Under the administration of former US president Richard Nixon, then-US national security adviser Henry Kissinger, playing off the balance of power in Europe, submitted two strategic layouts at the time the US opened the gates of China and established official dialogue with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) government.
The first was to establish connections with China and contain the Soviet Union, although today, 20 years later, the US might consider bonding with Russia to contain China instead.
The second strategy was to establish a multipolar world order that would maintain global stability through a power balance between the US, the Soviet Union, China, Japan and Europe.
This geopolitical strategy of bonding with China and containing the Soviet Union only lasted until the administration of former US president Jimmy Carter, who established official diplomatic ties with China.
Former US president Ronald Reagan, who succeeded Carter, challenged the Soviet Union using the US’ strong economic and technological capabilities to develop tactical weapons, leading to the collapse of the Soviet Union and an end to the Cold War, strengthening the US’ superpower status.
In the Asia-Pacific region, China had previously signed an “anti-hegemony” clause with the US and Japan to counterbalance the Soviet Union. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the removal of the Soviet threat, China faced a new crisis of internal systemic implosion. Then-Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) preferred to keep a low profile and bide his time, and emphasized stability and economic development rather than exposing himself.
However, Deng’s successors have conducted aggressive militarization, breaking the post-war world order and challenging the US’ position in the Asia-Pacific theater.
Many Americans tend not to trust Russia, but they often have a romanticized concept of China, which makes it easy for them to accept a policy of engaging Beijing and containing Moscow. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of China, the situation has changed, and there has been rapprochement between Beijing and Moscow, removing the US’ option of bonding with Russia and containing China.
The US has exhausted its power in the extensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, changing the nation’s relative strength. As China rises, it wants to change the US-designed international system and order, using its financial and military capabilities to compose a new balance of power and essentially return to a situation resembling the Cold War.
The most obvious example of this shift in alignment is the parade that is planned to take place in Moscow’s Red Square on Saturday to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II. Leaders from all over the world were invited, but representatives from Western nations have decided to boycott the event. The most significant leader due to attend is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
China has chosen to celebrate its victory in the war of resistance against Japan in August, which the US and Japan have refused to attend. The most notable foreign leader attending that celebration is to be Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Not only is the US not attending China’s celebration despite being the key player behind Japan’s defeat in the war, it even invited Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to an official visit to Washington, gave him the privilege of addressing the US Congress and modified the mutual defense agreement, which allows Japan to play a larger role in regional security affairs.
Japan’s surprise attack on Pearl Harbor compelled the US to declare war on Japan. After the war, Japan changed from being an enemy to being the US’ closest ally in the Asia-Pacific region. When the US decided not to join a celebration of victory in World War II organized by one of its allies at the time, while strengthening its defense agreement with Japan, a war-time enemy, that treats China and North Korea as potential enemies, is quite a significant change in direction.
US President Barack Obama’s rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific region, and the reconsideration of Asia-Pacific strategy by US think tanks, are responses to China’s military buildup, Beijing’s stimulation of Chinese nationalism to curtail internal unrest and China’s use of its military to begin a territorial expansion that threatens to challenge the “status quo” in the region.
China is constantly engaging in provocations in the waters around the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台). It is actively provoking US ships and aircraft in international waters and airspace, seizing islands and developing resource extraction in the South China Sea.
A large component of the normalization of US-China relations, which is focused around bonding with Beijing and containing Moscow, is based on a belief that China will follow a path toward a healthy development. However, China’s international and domestic actions are showing China affairs experts in the West that all their trust, assumptions and predictions have been misplaced, and they are now admitting their mistakes and beginning to discuss new strategies for dealing with Beijing.
The most typical example of this phenomenon is a book by Michael Pillsbury, entitled The Hundred-Year Marathon, which says that the romanticized image of China presumed in the West is flawed. China is not shifting toward democracy, accountability and cooperation as expected; Chinese war hawks are not vulnerable; and China is unlikely to change to become more like the US.
Pillsbury strongly believes that Chinese political, military and economic policies are all deceptive parts of the “hundred-year marathon” that has been going since the start of normalization of relations with the US. He also thinks that by 2049, the 100th anniversary of the PRC, China’s power is likely to surpass that of the US.
Even more surprisingly, the historically pro-China Council on Foreign Relations has recently published a report by Robert Blackwill and Ashley Tellis, who advocate a revised US grand strategy vis-a-vis China. The report supports the establishment of a closer tactical relationship between the US, Japan, South Korea, India, Southeast Asia and Taiwan.
The report says that the key to establishing a grand strategy against China is to counterbalance the assent of Chinese power and stop aiding China’s existing advantages. This is because Beijing already has a grand strategy, which is to try to suppress domestic unrest, appease neighboring nations and consolidate its position in the international system to replace the US as Asia’s most important great power.
This is clearly reflected in the attitude of US authorities. On newly appointed US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter’s first overseas trip last month, he only visited Japan and South Korea, and he is scheduled to visit Singapore this month to meet leaders of Southeast Asian nations and to visit India. Yet, the US Department of Defense placed Russia, China, North Korea and Iran on a hot list of nations conducting cyberattacks targeting the US.
To derail Beijing’s fantasy, supporting a revised strategy against China would involve the US establishing a closer tactical relationship with democratic nations, including Taiwan. This would be the most profound change in US foreign policy since the normalization of US-China relations.
China’s attempt to break the post-World War II world order and regional “status quo” is an obvious challenge to the anti-hegemony provision it signed with the US and Japan. Now that the US can no longer use its relationship with Russia, and since it wants to join hands with its democratic allies to counterbalance China, it is going to have to consider normalizing relations with democratic Taiwan.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Zane Kheir
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
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
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