• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
United States and China Need Leaders, Not Politicians

Source: Getty

Article

United States and China Need Leaders, Not Politicians

Leaders in both the United States and China need to move beyond heated rhetoric and political electoral considerations and look for areas of cooperation in building a constructive bilateral agenda.

Link Copied
By Douglas H. Paal
Published on Jun 15, 2010
Program mobile hero image

Program

Asia

The Asia Program in Washington studies disruptive security, governance, and technological risks that threaten peace, growth, and opportunity in the Asia-Pacific region, including a focus on China, Japan, and the Korean peninsula.

Learn More

As election season in the United States heats up, America’s bilateral relationship with China could drift further into troubled waters as sensitive issues are pushed to the surface by American candidates competing for electoral victories. This is complicated on the Chinese side as Communist Party officials jockey for top positions ahead of the country’s leadership change in 2012. But leaders need to move beyond the heated rhetoric and look for possibilities for cooperation on economics, security, and China’s rising influence. 

Despite Beijing issuing sharp words and threats over U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and President Obama’s meeting with the Dalai Lama in the White House, leaders from the two countries were able to compose their differences long enough for President Hu to attend March’s nuclear security summit meeting in Washington. When the top leaders engage each other, priorities become more rational, but when they don't the relationship begins to deteriorate.

As seen during the less than successful Strategic and Economic Dialogue in Beijing last month and the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore last week, anger and frustration are now outpacing structured efforts at building a common agenda.

On economics, expectations have been high for months that China will adjust its method for currency valuation and reduce the trade advantages it has gained by pegging the renminbi to the U.S. dollar. Senators Schumer and Graham are openly threatening trade action against China through legislation if this does not occur and Treasury Secretary Geithner publicly urged China to act. But the underlying situation has changed. 

The bilateral trade deficit with China has been dramatically reduced and U.S. exports to China are soaring. With the collapse of the euro, China’s currency undervaluation has been reduced by more than half against a trade-weighted basket. To increase the value of the renminbi now would reduce China’s exports to its largest market, the European Union. This would cost Chinese jobs, slow domestic growth, and eventually hurt the United States as exports to China fall. Many expect a cascade of trade disputes brought by both sides before the November elections.

For security matters, questions of military-to-military ties, North Korea, and Iran are all testing the relationship between Washington and Beijing. Defense Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, recently raised the decibel level of complaints about China’s continued refusal to engage in serious military-to-military talks about its expanding capabilities and intentions. Chinese military figures are increasingly outspoken about U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, activities in the South China Sea, and spy flights and maritime surveillance opposite China. These are not idle remarks. Both militaries are increasing their activities in the Western Pacific and are frequently operating at uncomfortably close distances—a serious incident is just waiting to happen. China needs to drop its preconditions to resumed talks between the militaries.

In the aftermath of the sinking of a South Korean corvette by a North Korean torpedo in March, Secretary Clinton worked hard to win Chinese support for United Nations Security Council condemnation of Pyongyang. But Beijing has resisted and it’s clear that China’s most senior leaders put stability in North Korea ahead of every other consideration, including nuclear proliferation. China did vote for new UN sanctions on Iran, but China sees little to be gained by joining criticism of North Korea. 

Finally, there is no avoiding discussion of the growing sense in the United States of surging Chinese economic, military and possibly political power. And on the other side, there is a perception that the United States is beset by financial, fiscal, technical and regional challenges. That President Obama’s political advisors felt he had to again put off an important trip to Guam, Indonesia, and Australia while the BP oil spill is uncapped and dominating the news is but one glaring example of a country that is widely seen as stumbling.

The accumulating American setbacks in Afghanistan, imminent departure of combat troops from Iraq, and blockbuster fiscal deficits without end are feeding Chinese self-confidence and assertiveness. Many relevant Chinese officials know China is still far from displacing American power now—if ever—but it is not in their political interest to try to defy the rising tide of triumphal sentiment at home.

Domestic politics in the United States and China jeopardize the overall relationship. Politicians need to rise above electoral considerations and provide a constructive agenda at home and abroad. Economic concerns, strategic issues, and China’s changing international role all deserve high-level attention from leaders, not politicians.

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.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    America’s Future in a Dynamic Asia

      Douglas H. Paal

  • Q&A
    U.S.-China Relations at the Forty-Year Mark
      • +1

      Douglas H. Paal, Tong Zhao, Chen Qi, …

Douglas H. Paal
Distinguished Fellow, Asia Program
Douglas H. Paal
North AmericaUnited StatesEast AsiaChinaPolitical ReformEconomyTradeSecurityMilitaryForeign Policy

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 Endowment for International Peace

  • Implementing the Biden Administration’s China Strategy
    Report
    Implementing the Biden Administration’s China Strategy

    At the heart of Biden’s approach to China was the consolidation of a framework for strategic competition with an eye toward coexistence.

      • Senkai Hsia

      Christopher S. Chivvis, Senkai Hsia

  • Article
    What Could a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement Do for U.S.-India Ties?

    India and the United States are close to concluding a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement (RDPA) that will allow firms from the two countries to sell to each other’s defense establishments more easily. While this may not remedy the specific grievances both sides may have regarding larger bilateral issues, an RDPA could restore some momentum, following the trade deal announcement.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Trump and Netanyahu speaking
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Diverging U.S. and Israeli Goals in Iran Are Making the Endgame Even Murkier

    The cracks between Trump and Netanyahu have become more pronounced, particularly over energy and leadership targets.

      • Eric Lob

      Eric Lob

  • Seoul traffic at night
    Commentary
    Emissary
    How the Hormuz Closure Is Testing the Korean President’s Progressive Agenda

    The crisis is not just a story of energy vulnerability. It’s also a complex, high-stakes political challenge.

      Darcie Draudt-Véjares

  • Paper
    A Tight Spot: Challenges Facing the Russian Oil Sector Through 2035

    Russian oil production is remarkably resilient to significant price changes, but significant political headwinds may lead to a drop regardless of economics.

      • Sergey Vakulenko

      Sergey Vakulenko

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.