Whenever China is mentioned in a US presidential campaign, the consequences are rarely good. In 2012, residents of Ohio, where anti-Beijing advertisements proliferated, might have believed that the campaign hinged on China. In the current US election campaign, US policy toward the People’s Republic of China (PRC) might become a broader election issue, leading to serious damage in the relationship.
Trade, proliferation, human rights, cyberwar, security and more are at stake in how the existing superpower and emerging great power get along in coming years. Whether cooperation or confrontation dominates might define the 21st century.
Unfortunately, political campaigns are not well-suited for the thoughtful discussion of complex international issues. Especially currently, when many Republican voters are skeptical of any foreign policy message that does not involve pummeling one nation or another.
One of Beijing’s loudest critics is Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, though he has focused on economic issues, as did US President Barack Obama and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney when they battled for Ohio’s votes three years ago.
Trump’s only female Republican presidential rival, Carly Fiorina, promised to be “more aggressive in helping our allies [and] push back against new Chinese aggression.” With Washington already pledging to defend allied territorial claims, arm allied states and step up military patrols, it is not clear what more she would do.
US Senator Marco Rubio denounced the PRC’s “increasingly aggressive regional expansionism” and the administration’s alleged “willingness to ignore human rights violations in the hope of appeasing the Chinese leadership.”
Despite the Florida senator’s bluster, Beijing would not adopt democracy on Washington’s say-so.
However, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, desperate to revive his flagging campaign, has rushed to become China’s harshest critic.
“Given China’s massive cyberattacks against America, its militarization of the South China Sea, continued state interference with its economy, and persistent persecution of Christians and human rights activists, President Obama needs to cancel the state visit,” he said.
“Honors should only be bestowed upon leaders and countries that are allies and supporters of the United States, not just for China, which is a strategic competitor. I think China, as others in the world, would actually respect some leadership once and for all from the United States,” he added.
No country or leader is entitled to a state visit, of course, but Walker’s convoluted reasoning is what one would expect from a governor play-acting as president. US policy toward Beijing can, and perhaps should, be tough. However, it should not be stupid.
First, it is a mistake to view a state visit as an “honor.” It is a diplomatic tool. No matter how much Luxembourg might deserve the “honor,” it would be silly to host the reigning grand duke for a state visit.
Second, disrespecting another nation’s leadership is a curious way to seek its respect.
Privately telling Beijing that there would be no state visits would get its attention, though probably not affect its behavior. Canceling an already scheduled trip would be seen as a studied insult, enough to anger, but not coerce.
Third, everyone believes that “there is serious work to be done” with China. The disagreement is over the best way to do so. Treating other nations seriously is one step in attempting to work through contentious issues.
Fourth, lumping together radically different issues makes serious work less likely to succeed. Fiscally irresponsible Washington is in no position to lecture the PRC on internal economic policy. Christians do face persecution, but the situation, though complex, is far better than a few years ago and is likely be determined by the rising number of Chinese believers, not Washington demands.
There is no easy answer to cyberwar, but US companies and governments possessing the ability to retaliate as well as defend would be more effective than canceling a state visit.
Resolving conflicting territorial claims is mostly the concern of allied states now squabbling with Beijing. Telling Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that he would not get a state dinner is unlikely to cause his government to give up its claim to the disputed Spratly Islands (Nansha Islands, 南沙群島) in the South China Sea, or, more importantly, Taiwan.
Unfortunately, with almost 14 months to go until the presidential election, there is room for a lot more China-bashing. However, much is at stake in maintaining a civil relationship. Hopefully any threats and insults would be forgotten by the winning candidate.
However, the more heated the rhetoric, the more likely the PRC is to respond in kind, and “Grand Old Party” hawks like Walker might turn out to be true believers rather than pragmatic cynics. If so, US-China relations could be heading for stormy times. That would be bad for them and for Taiwan.
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to former US president Ronald Reagan.
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
Deflation in China is persisting, raising growing concerns domestically and internationally. Beijing’s stimulus policies introduced in September last year have largely been short-lived in financial markets and negligible in the real economy. Recent data showing disproportionately low bank loan growth relative to the expansion of the money supply suggest the limited effectiveness of the measures. Many have urged the government to take more decisive action, particularly through fiscal expansion, to avoid a deep deflationary spiral akin to Japan’s experience in the early 1990s. While Beijing’s policy choices remain uncertain, questions abound about the possible endgame for the Chinese economy if no decisive
Actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) on March 13 posted an Instagram caption after the opening of Tiffany’s Taipei flagship store two days earlier that read: “Thank you Tiffany for inviting us to Taipei China.” We know that Yeoh knows Taipei is in Taiwan, not China, because the caption was posted following comments she made — in English — in which she said: “Thank you to Tiffany for bringing me to Taipei, because I do love this country very much.” Her remarks and the subsequent Instagram caption were reported in Taiwan, in Chinese and English- language media such as Radio Free Asia, and overseas,
China poses a dire threat to Taiwan’s semiconductor industry as it steps up efforts to poach Taiwan’s top chip talent, following the US’ implementation of stringent chip restrictions. Beijing is keen to develop its own semiconductor technologies, leveraging skilled engineers from Taiwan, Europe and other countries to circumvent US restrictions on providing China access to advanced US chips, particularly those used in artificial intelligence applications, as well as other chip technologies and manufacturing equipment. Taiwan has always contended with talent competition from China, but the situation is worsening. The Hsinchu District Prosecutors’ Office on Friday said that China’s ARK Semi and
RSS