It is hard to develop simple explanations of the games that big powers play either in order to maintain their strategic primacy over others or to enhance it, for their strategic objectives are quite complex. That statement fully describes US-China relations.
Here is one superpower and one wanna-be superpower. The lone superpower is not interested in sharing its primacy with anyone else, but it cannot control or even decelerate the pace of constantly changing global realities that ensures that no one country stays on top forever. That is also one of the most ancient historical realities. China -- one of the most ancient civilizations in the world -- knows that fact eminently better than the US.
As an ancient civilization, China has learned to live with the fact that it will have to struggle in the realms of economic and military power merely to close the gap between itself and the US. However, it has little doubt that it will eventually emerge as a super-power. For ancient civilizations, the phrase "eventually" repre-sents a short duration.
But its overall attitude toward the US would continue to be along a continuum of cooperation or the lack thereof, depending on what is at stake, and how the leaders in Beijing are calculating their country's stakes at any given time. Because, unlike democratic polities, modalities of intra-elite discussions are seldom witnessed by China-watchers, one has to use the rule of reason, which has a universal application, to evaluate the calculations of the powers that be in Beijing.
Relations between the US and the PRC have gone through some noticeable changes in the past two years. Beijing's decision to cooperate with the US in the post-Sept. 11 environment created positive contours in the previously competitive relationship. In the realm of economics, China and the US have developed a symbiotic relationship. China is America's fourth-largest trading partner, seventh-largest export market and fourth-largest source of imports.
Sino-US trade has grown from US$33 billion in 1992 to almost US$150 billion last year. The PRC has attracted US$52.7 billion worth of foreign-direct investment (FDI), thereby becoming the world's top destination for FDI last year. This reality further augments its potential importance as a major trading partner of the US.
Washington and Beijing also view each other with concern as countries that might have reasons for potential confrontation. The US is worried that China is pursuing its long-term political goals of developing its comprehensive national power and ensuring a favorable strategic configuration of power. Leaders in Beijing, on the other hand, remain wary of America's mounting military supremacy. They are watching with concern America's growing presence in Asia Pacific, how it is likely to affect their own country's aspirations to emerge as a global power, and their ability to resolve the Taiwan conflict.
There is little doubt that Tai-wan's unification with the PRC remains one the most obdurate issues of US-China relations. Both countries agree that the conflict related to Taiwan should be resolved; however, the modality of its resolution is the source of major disagreement between them. Washington is adamant about a peaceful resolution, while China has not ruled out the use of force.
In a report issued to the US Congress last month, the Pentagon stated, "While it professes a preference for resolving the Taiwan issue peacefully, Beijing is also seeking credible military options." China's strategy, according to the report, is aimed at diversifying "its options for use of force against potential targets such as Taiwan" and complicating "United States intervention in a Taiwan Strait conflict."
The Pentagon's greatest concern is China's buildup of ballistic missiles in Fujian Province, where 450 missiles are pointed at Tai-wan, and it is adding to its arsenal there at the rate 50 missiles per year. The accuracy and lethality of those missiles is increasing. The report also notes, "China's doctrine is moving toward the goal of surprise, deception and shock effect in the opening phase of a campaign," and is aimed at "coercive strategies designed to bring Taipei to terms quickly."
A noticeable contrast between the recent Pentagon report and its reports issued during the administration of former president Bill Clinton, is that the latest report underscores that the continuing modernization of the Chinese military is aimed at bolstering its arsenal with medium-range missiles, new submarines and destroyers, and is focused on a potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait. Reports issued during the Clinton years stated that China lacked sufficient military might for outright confrontation.
The PRC lashed out at the claims made in the Pentagon report. The Foreign Ministry told Agence France-Presse, "Safeguarding the sovereignty and integrity of our territory is every country's un-doubted right." It added, "The concerned parties in the US spread [rumors of] so-called mainland missile threats to Taiwan in various forms over and over. The purpose is to make excuses, and create public opinion for [the US] selling advanced weapons to Taiwan."
The US remains the leading arms supplier to Taiwan. Last month the Pentagon announced an agreement to ship AIM-120 medium-range air-to-air missiles to Taiwan -- a deal that was aimed at ensuring the military balance in the Taiwan Strait. This aspect of US policy continues to infuriate Beijing's leaders. Thus, the issue of Taiwan promises to flare up periodically, with neither the US nor China seeming to alter their basic positions.
The PRC is also suspicious of the ostensibly permanent US presence in Central Asia. However, this development should be viewed in conjunction with the US-India strategic partnership, whose seeds were sown by Clinton, but it has been given a new significance under President George W. Bush.
China is watching with rapt attention the dynamics of this partnership, since its ties with India are also highly competitive. Even though the surge of cooperation stemming from Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's recent trip to the PRC is the newest development, New Dehli and Bei-jing regard the other as a powerful strategic competitor. As such, the competition between the two major powers for dominance in the Indian Ocean and in the South China Sea is not likely to end anytime soon. Thus, the mounting presence and influence of the US in Central and South Asia fuels the suspicions of Beijing's leaders that the lone superpower is purposely pursuing a policy of containing their country.
One the most noteworthy recent developments in the Asia Pacific is the role of the PRC as a peacemaker between North Korea and the US in the conflict over Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program. This is an archetypical instance of cooperation on the part of China. There is little doubt that, as a major supplier of food and oil to North Korea, China is capable of exercising considerable influence over Kim Jong Il. The PRC supports the US position that North Korea's nuclear weapon program should unravel; however, it also equally supportive of the prerequisite of security guarantees for Kim's regime.
Like Kim, the Chinese leaders insisted that the Washington and Pyongyang resolve their conflict through bilateral talks. However, given Bush's resolve to conduct multilateral negotiations with North Korea, China opted to change its own position. Now both Washington and Pyongyang have agreed to a multilateral forum of negotiations. China has played a critical role in proposing the specifics of it. It should be noted that Washington has reportedly agreed to have periodic bilateral "side-bars" with North Korea on other issues. If China's role were to indeed resolve the US-North Korea conflict, that development would serve as a major boon for US-China relations.
Beijing seems to have adopted a compartmentalized approach to its strategic ties with the US. The economic payoffs stemming from continued cooperation are too enormous to be sacrificed to bring about unification of Taiwan in the near future. That is not to say that this issue has become of lesser import. On the contrary, economic cooperation with the US is seen as an integral aspect of escalating China's capabilities to pay for the mounting cost of its military modernization, which, in turn, will be crucial to its emergence as a superpower.
Beijing's positive role in persuading North Korea to peacefully resolve its nuclear weapons conflict with the US is also aimed at ensuring enhanced American goodwill, which China must have to further its own global aspirations. Meanwhile, the resolution of the Taiwan conflict may wait another 100 years, an option that late Mao Zedong (
In the ostensibly unending power games among great powers, China knows that the chances of its victory over the lone superpower are slim for now. However, these are games that have many rounds. Victors emerge by maximizing their advantages in niche areas and by expanding the scope of their niche areas into others.
These intricate games last over several decades and often much longer. China's sense of history and its record of endurance afford it a sense of confidence -- that over the long run, its chances of emergence as a superpower are quite good. Look out Japan and India. More importantly, be on guard, US.
Ehsan Ahrari is professor of national security and strategy at the Joint Forces Staff College in Virginia. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under