Michael D. Swaine
{
"authors": [
"Michael D. Swaine"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie China"
],
"collections": [
"China’s Foreign Relations",
"U.S.-China Relations"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Chinese Views on the Presumptive U.S. Presidential Candidates Hillary R. Clinton and Donald J. Trump
While some Chinese observers praise Trump’s directness, others perceive him as a threat. For such observers, Clinton’s predictability is seen positively, yet some of her positions are expected to increase tensions.
Source: China Leadership Monitor
This year (2016) is a presidential election year, and as always, views toward China and U.S.-China relations play a role in the presidential campaigns of both the Republican and Democratic Party candidates.
In many past campaign years, while stressing the growing importance of the U.S.-China relationship, presidential candidates have generally highlighted the points of contention between Beijing and Washington, especially in the economic, human rights, and (to a lesser extent) national security arenas. These statements and policy platforms have often criticized China (sometimes very sharply) for its alleged transgressions, and proposed various supposedly new or more energetic policy moves designed to elicit more favorable Chinese behavior.
The China issue has frequently been a campaign point for past presidential candidates of both parties. In his 1992 campaign, Bill Clinton used the China issue to criticize the foreign policies of the incumbent George H. W. Bush Republican administration. Clinton used the 1989 government actions in Tiananmen Square to accuse Reagan and Bush of sending “secret emissaries to raise a toast with those who crushed democracy.”1 Similarly, in 2000, part of Al Gore’s foreign policy agenda was to strongly support normalized trade relations with China because “it is right for America’s economy and right for the cause of reform in China.” This gave George W. Bush a point on which to attack Gore.2 Again, in the 2012 election, Barack Obama took a shot at China by complaining to the WTO about Beijing’s imposition of more than $3 billion in duties on U.S. automobile exports, which the Obama administration regarded as an abuse of trade laws. Other than being a counterargument to Mitt Romney’s claim that Obama had not been tough enough on China’s trade policies, this was also a way to remind voters that Romney’s role as a private equity executive was linked to the outsourcing of American jobs to China.3
This year is no exception to the general pattern of a China focus in the foreign policy arena. Both of the presumptive presidential candidates, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republican Donald J. Trump, have addressed China, U.S.-China relations, and U.S. policy toward China at various times in their campaigns, often stressing the problems Beijing poses while offering various supposed new or improved policy solutions. That said, the 2016 presidential campaign arguably provides a particularly interesting example of the China views of presidential candidates. Given her long history as First Lady, U.S. senator, and public political figure, Clinton has an extensive track record of views on China and has in the past generated considerable controversy within that country over her stances. Chinese views on her during the current campaign to some extent reflect that history. In contrast, Trump is a relative newcomer to the national political arena, and has made far fewer comments on China. However he has arguably made up for that deficiency in recent months as an extremely provocative and energetic candidate, offering a variety of controversial statements on China or China-related aspects of U.S. foreign policy...
This article was originally published in China Leadership Monitor.
NOTES
1 Paul Haenle, “The China Factor in the U.S. Presidential Election: Separating Rhetoric from Action,” Carnegie-Tsinghua, October 17, 2012,
http://carnegietsinghua.org/publications/?fa=49700#3.
2 “Gore Tries to Sway Union on China Trade,” Associated Press, May 23, 2000,
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/may/23/news/mn-33119.
3 Jeff Mason, “Obama knocks China trade policy, Romney on campaign tour,” Reuters, July 5, 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-campaign-obamaidUSBRE8640WM20120705;
see also Tom Cohen, “Obama, Romney duel over China, immigration,” CNN Politics (website), September 18, 2012, http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/17/politics/campaign-wrap/.
I am indebted to Wenyan Deng for her critical assistance in the preparation of this article.
Read Full Text
About the Author
Former Senior Fellow, Asia Program
Swaine was a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and one of the most prominent American analysts in Chinese security studies.
- What Kind of Global Order Should Washington and Beijing Strive For?Other
- A Smarter U.S. Strategy for China in Four StepsCommentary
Michael D. Swaine
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of TimeCommentary
The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.
Marc Pierini
- A Black Sea Truce Is About Global Food Security, TooCommentary
A summer of escalation in the Black Sea has hurt Ukraine economically and is exacerbating world food security. A truce is needed—as is a broader reframing of Europe’s Ukraine strategy.
Thomas de Waal
- Taking the Pulse: Does the EU Have a Germany Problem?Commentary
Are Germany’s economic, industrial, and political struggles becoming a liability for the EU’s ability to rise to the geopolitical moment?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- The Speech Ursula von der Leyen Can’t DeliverCommentary
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is about to give her annual address on the state of the EU. Here’s what she won’t—but should—say.
Rym Momtaz
- How Europe’s 2027 Elections Could Test EU GovernanceArticle
Radical-right parties are expected to do well in upcoming elections in four of the EU's biggest member states. If successful, they could prevent the union from addressing key challenges ahead.
Stefan Lehne