US SECRETARY OF STATE Hillary Clinton is off to China. Her decision to make her first overseas trip to Asia, particularly China, was a smart one and, if done with aplomb, could yield enormous returns for the administration of US President Barack Obama as it attempts to re-establish world leadership.
That Clinton chose to go to Asia now, when the US State Department remains unsettled — with no ambassador in Beijing, many old officials having departed or leaving, and many new appointees still unseated — attests to her determination to stake out Asia as her own area.
What she brings to this task is openness and an eagerness to construct a new architecture for Sino-US relations. But, even as a host of other issues come into play, strengthening this most important of bilateral relationships requires a new, underlying common interest. Paradoxically, the challenge of climate change is a good place to look.
The Chinese government should not underestimate Clinton’s and Obama’s commitment to this issue. As she said in a pre-trip speech at the Asia Society in New York: “Collaboration on clean energy and greater efficiency offers a real opportunity to deepen the overall US-Chinese relationship.”
Publicly acknowledging that the US “has been the largest historic emitter of greenhouse gases,” she declared that the US “must lead efforts to cut harmful emissions and build a lower carbon-economy.” China has long waited to hear that.
So Clinton has set the stage for exploring a possible joint venture with China on meeting the challenge of climate change. The receptiveness of the Chinese will reflect the degree to which both countries advance the discussion from theory to practice, as well as stabilizing their relations.
Until now, China has taken a wait-and-see attitude, as officials waited to see who Obama would appoint to deal with China and what the new emissaries would say. This caution is understandable. But what seemed to be missing in China was a full recognition of just how uncertain things have become in the US, and how, with a new president, almost everything is in an unprecedented state of flux.
By being more proactive, China might have been able to influence the policies that ultimately come from the US side. For, when it comes to China, Clinton and Obama are yizhang baizhi, “a sheet of blank paper.” With Clinton in Beijing, the time is now to begin sketching out a common US-Chinese future in a deliberate and thoughtful way.
In her talk, Clinton evoked the ancient Chinese aphorism Tongchuan gongji: “When on a common boat, cross the river peacefully together.” This alludes to an ancient episode in which soldiers from the warring states of Wu and Yue found themselves on the same boat on a river in a storm and agreed to put down their arms to make a common passage. It is an apt metaphor for the situation in which the US and China now find themselves: on a planet in the process of being dangerously warmed by our own runaway progress.
It is inevitable and right that Clinton will bring up Tibet, human rights and other contentious issues. But all evidence suggests that she would like to do so in the context of a re-formatted US-China relationship that places collaboration at its heart.
China’s leadership thus would be gravely mistaken to treat climate change as a subsidiary issue, much less as a problem imposed on developing countries like China to impede their economic progress. China should take up Clinton’s call for collaboration on climate change, which could possibly become a paradigm-shifting issue in Sino-US relations, much as the united front against the Soviet Union did in 1972, when US president Richard Nixon and national security advisor Henry Kissinger went to China to begin normalizing relations.
As they contemplate this turning point, China’s leaders should be aware of how malleable US foreign policy currently is. Although they are accustomed to experiencing the US as a dominant, often censuring “great power,” the reality now is that the US is beginning not only a new presidential administration, but a whole chapter in its history. And, as former Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) famously noted of China’s reforms in the 1980s: “We are feeling our way across the river over the stones.”
It is not that former US president George W. Bush’s administration left Sino-US relations in such bad repair, but that the possibilities for a substantial change for the better have never been greater. Clinton’s openness to new approaches and her early trip to Beijing provides an incomparable opportunity for Chinese leaders to help make the fight against global climate change — which is perhaps the most important challenge to confront the world in our time — a common odyssey.
Orville Schell is director of the Asia Society’s Center on US-China Relations and a coauthor of the recent report Road-map on US-China Cooperation on Energy and Climate Change, issued by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS