Turbulent world and Confucian strategic patience

When foreign ministers Wang Yi and Seyed Abbas Araghchi met in Beijing on September 17, both agreed that safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz required a reinforced, multilateral security architecture in West Asia.

Yi offered China's support for de-escalating tensions in the region, while Araghchi consented that the transformation in the security landscape required security cooperation among regional countries to preclude interference by foreign forces. Both countries agreed that the present tensions are rooted in the US and Israeli military attacks against Iran early this year.

During the meeting, Yi also said that relations between Tehran and Beijing are significant due to their strategic partnership, and that Beijing is keen on strengthening and developing these ties.

Yi's messaging was consistent as ever; peace and tranquility in the Middle East and West Asia, as well as peaceful conflict resolution based on respect for sovereignty of individual nations.

Only a few days earlier, during the recent 18th BRICS summit in India, similar messages resonated across the conference hall. President Xi Jinping anchored his speech in multilateral cooperation, the urgency for upholding the international rule of law, respect for sovereign equality, and perusal of the peaceful settlement of disputes. And China, Xi declared, is ready to act as an anchor, a stabilising force for achieving these ideals. He reiterated the need for expanding the Global South, instituting AI collaboration and joining hands for global-governance reform.

Curiously, however, Xi avoided mention of counter-terrorism and security issues and presumably - as a tactical move - allowed the Indians to slip the explicit condemnation of the April 22, 2025 Pahalgam attack into the New Delhi Declaration. The inclusion of this text represents a notable diplomatic success. It gave the Indians a "feel-good" diplomatic achievement, with no last minute altercation since the Chinese leadership did not want to inject any negativity on the occasion of Xi's visit after seven long years.

From the Indian perspective, inclusion of issues such as cross-border movement of terrorists, terror financing, safe havens, accountability for perpetrators and supporters, rejection of double standards and zero tolerance into BRICS was a diplomatic achievement.

For Beijing, this was a small concession in view of the big challenges that China as a BRICS lead country is trying to deal with – very much reflective of the Confucian spirit of accommodation and peaceful conflict resolution.

Quietly but consistently, the leadership pursues planning for the future while staying clear of international conflicts, securing internal stabilisation through people-centric policies and at the same time pursuing nation's long-term economic interests abroad.

Conversations with scholars and officials as well as the major contours of Beijing's policies are quite enlightening and guide you to an unmistakable conclusion; contemporary Chinese statecraft, security doctrine and social policy continue to draw heavily on Confucian and Mencian ideas of legitimate authority.

Mencius was an ancient Chinese philosopher and one of the most important figures in Confucianism. He is traditionally regarded as the "Second Sage" second only to Confucius himself.

Mencius taught that coercion can compel outward compliance but never wins genuine allegiance; only virtue and moral example secure lasting loyalty.

This distinction underpins the classic contrast between the brittle "hegemonic way" (badao), which relies on coercion, and the sustainable "kingly way" (wangdao), in which others follow voluntarily because they recognise the ruler's benevolence and competence.

"A confident state first puts its own house in order, strengthening domestic stability and social cohesion so that foreign policy need not manufacture external enemies for internal legitimacy."

When this Mencius quote resonated through the Beijing conference hall on September 16, it must have reminded several Asian participants of the situation in their own countries, where rulers tend to rely on 'foreign enemies' to address domestic legitimacy issues.

This was a remarkable speech by Chan Chun Sing, Singapore's Defence Minister, when speaking of the present day "security dilemma" – a combination of wisdom, sagacity and cautious public policy.

"How do we strengthen our own security without weakening the security of others, or without aggravating the insecurity of others," asked Sing in what appeared to be an indirect jibe at the USA's strident policies concerning Veneuzuela and Iran.

Without directly accusing the US of triggering the current security crisis in the Gulf following its attacks on Iran since early this year, the Singapore defence minister implicitly dubbed phrases such as "freedom of navigation" (through Hormuz) or "sanctions" (on Iran) as unnecessary stunts. In other words, it is like sailing warships near the other's coast just to show off, or adding new punishments for no clear reason. It's like taking money out of that account. Building up that trust again is slow and hard. But you can drain the whole account in a single moment - one bad decision and all the trust is gone.

Sing's was a brilliant summation of the current paradox accompanying the Trump administration's Middle East policy – total exceptionalism vis-a-vis Israel, and absolute strident, self-serving attitude towards Iran. This also resonated the present day Chinese approach in international relations: the more responsible major powers are, the less concerned small countries will be.

Equally compelling message in Sing's speech was that "leadership confident at home doesn't need foreign enemies to hold itself together, and can therefore act in its 'enlightened long-term interest' abroad."