Over the past eight years, as China’s posturing in Asia became increasingly aggressive, many criticized then-US president Barack Obama for failing to stand up to the Asian giant. It was on Obama’s watch, after all, that China captured the disputed Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) from the Philippines and built seven artificial islands in the South China Sea, on which it then deployed heavy weapons — all without incurring any international costs.
Many expect Obama’s tough-talking successor, US President Donald Trump, to change all of this. He is not off to a good start.
During the campaign, Trump threatened to retaliate against China for “raping” the US on trade, to impose massive tariffs on Chinese imports, and to label China a currency manipulator.
Soon after his victory, Trump took a congratulatory telephone call from President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), thereby breaking with nearly 40 years of diplomatic orthodoxy. Trump then took the matter a step further, publicly suggesting that he would use the “one China” policy as a bargaining chip in bilateral negotiations over contentious economic and security issues.
However, Trump backed down. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) made it clear that he would not so much as talk to Trump on the phone without assurance that the US president would pledge fidelity to the “one China” policy.
The call happened, and Trump did exactly what Xi wanted, ostensibly without extracting anything in return.
Trump is not the only figure in his administration to stake out a bold position on China and then retreat meekly. During his Senate confirmation process, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson declared that the US should “send China a clear signal” by denying it access to its artificial islands in the South China Sea.
China’s expansionism in the region, Tillerson asserted, was “akin to Russia’s taking Crimea” from Ukraine — an implicit criticism of Obama for allowing the two developments.
However, Tillerson, like his new boss, soon backed down.
The US, he now claims, merely needs to be “capable” of restricting China’s access to the South China Sea islands, in the event of a contingency.
And yet China’s behavior merits stronger US action now. The country is attempting to upend the “status quo” not only in the South China Sea, but also in the East China Sea and the Himalayas. It is working to create a large sphere of influence through its “one belt, one road” initiative. And it is re-engineering transboundary river flows. All of this is intended to achieve Chinese leaders’ goal of re-establishing the country’s mythical “Middle Kingdom” status.
Flawed US policy has opened the way for these efforts, in part by helping to turn China into an export juggernaut. The problem is not that China has a strong economy, but rather that it abuses free-trade rules to subsidize its exports and impede imports to shield domestic jobs and industry. Today, China sells US$4 worth of goods to the US for every US$1 in imports.
Just as the US inadvertently saddled the world with the jihadist scourge by training Afghan mujahidin — the anti-Soviet fighting force out of which al-Qaeda evolved — it unintentionally created a rules-violating monster by aiding China’s economic rise. And it sustained its China-friendly trade policy even as China’s abuses became bolder and more obvious.
It is ironic that China, which has quietly waged a trade war for years, has responded to Trump’s threats to impose punitive tariffs by warning of the risks of protectionism and trade wars.
However, a growing number of countries are recognizing that reciprocity should guide their relations with Beijing.
Trump himself might yet challenge China. When he agreed to abide by the “one China” policy, he said that he had done so at Xi’s request, suggesting that his commitment to the policy should not be taken for granted.
Moreover, even without defying the “one China” policy, Trump has ample room to apply pressure. He could start by highlighting increasing Chinese repression in Tibet. He could also expand political, commercial and military contacts with Taiwan, where the “one China” policy has had the paradoxical effect of deepening people’s sense of national identity and strengthening their determination to maintain autonomy.
In any case, as China continues to pursue its hegemonic ambitions, Trump will have little choice but to pivot toward Asia — substantively, not just rhetorically, as Obama did. To constrain China and bring stability to Asia, he will have to work closely with friends. His efforts to establish a personal connection with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and the high priority his administration is assigning to relations with India and South Korea are positive signs.
By failing to provide strategic heft to his Asia pivot, Obama left it unhinged. Trump has the opportunity to change this. If he does not, China will continue to challenge US allies and interests, with serious potential consequences for Asia and the world.
Brahma Chellaney is a professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and a fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
RSS