US-China Relations (3rd Ed)

Home > Other > US-China Relations (3rd Ed) > Page 27
US-China Relations (3rd Ed) Page 27

by Robert G Sutter


  tious economic, security, political, sovereignty, foreign policy, and other

  148

  Chapter 7

  issues. Economic issues became more prominent: The growing inequities

  seen in the United States with regard to America’s economic relationship

  with China’s ever more powerful economy included a massive trade deficit,

  Chinese currency policies and practices, US dependence on Chinese financ-

  ing of US government budget deficits, and Chinese national security and

  industrial espionage and abuse of intellectual property rights.

  Security issues became more prominent in the United States with the

  buildup of Chinese military forces and the threat they posed to US interests

  in Taiwan and the broader Asia-Pacific. China was increasingly assertive in

  using security forces backed by its robust military presence and other coer-

  cive means to expand influence at expense of neighbors in disputed territory

  in the East China Sea and the South China Sea. Its actions seriously under-

  mined American interests in regional security and the US leadership role as a

  security guarantor in the Asia-Pacific.

  Political issues included China’s controversial record on human rights,

  democracy, religious freedom, and family planning practices. Sovereignty

  questions involved disputes over the status of Taiwan, Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong

  Kong, and Chinese claims to disputed islands and maritime rights along

  China’s rim. Foreign policy disputes focused on China’s support for such

  “rogue” states as North Korea, Sudan, Myanmar/Burma, Iran, Cuba, Zim-

  babwe, and Venezuela; and on Chinese trade, investment, and aid to re-

  source-rich and poorly governed states in Africa that undermined Western

  sanctions designed to pressure these governments to reform.

  Meanwhile, China’s new boldness in foreign affairs saw Beijing create

  and lead a variety of international economic, political, and security organiza-

  tions that challenged existing US-backed bodies, stressed norms more in line

  with China’s objectives, and underlined US international leadership. The

  broad Chinese challenge seemed to sharpen with ever closer Chinese collab-

  oration with Russia under President Vladimir Putin as Russia pursued blatant

  land grabs and military incursions among other egregious affronts against the

  international order supported by the United States. 5

  As in the past, these many areas of acrimony and friction developed in

  tandem with a wide range of cooperation between the two governments and

  societies. Economic interaction and deepening ties between the elites and

  peoples had major positive impacts. Relations between the two militaries, a

  heretofore weak link in US-China ties, made substantial progress. The two

  governments continued and advanced cooperation on a variety of internation-

  al issues, including climate change, nuclear security, and various accords,

  which were highlighted notably during periodic meetings of groups like the

  G-20 dealing with issues in global governance. President Obama and Presi-

  dent Hu Jintao and President Xi Jinping had several lengthy summits and

  numerous other meetings that announced progress in the multifaceted Sino-

  American relationship. The biannual senior dialogues between the two coun-

  Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Xi Jinping

  149

  tries produced long lists of more than two hundred accomplishments in ef-

  forts to advance Sino-American cooperation. Many were the results of in-

  tensely focused collaboration by different agencies and departments of the

  two governments.

  Such progress in the relationship gave support to liberals who argued that

  the overall relationship was changing for the better due to increased contacts

  and the impact of trade and economic interdependence. Constructivists also

  highlighted the common ground between the United States and China over

  issues like climate change, nuclear security, and other issues of international governance as reflecting positive learning by leaders on both sides and conducive to progress and mutually advantageous development. Meanwhile, re-

  alists needed to weigh the importance of these various areas of cooperation

  against the rising differences in the relationship, in charting recommended

  courses for the way ahead. 6

  At a practical level, whether the pragmatic engagement in US-China rela-

  tions that developed during the tenure of the George W. Bush–Hu Jintao

  governments would continue depended heavily on the choices of Chinese

  and US leaders, especially regarding the major differences between the two

  countries. What the record over the next decade showed to this writer and

  many but certainly not all American specialists was that China’s repeated

  policy choices sought advantage at the expense of the United States and

  others, as it endeavored to rectify the key differences it had with those coun-

  tries. Those policy choices were supported by Chinese judgments of greater

  Chinese strengths and declining US influence and resolve and by a uniquely

  self-righteous and aggrieved Chinese nationalism fostered by the govern-

  ment, which provided an important moral imperative for China to seek ad-

  vantage at the expense of others. The main counterarguments to the above

  assessments came from those American officials and specialists who judged

  that the recent negative trends and frictions were exaggerated, and they did

  not take enough account of China’s legitimate concerns nor correctly weigh

  the differences against the many benefits that continued to flow from the

  Sino-American relationship. Indeed, as Obama government officials left of-

  fice, they offered private assessments to American specialists that the admin-

  istration had been remarkably successful in charting a course between US-

  China differences and common ground that redounded to the overall benefit

  of the United States. Other American specialists acknowledged the rising

  tensions and differences but judged that American myopia about China’s

  concerns obscured what they saw as needed compromise where the United

  States would “meet China half-way” in seeking mutually advantageous out-

  comes. 7

  What the recent record does show clearly is that at times in the past, even

  as recently as the first two years of the George W. Bush administration,

  assertive Chinese proclivities to seek rectification of differences with Ameri-

  150

  Chapter 7

  ca and others were held in check by effective and resolute US countermea-

  sures. As discussed in chapter 6, the perception in China and actual reality of US economic, military, and political strength and determination to use it at

  that time influenced Chinese leaders to shift to a stance that focused on

  reassuring the United States that China’s rise would not challenge the United

  States. And as seen in chapter 6, the Bush government’s ability to employ

  such countermeasures declined as it came to depend heavily on China and

  faced enormous preoccupations at home and abroad.

  The Obama government also remained preoccupied with other problems

  at home and abroad and gave a high priority to sustaining smooth relations

  with China despite growing diffe
rences. The Obama administration’s ap-

  proach to Beijing stressed transparency and predictability, with any change

  coming only after careful deliberations that usually resulted in incremental

  adjustments in policy. Linkage—using US policy in one area to influence

  Chinese policy in another—was not used. The result was that Chinese leaders

  could easily assess the likely reaction of the United States to China’s in-

  creased assertiveness and probes seeking to advance control in disputed terri-

  tory, economic advantage at US expense, cooperation with Russia against

  American concerns, and other initiatives sensitive to US interests. The likeli-

  hood of substantial changes adverse to Chinese interests seemed low, thereby

  weighing China’s calculus in favor of the assertiveness and probes at

  American expense. 8

  The 2016 American election campaign made it evident that American

  discourse was shifting away from the optimistic outlook of Obama govern-

  ment officials and other specialists emphasizing the positive accomplish-

  ments in the relationship and the need for greater compromise with China.

  Democratic Party front-runner Hillary Clinton registered the broadest-rang-

  ing indictment of Chinese infringements on American interests. She warned

  against China’s incremental advances to the detriment of the United States,

  promising to confront Beijing as it endeavored to maneuver in duplicitous

  ways and “game” the United States over various issues. Her rhetoric captured

  growing frustrations in the United States as China advanced its influence at

  American expense. 9

  Republican presidential candidate Trump had a narrower set of com-

  plaints against China, giving a high priority to negotiating more advanta-

  geous economic deals for America. During the election campaign, Chinese

  specialists judged that observers in China as well as the United States had

  adopted a more negative view of relations, highlighting salient differences

  seen from both sides. They disliked both the Democratic and the Republican

  nominees but judged that Beijing would be better off with a Trump govern-

  ment than a Clinton government. 10 They were taken up short when President-elect Trump, reflecting the views of key staff members in his administration

  and among Republicans in Congress, showed unusual support for Taiwan

  Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Xi Jinping

  151

  and questioned the US one-China policy as well as Chinese economic poli-

  cies and expansion of control in the disputed South China Sea. After inaugu-

  ration, the president reaffirmed the one-China policy and conducted a busi-

  nesslike series of meetings with President Xi Jinping at the US leader’s

  Florida resort, establishing negotiation frameworks for advancing relations

  and dealing with problems. The problems remained unresolved and highly

  prominent, raising tensions in the US-China relationship. 11

  COMPETITION CHALLENGES POSITIVE ENGAGEMENT

  A major theme in President Obama’s initial foreign policy was to seek the

  cooperation of other world powers, including China, to deal with salient

  international concerns such as the global economic crisis and recession, cli-

  mate change, nuclear weapons proliferation, and terrorism. He and his team

  made vigorous efforts to build common ground with China on these and

  related issues. China’s leaders offered limited cooperation; they focused

  much more on their own interests than the need for global responsibility

  urged by President Obama. Chinese officials suspected that added global

  responsibilities would hold back China’s economic development and mod-

  ernization. 12

  More worrisome, Chinese actions and assertions in 2009 and 2010 direct-

  ly challenged the policies and practices of the United States, as follows:

  • Chinese government patrol boats confronted US surveillance ships in the

  South China Sea. The Chinese government took the position, opposed by

  the United States and the majority of concerned world powers, that China

  had the right to regulate the movement of military naval and air vehicles in

  the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) along China’s rim. A coastal state’s

  EEZ generally extends from the edge of its territorial sea (twelve nautical

  miles from its coast) to a distance of two hundred nautical miles from its

  coast.

  • China challenged US and South Korean military exercises against North

  Korea in the Yellow Sea. Such exercises had occurred in the past and in

  2010 they were initiated in response to North Korean provocations in the

  sinking of a South Korean warship that resulted in the death of forty-six

  sailors and the shelling of a South Korean island that resulted in South

  Korean military and civilian casualties.

  • Chinese treatment of US arms sales to Taiwan and President Obama’s

  meeting with the Dalai Lama in 2010 was harsher than in the recent past.

  In both cases the Obama government had delayed these US actions that

  conformed to past American practice until after the president’s first visit to

  China in November 2009, hoping not to undermine the emerging coopera-

  152

  Chapter 7

  tive atmosphere in his administration’s relationship with China. The more

  strident Chinese response came as a surprise to the United States.

  • Chinese officials threatened to stop investing in US government securities

  and to move away from using the US dollar in international transactions.

  • The Chinese government for a time responded very harshly to American

  government interventions in 2010 that (1) urged collective efforts to man-

  age rising tensions in the South China Sea, and (2) affirmed, during Sino-

  Japanese disputes over East China Sea islands, that while the US took no

  position on the sovereignty of the islands, the US-Japan alliance did pro-

  vide for American support for Japan in areas under its control, including

  the disputed islands in the East China Sea controlled by Japan but claimed

  by China. 13

  The Obama government reacted calmly and firmly to what Secretary of

  State Clinton referred to as “tests”—that is, this manifestation of new asser-

  tiveness by China. It gave no ground on any of the Chinese demands. It made

  clear to the Chinese government and the world that the United States was

  prepared to undertake military measures needed to deal with the buildup of

  Chinese forces targeting Americans and American interests in the Asia-Pa-

  cific. US officials also helped move China to curb North Korea’s repeated

  provocations by warning privately as well as publicly that the United States

  viewed North Korea’s nuclear weapons development as not just a regional

  issue nor a concern for global nonproliferation, but as a direct threat to the

  United States. 14

  The US government also found that prominent Chinese assertiveness and

  truculence with the United States and neighboring Asian countries over mari-

  time, security, and other issues prompted Asian governments to be more

  active in working more closely with the United States and in encouraging an

  active US presence in the Asia-Pacific. Their interest in closer ties with the

 
; United States meshed well with the Obama government’s broad effort begun

  publicly in late 2011 to “pivot” and “re-engage” with the countries of the

  Asia-Pacific, ranging from India to the Pacific Islands. 15

  The Obama government leaders from the president on down articulated

  the outlines of a new emphasis on what was called the American “rebalance”

  policy in the Asia-Pacific that was welcomed in the region but criticized by

  China. 16 The significant elements of the policy, many of which competed with China, included the following:

  • The Obama government’s priority international attention would focus on

  Asia-Pacific following US military pullbacks from Iraq and Afghanistan.

  • The government was determined to maintain force levels and military

  capabilities in the Asia-Pacific region despite expected substantial cut-

  backs in US defense spending.

  Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Xi Jinping

  153

  • More widely dispersed US forces and basing/deployment arrangements

  indicated rising importance of Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean in

  support of long-standing American priorities, including those in Northeast

  Asia.

  • The dispersal of US forces and a developing US air/sea battle concept

  provided a means to counter growing “area denial” efforts in the Asia-

  Pacific region, used mainly by China.

  • Strong emphasis on US pursuit of free trade and other open economic

  interchange, notably through the multilateral Trans Pacific Partnership

  (TPP) arrangements was in competition with less liberal regional arrange-

  ments supported by China that excluded the United States.

  • Significantly enhanced and flexible US diplomatic activism both bilateral-

  ly and multilaterally in pursuing American interests in regional security

  and stability, free and open economic exchange, and political relations and

  values involving human rights and accountable governance often were at

  odds with Chinese interests and positions.

  At the same time, the US government took pains to reemphasize repeated-

  ly the importance of across-the-board close and positive US engagement with

  China. US officials well understood that a zero-sum competition with China

 

‹ Prev