China is angry about US President Barack Obama’s meeting with Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, and the US ambassador to China has been called in to take the flak.
One might expect the situation to heat up following the Lunar New Year break, with a concomitant cooling of relations between the two countries. While we can expect tensions in Sino-US relations, there are other aspects that are less easily anticipated.
There is a certain pattern of events when it comes to relations with China that every US president has had to face. The first phase is characterized by working hard to create an amicable atmosphere. In the second phase, frictions appear as the US president addresses practical issues and this is where relations become more tense. The third phase is where the two sides accept their differences and find ways to work together, feeling out their counterpart’s bottom line and gradually moving into the fourth, more pragmatic phase.
Obama is already into the second year of his presidency and his inbox is piling up. Predictably, Sino-US relations are entering a testing phase.
The sabers are already drawn, with recent tensions over economic issues, the Google hack attacks and US arms sales to Taiwan. Obama’s decision to meet the Dalai Lama added fuel to the fire, giving the more hawkish elements in Beijing an excuse to push for a harder line against the US. This is likely to cause a cooling of relations that will take us into more unpredictable territory.
The meeting with the Tibetan leader had been planned some time ago — as early as last year — but had been delayed in deference to China. Beijing was also given plenty of time to prepare its response, as the announcement of the date for the meeting was made well in advance.
China’s response, as usual, was that it did not want the leaders of any nation to grant an audience to the Dalai Lama, whom they consider a “splittist.”
The problem is that China pretty much stands alone on that point — the Dalai Lama is mostly viewed elsewhere in a positive light, as a respected religious and ethnic leader and a Nobel Peace Prize winner. China is not going to win anyone’s approval by its intransigence on this issue.
As China’s power and influence in international matters grows it is going to have more opportunities to compete as well as cooperate with the US in international affairs and trade. As it does so, it is going to become more difficult to sweep any differences of opinion or conflicts of interest under the carpet. Both sides are going to have to learn the benefits of cooperation and “constructive conflict.”
If China feels the need to turn up the heat, it risks not only damaging bilateral relations with the US, but also of reversing the current trend of regional integration and replacing it with a polarization of international relations that would do no good for China, the US or the international community.
Both China and the US are currently facing a range of domestic challenges and in future they are going to have to address a number of issues together, such as stabilizing the global economy, dealing with climate change and preventing weapons proliferation. These issues are going to require cooperation and China would do well to recognize the differences it has with other countries and make an effort to tone down its confrontational behavior.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS