the Asian continent and beyond, on land and at sea, which China puts in an economic and developmental context, but Chinese assurances do not seem to be accepted and accepted by these countries, which see in the initiative an enhancement of China's military and strategic influence, including the six economic corridors contained in the initiative, the most prominent of which today is the Pakistan Economic Corridor that starts from China and ends in the Pakistani port of Gwadar on the Arabian Sea, in addition to a series of ports that are built or developed in cooperation with each other.^[53]

As for the economic aspect of the initiative, it seeks to transform the customs and tax laws and regulations of the 70 countries participating in the initiative and adopt Chinese industrial standards, which, combined with China's technological development, will lead to competition with the advanced Western countries in areas long considered their monopoly, and could shift the center of economic activity in the world from West to East, revive the idea of the Chinese "Middle Earth," in which China is the center of the world and the source of civilization, and throw the aging Western countries with deep economic issues into the shadows.

A few weeks before the global coronavirus pandemic exploded, the Pew Research Center published a poll to find out how people perceive China, and the survey, which covered 34 different countries, ranging from Western, developed and developing countries from different continents, reflected a negative attitude towards China.^[54]

The difference between countries was clear: 57% of people in Western Europe and the US had a negative outlook compared to 37% who had a positive outlook.

In Southeast Asia, i.e., neighboring countries close to China, the negative attitude was also dominant, with an approximate ratio of 56 % for a negative view and 35 % for a positive view, with the Japanese having the highest percentage of those with a negative attitude toward China at 85 %.

The emergence of the coronavirus has reinforced the negative perception of China. However, China's realization of the situation and its tendency to send aid and medical staff and help countries confront the virus at a time when Western countries are experiencing rifts, conflicts, accusations of piracy of medical shipments and the international union's confusion in dealing with the crisis improves China's opportunity to build new relations with countries and improve its image.

In the United States, anti-China sentiment is growing in both parties, due to the intensification of the geopolitical competition between the two countries, and even if President Trump does not win the next election, it is certain that the competition between the United States and China will continue, and the United States will take advantage of the coronavirus outbreak in China and the mistakes made by Beijing in this area to strengthen its criticism of the authorities there.

As for the governments of countries like Italy, Greece, and Serbia, they still seem to be relatively happy with China because of the assistance it has provided these countries in the face of the coronavirus, while the governments of France and Germany look with annoyance at China because of its movements and statements during the pandemic, and perhaps in the foreseeable future many countries will continue to look favorably on China and strengthen their communication with Beijing in order to obtain assistance in the face of the virus more.^[55]

How China's rise could affect the Arab and Muslim regions

In 1949, Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong launched the "intermediate zone" theory, in which he considered that the main contradiction in the post-World War II era was not between the Soviet Union and the United States, but between the imperialist camp led by Washington on the one hand and African, Asian, and Latin American countries on the other. Mao believed that any American attack on the Soviet Union was unlikely as long as the United States did not fully control these intermediate zones.^[56]

The Chinese also coined the term "military crescent" stretching from Japan to the Middle East through North Korea, Taiwan, Indochina, Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey, which the United States will seek to control in order to encircle not only the Soviet Union but also China.

Thus, it is clear how much importance the Chinese attach to the Middle East in general. They believe that it is a key link in the encirclement of China, in addition to being an essential part of the intermediate region in which China is keen to be active ideologically and reformistically, in order to keep the specter of superpowers away from it, and considers this region part of the developing world, to which it considers itself to belong.^[57]

The 1970s marked the beginning of a new phase in China's domestic and foreign policy, as China soon introduced a new analysis of the global situation. During this period, China continued to consider the United States as its first enemy, and Chinese fears intensified that the Middle East would be a key site in the development of encirclement of Beijing by the United States, due to the increasing strategic importance of oil.^[58]

The importance of the Middle East region to China lies in its geographical proximity, as well as the economic and political cooperation of these countries with China, as the Middle East region is of security and economic importance to Beijing.

One of China's goals in consolidating relations with these peoples is to create a favorable image of China in the Middle East, and one of the factors in consolidating these relations is the export of Chinese technologies and technology to help Arab countries.^[59]

The Middle East is considered a sensitive region and the situation in it has a direct impact on the stability of the international system, and the issue of energy and oil is one of the strategic issues and matters that China seeks to obtain through the Middle East in order to complete and achieve its internal modernization process, and because China has become the second largest importer of oil in the world after the United States, and its oil imports in 2004 were estimated at 1.3 billion tons, half of which came from the Middle East, where China has made great efforts to diversify its oil imports, but the Middle East remains the first region to provide it in the future.^[60]

Estimates confirm that China's oil reserves will not last more than 20 years if production continues at its current rate, so China has only one of two options if it wants to solve its energy dilemma, either by expanding the use of coal with its destructive damage to the environment, or moving towards strengthening its relations with Middle Eastern countries and obtaining a share of their production, which amounts to half of global production and two-thirds of its reserves.^[61]

The Middle East is a major economic market for Chinese products, and it is all the more important because it provides a platform for China to develop multilateral diplomacy and present itself to the world as a responsible power. The Middle East has many hotspots such as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and more generally the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Iranian nuclear issue, and others, which are not only regional but also global issues.^[62]

With its rising economic power and political stature, China is becoming more active in participating in international affairs and the Middle East provides it with a favorable venue to demonstrate its willingness and role. China's position in the region has been helped by its contributions to these issues within the framework of the United Nations and demonstrating that China can play a role as one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (UNSC).

China measures its influence and presence in the Middle East primarily in terms of securing energy supplies, trade relations, and commercial benefits. Beijing is comfortable with its current policy of avoiding political involvement in the region's many disputes, and any isolated statements that contradict this position, such as an ambassador's claim in 2018 that his government would consider helping the Syrian regime fight rebels in Idlib, are immediately dismissed. ^[63]

China is also careful to avoid taking sides in the Iran-Saudi confrontation or intra-Arab disputes, such as the embargo on Qatar, and prefers to deal with the Arab League as its primary forum for dialogue, including continued support for the Arab League's positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

One of China's voting habits at the UN is to support all anti-Israel resolutions, fully aware that Gulf governments are quietly seeking cooperation with the Israeli government on many fronts, but as long as its official position remains lukewarm, China will continue to vote accordingly.^[64]

At the external level, the Chinese presence will take an upward curve, albeit after some time, in order to protect energy lines, raw materials and trade in general, and the Arab region and its neighborhood will be at the heart of this presence due to geopolitics and the concentration of energy sources in it.

Therefore, it is considered the soft underbelly of China, which, although it is trying to diversify its energy sources, is still heavily dependent on the region's oil, so the region may turn into a field of confrontation between the West and the United States and put its countries in front of a major challenge that could determine their future.

Chinese officials still fear that U.S. allies could establish long-term joint military control over the sea lanes from the Suez Canal and the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean, a key route in the strategic vision behind the BRI.

Accordingly, Beijing has focused on upgrading relations with Saudi Arabia and, to a lesser extent, the UAE and other Gulf states, and appears willing to provide Riyadh and the UAE with advanced missile technology, undeterred by protests from Iran.^[65]

Meanwhile, China has a small military base in Djibouti and plans to establish a presence in the Omani port of Duqm, but officials have been quick to emphasize that China does not need a military presence anywhere else in the region; to support this theory, China points to how it evacuated Chinese citizens from war-torn Libya rather than trying to protect its vital interests there.^[66]

Conclusion

In conclusion, the following conclusions can be drawn:

China turned the plight of the Coronavirus into an opportunity to achieve gains in terms of strategic relations and relations with countries, taking advantage of the state of confusion and hacking that occurred among Western countries as a result of the retreat of the United States from playing an administrative role in the crisis, and took advantage of European differences, and the European Union's failure to provide support to countries affected by the epidemic, such as Italy, to try to achieve a breakthrough in the Union, as it rushed to provide aid to those countries and used this to improve its image in the media, while the United States views Chinese moves and plans to deal with the virus with a look of doubt and fear, accusing China of hiding information about the emergence of the virus.

The pandemic has increased the determination of the United States, especially the US President's administration, to escalate plans and programs to confront China and its influence and try to prevent it from exploiting the crisis to achieve more gains or improve its external image, and the latest of these measures was Washington's decision to prevent granting entry visas for Chinese graduate students and researchers to the United States, arguing that the decision aims to prevent them from "stealing sensitive research." It shows that Washington is determined to take multiple measures to pressure China, and at the same time Washington is trying to push towards involving China in the upcoming arms control talks with Russia in order to effectively monitor

One of the consequences of the pandemic is likely to be a reassessment by many countries of their dependence on China. The lockdown at the beginning of the crisis in China caused significant losses to foreign companies operating there and affected their supply chains, which will have a negative impact on the Chinese economy if China does not take advantage of its large domestic market and move towards opening new markets.

The United States seeks to tighten the noose around China by controlling the "military crescent" extending from Japan to the Middle East through North Korea, Taiwan, India, Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey, and it is trying to pressure China by bringing India into the conflict and polarizing it, which has contributed to increasing border tensions between China and India, and the United States needs India to weaken China's influence and spread regional political geography in its favor, New Delhi for the United States is a profitable strategic partner that it needs to join the alliance with Japan and Australia, and Washington also believes that it can, by strengthening

The Middle East region occupies an advanced position in China's foreign relations file, due to its geographical proximity and the economic and political cooperation of these countries with Beijing, and the Middle East is considered a sensitive region for China, as a market for Chinese technological and technical goods and a source of energy and oil for Beijing, and the region will most likely witness many confrontations between America and China, through pressure on countries traditionally loyal to the United States, such as Israel and the Gulf states to take more stringent positions towards China, especially in the field of energy and technology transfer and dealing with the Belt and Road Initiative.

Note

I would like to thank Dr. Abeer Rantisi for her help in preparing this paper, which would not have been possible without her efforts.

Source: Egyptian Institute for Studies 2020

Margin