Minnesota Governor and Democratic US vice presidential candidate Tim Walz has connections to China dating back decades that could help inform US Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris’ approach to the world’s second-biggest economy, but might also spell trouble with leaders in Beijing and Republicans back home.
The little-known Minnesota governor taught English in China’s southern Guangdong Province in 1989 and 1990, making him the first person on a presidential ticket to have that kind of experience living in the country since former US president George H.W. Bush, who served as US ambassador in Beijing in the 1970s. Walz has often spoken affectionately about Chinese.
“If they had the proper leadership, there are no limits on what they could accomplish,” he told a local newspaper after returning from China in 1990. “They are such kind, generous, capable people.”
Walz got married on the fifth anniversary of the deadly 1989 Tiananmen Square military crackdown, with his wife Gwen telling a local newspaper: “He wanted to have a date he’ll always remember.”
He has also posted on social media that he had a “life-changing” lunch with the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader exiled by China.
His interest in the country has also extended to policymaking, with Walz cosponsoring numerous pieces of legislation in the US House of Representatives including the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2017.
Walz was the only Democratic lawmaker in the House of Representatives willing to support the bill, said Jeffrey Ngo (敖卓軒), a former youth activist from Hong Kong, adding he “knocked on every door” to seek backing for it.
Ngo said he met Walz in 2016 along with fellow democracy advocate Joshua Wong (黃之鋒) and was impressed by the congressman’s knowledge of Hong Kong and China issues.
“This guy really knew his stuff,” said Ngo, now a research fellow at US-based advocacy group Hong Kong Democracy Council.
“He’s rare among members of Congress because he’s actually been to China so many times,” he added.
Walz also cosponsored numerous resolutions, including those condemning China’s censorship of the killings around Tiananmen Square in 1989 and ones expressing concern about the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners.
With Walz appearing prominently on the national political scene for the first time on Tuesday last week, many on social media began poring over a long record of comments on China, some of them decades old.
“I don’t fall into the category that China necessarily needs to be an adversarial relationship,” Walz said in a video interview posted in 2016 that focused mainly on agriculture that is now being reposted on X. “I totally disagree, and I think we need to stand firm, on what they’re doing in the South China Sea. But there’s many areas of cooperation that we can work on.”
At the same time, his views on China have tracked a familiar evolution from hope that an economic opening up would lead to greater political freedoms to frustration about what he has called China’s worsening human-rights record. His positions appear largely in sync with the approach of the administration of US President Joe Biden that aims to compete with Beijing in military and economic spheres, and cooperate where possible on climate or narcotics trafficking.
“I think the idea was, with a free market economy, we’d see a more opening of the Chinese grip on — on social life and on human rights,” Walz said in a US congressional hearing in 2016. “That simply has not occurred.”
Walz’s stance toward China — and his past meeting with the Dalai Lama — might open him to criticism from Beijing.
However, a Chinese official, who asked not to be identified, said the choice of Walz is unlikely to impact Washington’s policy as US politicians are unified in their hardline views on China.
In Beijing’s view, every candidate believes untrue and harmful things about China, the official said.
On the other hand, some of the governor’s more nuanced takes on the country from his trips could leave him open to Republican attacks during a tight race for the White House at a time when the China relationship is much more confrontational.
While China appears to be a personal issue for Walz, that is only good “to a point” and does not reflect the “zero-sum competition” between the US and China, said Michael Sobolik, a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council and author of Countering China’s Great Game: A Strategy for American Dominance.
“The Chinese people aren’t Americans’ enemies, and Walz understands that basic reality — on the other hand, Walz seems overly optimistic, almost Pollyannish, about Washington’s struggle with the Chinese Communist Party,” Sobolik said. “Like President Biden and Vice President Harris, Walz seems to reject a cold war framing for US-China relations. That’s a bad thing.”
Spokespeople for Walz did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday last week.
“I lived in China, I’ve been there about 30 times,” Walz said back in 2016. “But if someone tells you they’re an expert on China they’re probably not telling you the truth, because it’s a complex country.”
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS