Pundits and the media have described US President George W. Bush's recent visit to China as somewhat of a disappointment.
Beijing and Washington failed to resolve their differences over the missile proliferation issue -- instead of reconfirming the "three no's" as former president Bill Clinton did during his 1998 visit, Bush reiterated the US obligations to Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act. The two countries also remained apart on issues ranging from human rights and religious freedom, to how to deal with the so-called "axis of evil" states. Indeed, it would appear that no substantive progress was made during the trip.
But Bush's scorecard may actually be better than has been acknowledged, in at least four respects. First, one should evaluate Bush's visit against the general state of Sino-US relations rather than solely based on what was accomplished during the visit. In this regard, the very fact that Bush went to China a second time in four months is significant. Clinton did not go to China until his sixth year in office.
Bush's visit must also be set against a backdrop of the early debacles in bilateral relations during his administration -- the midair collision of a US EP-3
surveillance plane with a Chinese fighter and last April, the admin-istration's approval of the largest arms sale to Taiwan in years and Bush's controversial "whatever it takes" statement regarding US obligations to the defense of Taiwan. In short, the visit shows that Bush is serious in rebuilding a "candid, constructive and cooperative" relationship with China, a far cry from the campaign rhetoric of viewing China as a "strategic competitor."
Second, Bush went to China to seek Beijing's continued commitment to anti-terrorism and its help in dealing with Pyongyang. He apparently got both even though the two countries have yet to work out tactical details. There was agreement on setting up an FBI office in Beijing to enhance bilateral cooperation in law enforcement and intelligence sharing. In addition, the two sides also signed a number of agreements, including one on collaborating on HIV and AIDS research and treatment.
Third, the trip has laid the foundation for regular bilateral consultation at various levels and through different channels. Both Chinese President Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and Vice-President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) will visit the US in the coming months and Commerce Secretary Don Evans will soon visit Beijing.
There is also indication that the military-to-military exchanges, which have been suspended since the Bush administration came into office last year, may be resumed, including the annual bilateral Defense Consultation Talks, which were held four times during the Clinton administration. Other security and arms control consultations may also follow. China's top arms control negotiator is in Washington this week for talks with US officials.
And finally, the visit provided an opportunity for Bush to convey directly to the Chinese public what he sees as core American values -- freedom, democracy and rule of law. Given at Tsinghua University in the presence of Hu, Jiang's heir apparent, Bush sought to dispel what he considers to be misperception of US power and responsibility in the world, much as he admonished his hosts to follow the US example to build a better China.
This is no small accomplishment as Bush sought to project a favorable image of the US to China's younger generation torn between its admiration of the US economic and scientific achievements and its resentment of American arrogance.
Sino-US relations will be one of the most critical bilateral relationships in the coming decades. The Bush visit should be seen as a worthwhile effort to chart a new course for Sino-US relations since the events of Sept. 11.
A pragmatic, consistent US China policy is called for and must be sustained. Washington should be sensitive to the facts that China is under another generational change of leadership and that the country is facing growing domestic challenges of managing the socio-economic fallout that comes with its accession to the WTO.
In a way, US China policy could help ease that transition and shape the direction of future development in China in a desirable way -- a country better integrated into the world economy that continues to develop and prosper while being receptive to international norms and prin-ciples. However, there is also the risk that a US seen as hostile in Beijing could be used as a pretext to vent the frustration of domestic difficulties to highly nationalist sentiments with the US being a convenient scapegoat.
The late US president Richard Nixon's visit to China 30 years ago changed the world. Bush's visit might have also accomplish a lot even as the issues and challenges are vastly different. The US can have an impact on China, not the least of which would be to make it a friend instead of a foe.
Yuan Jing-dong is a senior research associate at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies Monterey Institute of International Studies.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing