Paper
Douglas H. Paal
{
"authors": [
"Douglas H. Paal"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Military",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
China Threats Walk a Fine Line in Run-up to U.S. Election
Portrayals of the Obama administration's return to Asia as an effort to contain China exaggerate competition between Washington and Beijing. As the 2012 presidential election draws near, U.S. officials must adopt a prudent approach to China in the face of mounting anti-China rhetoric.
Published on Dec 19, 2011
Source: China Daily
US President Barack Obama was considered to have come back "winner" from his 10-day visit to the region in November. Obama himself struck a stern note about trade and currency after meeting with China's President Hu Jintao at the APEC meeting. Some commentators in China detected an anti-China flavor in the Trans-Pacific Partnership's emphasis on "high quality" trade agreements, and the initial exclusion of China as a party to the talks. They did not note that China has, in fact, been signing its own deals of varying quality and scope without attempting to include the US.
The new American access to a training facility in Australia was portrayed as adding to Washington's string of bases in the region and placing the US in a better position to contend with China over the South China Sea issue and to be out of range of China's conventional missiles. The fact that this will be a training ground and not a base, with an initial detachment of 250 troops envisioned to grow only to 2,500, was less remarked upon.
Moreover, the remote distance of Australia from China and the unlikelihood of scenarios where the US Marines will play a role in any future conflict with China make the "anti-China base" story line a fiction.
In the run-up to the East Asian Summit (EAS), the US contended that the EAS should become the regional forum for political and security issues, in contrast with APEC's economic focus. And the US proposed an agenda, including maritime security and non-proliferation.
China sought to exclude discussion on maritime security from the agenda, arguing that maritime territorial disputes should be dealt with bilaterally and not in a multilateral setting. However, the South China Sea issue was finally presented on the table. This led to another round of stories about China being confronted by a region being led effectively by the US.
Finally, Obama's decision to dispatch Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Myanmar was portrayed as essentially a play to pry away from China's grip one of its closest allies. Little effort was made to illustrate that the Myanmar story line is essentially a domestically driven one, not really the result of a new great game of strategic rivalry between the US and China. However, that real reform in Myanmar will have indirect implications for its relations with the two powers.
In general, the media coverage, perhaps inevitably, was too stark about the competition between Washington and Beijing. In fact, the US is just re-engaging in the region after more than a decade of reduced attention. That inattention started with the Asian financial crisis of 1997, when the Bill Clinton administration opted more out than in, and former Chinese president Jiang Zemin successfully stepped up China's diplomatic game.
But none of the lingering territorial, proliferation, military, economic, or other issues that beset the region, can be settled ultimately without China's cooperation or acquiescence, and Obama and the other leaders realize that.
Cold War rhetoric is not appropriate because the circumstances in the region are not of a Cold War nature. There is vigorous trade and investment across the region, and tourists and students are exchanged in huge numbers. China does not yet pose an existential or ideological threat.
But then there is politics. With an election year looming in the US, and a generational transition pending on the Chinese mainland and election in Taiwan, plus elections in Malaysia, Russia and Republic of Korea, 2012 will be a sensitive year politically.
Already, the Republican candidates for US president are lining up to take rhetorical shots at China. Obama's tough talk on trade in Hawaii suggests he is not going to allow himself to be outflanked and put on the defensive over China. He has already suffered from the media spin on his visit to China in 2009, which said he had been too weak.
The trick for American foreign policy officials will be to persuade China's officials and leaders that the US remains serious about cooperation with China, despite the rising rhetoric, and the need to occasionally to push China back.
About the Author
Douglas H. Paal
Distinguished Fellow, Asia Program
Paal previously served as vice chairman of JPMorgan Chase International and as unofficial U.S. representative to Taiwan as director of the American Institute in Taiwan.
- America’s Future in a Dynamic Asia
- U.S.-China Relations at the Forty-Year MarkQ&A
- +1
Douglas H. Paal, Tong Zhao, Chen Qi, …
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 Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
- Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is InsaneCommentary
The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.
Michael Young
- Corrupted by Absolute PowerCommentary
In an interview, Marc Lynch discusses his new book decrying the post-1990 U.S.-dominated order in the Middle East.
Michael Young
- Why Does the Middle East Suffer “Forever Wars”?Commentary
Because perpetual conflict enhances control, offers economic benefits, and allows leaders to ignore popular preferences.
Angie Omar
- Where is the Groundwork for Lebanon’s Negotiations With Israel?Commentary
A prerequisite of serious talks is that the country’s leadership consolidates majority national support for such a process.
Michael Young
- A Military Balance Sheet in the U.S. and Israeli War With IranCommentary
In an interview, Jim Lamson discusses the ongoing regional conflict and sees an unclear picture when it comes to winners and losers.
Michael Young
