Commentary
Dmitri Trenin
{
"authors": [
"Dmitri Trenin"
],
"type": "commentary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Japan"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
Commentary
PLA and the Pentagon: Get Connected!
The intensification of the Sino-Japanese standoff in the East China Sea calls for better communication between the Chinese People’s Liberation Army and the Pentagon.
Published on Dec 2, 2013
Of the events that happened last week, one of the most important was the Chinese imposition of an air defense notification zone over the Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea, claimed by China but held by the Japanese who call them Senkaku. The obvious change in the status quo in the disputed area provoked an immediate U.S. reaction in the form of two unarmed B-52 bombers flying over the islands, ignoring the Chinese demand for prior notification. The Japanese and the South Koreans followed up by sending their own warplanes. Even though later the Obama administration told U.S. commercial airlines to follow Beijing’s requirements, the situation in the East China Sea has acquired a new, more worrisome quality.
The loose war talk is getting louder in China, and war fears are getting higher in Japan, where for the first time since WWII a National Security Council is being formed and a secrets act has been passed. It is still incredible that the two countries which are linked by a vibrant trade relationship and hundreds of flights per day can actually go to war, but tensions are rising, not subsiding. The United States, by its bold move, has sought to restore the status quo, but it has also raised the stakes for itself and for China as the two countries are making their points regarding their respective strategic positions in the Western Pacific.
At minimum, the intensification of the Sino-Japanese standoff in the East China Sea calls for better communication between the People’s Liberation Army and the Pentagon. While China and the United States are not in the Cold War bind like the United States and the Soviet Union once were, they would benefit from having agreements preventing incidents in the air and at sea. The practice of breaking off contact between the Chinese and U.S. militaries in response to some political moves is fraught with dangers of misperception, miscalculation and, eventually, a collision. The world has had its share of big fear over Cuba and Berlin. It need not revisit it in Asia.
About the Author
Dmitri Trenin
Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
Trenin was director of the Carnegie Moscow Center from 2008 to early 2022.
- Mapping Russia’s New Approach to the Post-Soviet Space
- What a Week of Talks Between Russia and the West RevealedCommentary
Dmitri Trenin
Recent Work
Carnegie India 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 India
- AI in Outer Space: Opportunities, Risks, and the Governance GapCommentary
How is AI reshaping space security, creating governance challenges, and where does international diplomacy stand today?
Tejas Bharadwaj, Almudena Azcárate Ortega
- Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with ChinaPaper
After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.
Saheb Singh Chadha
- Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026Article
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
- India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible PathwaysArticle
A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.
Rajiv Bhatia
- The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor CooperationCommentary
The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.
Shruti Mittal
