China does not change leaders every four years. In regards to the US, it offers a consistent political line and one not based on ideology. Conversely, US policy changes from president to president. So, one day before the US presidential vote we ask,: what will US policy be?
China has much to gain if President George W. Bush were to be re-elected. But things could be quite different should Senator John Kerry get the nod tomorrow.
Facts say that in order to obtain Beijing's support for the war on terror, the US looked the other way on China's human rights issues.
Furthermore, the US benefited from a Chinese non-hostile attitude in regards to the US-led Iraq War and Beijing's proactive role in the difficult negotiation with North Korea.
Under the Bush administra-tion, the Washington-Beijing axis has gained quite a lot of momentum and it has never been stronger. A reality confirmed by Bush's opposition to a unilateral change in Taiwan's status quo, at the end of last year, and the recent comments made by Secretary of State Colin Powell.
When it comes to China, US political analysts are split. Some favor a policy of "constructive engagement, leaning towards a strategic partnership," while others see Beijing as the "inevitable adversary and eventual enemy" destined to shake the current balance of power.
The latter consider the Taiwan issue and the various trade problems the first warning signs. The same analysts envisage a sequence of events wherein, in the not too distant future, China's growth will upset the relative equilibrium in Northeast Asia and Beijing will gain a hegemonic position throughout eastern and Southeast Asia.
Noteworthy, in the area, Bei-
jing has committed itself to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a collective security agreement that includes Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Such a security pact has no precedent in China's foreign policy.
Regardless of spheres of influence, what worries some analysts most is that, over the last fifteen years, China's GDP has grown at an annual rate of around 9 percent. Such an impressive growth, coupled with improved technology, has supported a double digit military budget. Experts have predicted that, within 10 to 20 years, China will be able to deploy and sustain military force well beyond its borders.
So, while it is undoubted that China is closing the gap with the US, in Washington and beyond the two-fold question remains the same: Will it be a peaceful Chinese ascendancy (within the current balance of power) or will Beijing's economic and technological growth lead to a desire for a continental hegemony? Andwhat will the US answer be?
The first scenario would require a "liberal approach" and an overall strengthening of US-China cooperation. Such an option would be conducive to an opening of the Chinese regime. The second scenario would require a "realistic approach" and a containment policy -- similar to that applied to the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Such an approach would be based on the US alliances with those Asian countries historically wary of Beijing.
However, whatever the path, one thing is certain, the US-China relationship needs to be handled with care especially because East Asia presents specific problems: the area's economic growth -- the world's fastest -- implies a heighten competition for natural resources and the China-Taiwan and the North Korean's issue are potential serious contentions.
Francesco Maria Greco is a visiting professor of international relations at Orientale University in Naples, Italy. Fabio Scarpello is a political analyst and freelance journalist based in Jakarta.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs