U.S.-China Summit: Time to Make History

Source: Getty
Policy Outlook
Summary
A playbook for how Presidents Obama and Xi can make more history than leaders have in decades.
Related Media and Tools
 

U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping will sit down for an informal summit in California in June—the first time in over forty years that the leaders of two such consequential and different powers have met for a “blue sky” discussion. They should express principles to guide future cooperation and lay the foundation for a practical yet visionary way forward.

Principles for U.S.-China Cooperation

  • Commitment to resolving differences and regional crises peacefully, through international law and mechanisms
  • Resolution not to impose unilateral changes to the status quo in Asia
  • Dedication to the denuclearization and ultimate peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula
  • Pledge to pursue a global free trade agreement over the next decade

The Action Agenda

Establish U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue subgroups made up of subcabinet-level officials covering four issue areas:

  1. Economy: Lay out the conditions for the United States and China to move toward a global or large multilateral free trade agreement. The financial services, energy, and transportation sectors as well as government procurement policy, financial liberalization, and sensitive products are areas for negotiation.
     
  2. Military: Deepen U.S.-China military contacts and understanding. A ten-year objective can be to ensure that commanders who face each other have the responsibility to know each other personally and exchange cell-phone numbers and contact procedures to reduce the potential for accidental conflict. Military schools should exchange students at multiple career levels.
     
  3. Nontraditional Issues: Cooperate to reach agreements on how to manage nontraditional challenges, such as cyberattacks, threats in space, climate change, pandemics, human rights, and energy policy. 
     
  4. Regional Security: Work together to build a multilateral regional security mechanism for the Indo-Pacific over the next decade. The first priority is the Korean Peninsula, and the maritime issues in the East and South China Seas need rule-making and conflict-resolution outcomes as well.

The Summit

The presidents of China and the United States will meet for an unusual, informal summit in California on June 7–8. Officials on both sides are rightly trying to lower expectations, especially for “deliverables”—detailed outcomes on some of the thorniest issues between the world’s two leading economies in only two days of personal diplomacy. Instead, they are stressing the opportunity for the two leaders to explore areas for cooperation and reduced competition beyond the short-term calendar.

This summit will be the first time in over forty years that the leaders of two such consequential and different powers have sat down for a “blue sky” discussion. The last was between then Chinese Communist Party chairman Mao Zedong and then U.S. president Richard Nixon in 1972. History has left no doubt about the importance of that dialogue for principles and concepts governing Chinese and American cooperation and competition. If they had bogged themselves down in detailed disputes, of which there were many, beneficial strategic change would have proved elusive.

In significant ways, the upcoming summit could be similarly consequential for the future of the twenty-first century. Paul Haenle from Carnegie–Tsinghua and I called for such a meeting late last year, believing the potential gains outweigh the substantial risks. Grinding competition of the sort experienced recently between the two countries, potentially leading to conflict, could put them on a path to disaster. Focused cooperation, despite major systemic differences in the structure and interests of the two nations, can lead to more positive outcomes.

What the Two Presidents Should Discuss

They should seek to evoke from each other expressions of principle about handling the major disputes and challenges facing both countries. This is not about crafting a detailed “fourth communiqué,” for which there is neither time nor a need. Nor is it about creating a “G2” consortium of the United States and China to lead world affairs. But if these two powers cannot find a principled way to handle many of the problems they face, regional and global cooperation may prove elusive and competition dangerous.

The Principles

First, both leaders should state their commitment to resolving their differences and regional crises peacefully, through international law and mechanisms. Chinese President Xi Jinping has repeatedly spoken of “the Chinese dream” and called for a “new kind of great-power relationship.” Western ears tend to hear that this means China will not confront U.S. global dominance, but it is not clear what this means to the Chinese. U.S. President Barack Obama should ask Xi, in a welcoming but attentive fashion, where he wants to go with these concepts.

Obama has presided over a successful “rebalancing” of American attention to Asia that enjoys substantial bipartisan and regional support, but China suspects U.S. “containment.” The American leader should address China’s concerns. He should, in this context, press for China’s commitment to welcoming a continuing U.S. role in the Asia-Pacific, something many Americans believe Beijing seeks to erode. This should result in mutual acknowledgement of the legitimate American and Chinese roles in Asian peace and security, including internationally agreed-upon borders.

Second, the two should express their resolve not to impose unilateral changes to the status quo in Asia. This should help restrain the growing friction between China and its neighbors over maritime claims, putting the onus on all sides not to add tension to difficult, sensitive issues. Both leaders could further call for negotiations on interim arrangements to manage resource competition among the claimants over fisheries, hydrocarbons, and minerals.

Third, they should reiterate a common commitment to the denuclearization and ultimate peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula. They would do even better to designate trusted officials to meet quietly to discuss how to handle contingencies made all the more real by the erratic behavior of North Korea’s new young leader. Politburo member Wang Huning, who unobtrusively oversees the Chinese Communist Party’s Policy Research Office, appears to be an ideal interlocutor; Obama has a choice among his top officials on the National Security Council staff or in the intelligence community.

Fourth, they should state their commitment to securing a global free trade agreement over the decade ahead. Current arrangements under negotiation are partial and sometimes conflicting. China is embarking on a new round of reforms that will likely make American and Chinese economic interests intersect more closely over time. Beijing should welcome and be welcomed by the members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership when the time is ripe for China, and the United States should not be excluded from Asian regional arrangements.

Chinese investment in the United States is growing but is nowhere near as substantial as it should be for both U.S. and Chinese interests. The United States is locked out of some sectors in China’s market. The leaders should instruct their commercial and financial officials to address these shortcomings positively.

The Action Agenda

If the expression of these principles proves possible, then Obama and Xi would do well to assign their governments responsibility to follow up in a practical yet visionary fashion. The Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) is a huge annual meeting of Chinese and American senior officials scheduled to next convene in July in the United States. The S&ED has the virtue of assembling stakeholders across both systems to address issues. But it is also cumbersome and too infrequent.

The leaders should assign subcabinet-level officials to meet more frequently. There are four broad issue areas that can be designated as subgroups to the existing S&ED. These should be assigned ambitious objectives, taking advantage of the likelihood that President Xi, who is off to an energetic start to his administration, faces the prospect of serving ten full years as head of the Chinese party, government, and military. One major goal is to keep the respective bureaucracies committed to constructive long-term objectives that can be a counterweight to the grinding competition that so often accompanies adjustments in the correlation of forces in the region and the world.

The four S&ED subgroups should focus on:

The Economy

The leaders can assign their financial and commercial officials the objective of establishing the conditions for the United States and China to pave the way for a global or large multilateral free trade agreement over the next decade. For example, they can start with negotiation of a bilateral investment treaty that genuinely facilitates Chinese investment in the United States and protects and expands American investment in China. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States should be guided to view investment more constructively while addressing security concerns that are real and not imaginary.

China should open financial services, energy, and transportation sectors that are closed. Government procurement policy, financial liberalization, and sensitive product areas are further points for this group to negotiate.

The Military

Since Xi Jinping took power in November 2012, China’s military has exhibited a much more open approach to improving military relations with the U.S. armed forces. Having been subjected to on-again, off-again, deeply suspicious relations for years, both sides should seize this opportunity to deepen contacts and understanding, dispelling problems of “transparency” along the way.

A ten-year objective can be to develop ties to a point where the commanders who face each other have the responsibility to know each other personally and exchange cell-phone numbers and contact procedures to reduce the potential for accidental conflict. U.S. and Chinese military schools should exchange students at multiple career levels. The United States should encourage China to be flexible about Taiwan’s officer training in the same schools.

Nontraditional Issues

Cyberattacks, threats in space, climate change, pandemics, human rights, and energy policy are all areas where U.S. and Chinese interests intersect. In early June, Beijing agreed to sit down with Washington’s officials to grapple with the cyberthreat. Since the disappointing conference on climate change in Copenhagen in early 2010, Beijing has strengthened its cooperation on the subject in subsequent climate change meetings, probably to a degree reflecting the obvious challenges in China’s own dramatically worsened environment. Obama and Xi should instruct officials to tackle ways to cooperate over the next decade and reach agreements on how to manage nontraditional challenges.

Regional Security

The leaders should instruct their officials to cooperate in building a multilateral regional security mechanism for the Indo-Pacific over the next decade. Tensions today between China and Japan, Vietnam, the Philippines, and India demonstrate what a difficult objective this will be but also express the need for such a mechanism. Mistrust must be overcome gradually with substantial step-by-step progress.

The first priority is the Korean Peninsula, where new governments in the North and South have heavy legacies of suspicion but at least the potential to find a new way forward. The maritime issues in the East and South China Seas need rule-making and conflict-resolution outcomes as well. The United States and China have important interests in the Indo-Pakistan relationship, Afghanistan, the Persian Gulf, Syria, and beyond.

A Historic Opportunity

The “Sunnylands” summit in California has great potential, although it poses risks for both leaders if they seem to fail to protect sensitive interests. Obama and Xi need to assess their own ledgers of benefit and risk, but they will rise to the occasion only if they see and respect their counterpart’s needs as well.

China has 1.3 billion people, governed by a party with a record of both success and insecurity. The United States is the leading global power, with complex international relationships and challenges at home. Obama and Xi, if they can rise to the conceptual challenge and articulate a path forward, have a chance to make more history than leaders have made in decades.

End of document

About the Asia Program

The Carnegie Asia Program in Beijing and Washington provides clear and precise analysis to policy makers on the complex economic, security, and political developments in the Asia-Pacific region.

 

Comments (6)

 
 
  • Michael P Totten
    Climate and Energy get shortshrift in your essay. For more specific suggestions of joint initiatives that can and should be pursued by the two nations, see the newly published essay, "Pursuing Sustainable Planetary Prosperity," chapter 18 in US-China 2022, US-China Economic Relations the Next Ten Years, http://www.uschina2022.com/
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
  • Onymous
    1 Recommend
     
    The comparison to the Mao-Nixon discussion in 1972 is vitiated by the major differences in circumstances between then and now. In the early 1970s both leaders were vulnerable because they had lost major issues, Mao the GPCR and Nixon the Vietnam War. Their smiles and handshakes were directed at a third party, which doesn't exist now. On the eve of the Sunnydale meeting, China has provocatively published a map identifying the South China Sea, including all its islands and all its waters, to be within China's national boundaries. ("Mare nostrum" as the Romans used to call the Mediterranean.) This is their response to Obama's Pivot to Asia. The relatively young princeling supremo, Xi Jinping, is the modern equivalent of the Han Martial Emperor, who broke out of a strategic disadvantage by annexing the Gansu corridor, thereby gaining access to the Western Regions. The South China Sea is the maritime equivalent of the Gansu corridor, opening China's way to its long-term goal of unilateral dominance over SE and South Asia. Publishing the new map at this time is meant to put Obama on the back foot; they are testing him to see how he will respond to it. If Obama doesn't find a way to make Xi understand that the USA will not accept that, then it's all over for the US in Asia. Wasn't it Lee Kwan Yew who said that Xi has iron in his heart? Is Obama strong enough to deal with him?   
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
  • Ed the sceptic
    First, you say No Communiques! Then go on to list the subject for such a communique, general, non substantive "hope for's"
    We need to diminish the negatives, the irritants to each of us; then we those are disposed of by observable difference in behavior, then we can address agendas and goals.
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
  • Linda Fraser Jacobsen, PhD
    Àn additional item on the agenda should be education and research. working in higher education in central China has taught me much about Chinese values and priorities, some of which are little understood in the west. Our two nations could benefit greatly by funding and supporting academic leadership exchanges and joint degree and research programs. Peace can be built in the classroom, in conferences, over shared goals for mutual excellence and prosperity. We overlook the power of citizen diplomacy executed via the academy.
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
  • Anthony1223
    22 years after collapse of USSR, US already missed the chance of becoming real global power . Doing anything just for the interest of US in the first place will never let US become a real global power!!
    After more than 5000 years human history, human civilisation still using force in resolving dispute. Mankind in the 21st century is still so barbaric. In fact, relations between countries of the international community is no different with the underworld. Countries are still forming clique as the needs for belonging and for establishing identity. Shame!

     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
  • Javed Mir
    -they should reiterate a common commitment to the denuclearization and ultimate peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula-

    A nice workable suggestion re: Korean Peninsula. But the issue of Taiwan has not been hinted at thoroughly. China will ask for reunification of Taiwan with the mainland and the American military presence will have to be removed.
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
  • Report Abuse
Source http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/06/04/u.s.-china-summit-time-to-make-history/g8by

More from The Global Think Tank

In Fact

 

45%

of the Chinese general public

believe their country should share a global leadership role.

30%

of Indian parliamentarians

have criminal cases pending against them.

140

charter schools in the United States

are linked to Turkey’s Gülen movement.

2.5–5

thousand tons of chemical weapons

are in North Korea’s possession.

92%

of import tariffs

among Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru have been eliminated.

$2.34

trillion a year

is unaccounted for in official Chinese income statistics.

37%

of GDP in oil-exporting Arab countries

comes from the mining sector.

72%

of Europeans and Turks

are opposed to intervention in Syria.

90%

of Russian exports to China

are hydrocarbons; machinery accounts for less than 1%.

13%

of undiscovered oil

is in the Arctic.

17

U.S. government shutdowns

occurred between 1976 and 1996.

40%

of Ukrainians

want an “international economic union” with the EU.

120

million electric bicycles

are used in Chinese cities.

60–70%

of the world’s energy supply

is consumed by cities.

58%

of today’s oils

require unconventional extraction techniques.

67%

of the world's population

will reside in cities by 2050.

50%

of Syria’s population

is expected to be displaced by the end of 2013.

18%

of the U.S. economy

is consumed by healthcare.

81%

of Brazilian protesters

learned about a massive rally via Facebook or Twitter.

32

million cases pending

in India’s judicial system.

1 in 3

Syrians

now needs urgent assistance.

370

political parties

contested India’s last national elections.

70%

of Egypt's labor force

works in the private sector.

70%

of oil consumed in the United States

is for the transportation sector.

20%

of Chechnya’s pre-1994 population

has fled to different parts of the world.

58%

of oil consumed in China

was from foreign sources in 2012.

$536

billion in goods and services

traded between the United States and China in 2012.

$100

billion in foreign investment and oil revenue

have been lost by Iran because of its nuclear program.

4700%

increase in China’s GDP per capita

between 1972 and today.

$11

billion have been spent

to complete the Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran.

2%

of Iran’s electricity needs

is all the Bushehr nuclear reactor provides.

78

journalists

were imprisoned in Turkey as of August 2012 according to the OSCE.

Stay in the Know

Enter your email address in the field below to receive the latest Carnegie analysis in your inbox!

Personal Information
 
 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
 
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036-2103 Phone: 202 483 7600 Fax: 202 483 1840
Please note...

You are leaving the website for the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy and entering a website for another of Carnegie's global centers.

请注意...

你将离开清华—卡内基中心网站,进入卡内基其他全球中心的网站。