Abstract: Under the circumstance of frequent global governance crises and intensified power competition, the return of “state-centralism” has aroused people’s anxieties about the reversal momentum of economic globalization. How to reexamine the dual role of the state, either “to embrace the globalization” or “to reinforce the global governance”? The authors attempt to provide an accountable reply to this key question. By reviewing the basic functions of state, the causes of global governance deficits, the paper analyzes two types of “state return” phenomenon and the logics that derive from the market economy itself—the excessive growth of liberalist globalization inevitably weakens state’s monopoly on the one hand; and on the other hand, the role of state becomes central again when globalization has created too many pitfalls that need to be delt with and regulated. In face of global crises, the state is highlighted as the “last valve” for all global citizens to secure their individual survival. Unfortunately, populism and protectionism happen to revive at the same time. In the medium term, the restructuring process of global system will display a contracted state-centric vs. market-centric contest. The forces of state and market will entangle and reshape each other. In the long run, a new-type globalization will not prevail until the relationship between state and market gets to a rebalance. Namely, the state is restored as the main vehicle to advance national development and its external interests. However, it must steadily reform itself to better handle the lasting contradictions between socio-economic developments and effective internal and external governance. In meeting such challenges, the state would have to demonstrate and finally adopt “pragmatic flexibilities” as a neo-crieria of its core competity. In sum, the ‘reemergence of state’ in different periods and to different degrees is an inevitable phenomenon of the history. It must have distinctive dynamics accumulated for profound adjustments and changes. The state should wisely recognize and comply with them, while neither overestimating nor underestimating the limitations of its function.