The European debt crisis is a significant challenge for China. There's the risk for Beijing's export-dependent economy and the threat to China's attempt to achieve a successful diversification of its currency reserves.
But perhaps the most important problem is that a potential disintegration of the European common currency area might have dramatic consequences on the world order and affect the principle of multilateralism advocated by the Chinese leadership in international affairs.
The degree of China's interference in the European debt crisis has been subject to intense academic debate domestically.
But Beijing finally decided to intervene. Its pace has been careful and cautious. Its policy is based on the logic of assisting but not saving Europe.
Within this context, the economic interaction between both sides has entered a new phase, creating opportunities for further cooperation.
The boost of Greek-Chinese relations highlighted by the ongoing official visit of Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras to China is a characteristic development. And the investment in the port of Piraeus represents one of the most successful indications of Beijing's "opening-up" strategy securing its access in one of Europe's most important gateways.
But the participation of China in the European debt crisis is not always regarded positively.
Critics of it do not pay attention to immediate benefits in debt-ridden countries but express their fear for future repercussions.
By challenging the theory of peaceful rise, they see another driving force behind Beijing's policy. This is its will to expand its economic influence in the world and lay the foundations for its emergence as a new superpower, starting with the economy and continuing with international politics.
This argument is mainly related to the potential new nature of globalization in coming years. Although this term has been so far almost associated with Americanization, some germs of Sinification, critics say, can now be found.
In other words, the criticism of China's economic policy can be grounded on the perception that the country actively endeavors to promote its values and soft power.
Followers of this view believe that Beijing is at an early stage of developing a hegemonic capacity. They thus fear that Europe might pass through a stage of Chinese restructuring in the same way that has partly happened in East Asia in recent years.
Some of them go even further and analyze China's foreign economic policy through the perspective of cynical realism predicting serious disagreements and clashes with the US in the future.
Are critics right? Lessons from the history of international relations suggest that various theories attempting to predict developments have not been successful in their predictions. The best example outlining this is the failure of most scholars to predict the end of the Cold War in the 1980s.
In any case, it is still too early to discuss hegemonic aspirations on the part of Beijing.
Although the world seems to be heading toward a multipolar or apolar order, the linear growth of China in connection with the future decline of the US cannot be taken for granted.
China has interfered in the European debt crisis following its national interest. However, the crisis has not only shown Beijing's strength and its ability to play a stronger role granting immediate liquidity, it has also demonstrated its relative weakness being so heavily dependent on European markets.
Without supporting Europe, the Chinese economy might have suffered a serious blow.
In the final account, we should not forget that China has often been hesitant in undertaking additional intervention in Europe.
For instance, China rejected the European request to contribute funds to Brussels' rescue mechanism in the autumn of 2011.
Beijing has only endorsed the idea of taking part in a wider International Monetary Fund bailout, confirming its principle of acting carefully and avoiding risks.
The author is a research fellow at the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn