China is a hot topic in Washington. Its currency, exports to the US, oil interests and military capabilities have all been significant issues in Congress. While these concerns are important and real, none should stand alone. Each is part of a larger and more complex US-China -relationship. In that light, today's overheated US rhetoric over China needs to be tempered with sound judgment and wise long-term considerations.
Both competition and co-operation will feature in US-China bilateral ties in the 21st century. That does not mean relations are destined to be hostile although they could be if mishandled. The US has an opportunity to shape a co-operative relationship that would allow us to influence China's overall strategic choices. It would be a colossal mistake if misguided assumptions, rhetoric and actions led to a dangerous and conflicted relationship. This is not a time to let paranoia chart the course for US policy toward China.
The rise of China is a reality. No amount of Congressional legislation or US bludgeoning will change that. This is a country with a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, the world's largest population and, by some measures, the world's second largest economy. At the same time, the majority of China's 1.3 billion people are very poor and many problems put limits on its future.
A US-China partnership based on mutual self-interest is important to both countries. Each has a clear stake in the other's success. China has become America s third largest trading partner. The US and China have worked together to strengthen regional security, fight terrorism and international crime, help stabilize Afghanistan and address the North Korean nuclear problem.
There are also difficulties in this relationship and economic friction is a focal point. The withdrawal of CNOOC's bid for Unocal removes what was becoming a source of serious bilateral tension. But the rancor of the debate fuels an unproductive atmosphere and hinders efforts to address some more fundamental concerns.
In 2004, China's exports to the US were nearly six times its imports of US goods and services. Trying to close that gap through artificial tariffs that violate WTO rules and public threats will not resolve the differences. Most likely, such actions would further divide us, complicating the issues we should be working on and magnifying Chinese recalcitrance.
China has enacted some basic economic reforms in recent years, in large measure to comply with WTO standards. But China has many more reforms to make not least, opening its markets to US companies. This will require continued economic reform, a more transparent and consistent regulatory and licensing system, enforcement of distribution rights for foreign companies and strong enforcement of intellectual property laws.
While China's recent decision to abandon a fixed exchange rate to the dollar is an important step forward, the country needs eventually to achieve full convertibility of the yuan. The US and international community must help ensure that the Chinese financial system can absorb a transition to market-based exchange rates.
Beyond economic policy, the US must keep working with the Chinese on other key issues such as rule of law, human rights and religious freedoms. China's aggressive global diplomatic and economic strategy and its military build-up also bear close scrutiny. The US and its allies must encourage responsible Chinese actions, appropriate for a rising global power. This means, for example, not allowing a dangerous, historical Sino-Japanese confrontation to re-emerge.
An important US response to the rise of China is to strengthen alliances and friendships in the region, especially with ASEAN, and to work with its partners to sustain America's stabilizing role in Asia and the Pacific.
The US must also take positive steps to maintain its competitive position in the world. It also must get its own house in order. Raising trade barriers or compromising its core, free trade values will undermine America's overall long-term interests. We must rein in US deficit spending, promote greater domestic savings, address the growing entitlement challenge, rehabilitate infrastructure, invest in education and establish immigration reform. That is how America can maintain pre-eminence in the 21st century, regardless of the rise of China or any other nation.
Chuck Hagel, is the No.2 Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and chairman of the US Congressional-Executive Commission on China
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The stocks of rare earth companies soared on Monday following news that the Trump administration had taken a 10 percent stake in Oklahoma mining and magnet company USA Rare Earth Inc. Such is the visible benefit enjoyed by the growing number of firms that count Uncle Sam as a shareholder. Yet recent events surrounding perhaps what is the most well-known state-picked champion, Intel Corp, exposed a major unseen cost of the federal government’s unprecedented intervention in private business: the distortion of capital markets that have underpinned US growth and innovation since its founding. Prior to Intel’s Jan. 22 call with analysts
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
International debate on Taiwan is obsessed with “invasion countdowns,” framing the cross-strait crisis as a matter of military timetables and political opportunity. However, the seismic political tremors surrounding Central Military Commission (CMC) vice chairman Zhang Youxia (張又俠) suggested that Washington and Taipei are watching the wrong clock. Beijing is constrained not by a lack of capability, but by an acute fear of regime-threatening military failure. The reported sidelining of Zhang — a combat veteran in a largely unbloodied force and long-time loyalist of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — followed a year of purges within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
RSS