Atlantic Community:Open Think Tank Article "Hedging Is Wise As China Rises"

Hedging Is Wise As China Rises

Greg Randolph Lawson: As China rises, many questions loom about its trajectory. The United States must be prepared to confront everything from continuing economic interdependence to outright military conflict. However, too much emphasis on either extreme would be unwise, thus the U.S. must continue walking a tightrope

Irrespective of what anyone may say, the People's Republic of China is an enigma. As it celebrates its 60^th Anniversary many questions loom. For the United States, answers to these questions are necessary to calibrate an effective overall foreign policy.

For many US commentators, China's rise as the next "Superpower" is inevitable. For others, it is an ancient, multi-cultural empire that oscillates through cycles of both administrative centralization and centrifugal stress, thus not necessarily representing a snarling dragon at all, but a potentially fragile state that could be blown apart by unexpected geopolitical storms. For some it is an indispensable linchpin to a reordered global economy. And for others, it is a rising military threat that must be hedged or contained so as to not destabilize East Asia and the world at large.

Which of these visions is the most closely related to reality? There is no unambiguous answer. In many ways, they are all true and none true. This is what makes the development of policy related to China so perplexing.

For the United States, this is especially so. It is common knowledge that China owns a substantial portion of US debt and that it has been one of the key creditors that has allowed the US to go on both a consumer and government spending spree of epic proportions. For a time, it seemed that this was a mutually beneficial arrangement. Indeed, phrases like "Chimerica" have come into usage in order to reflect the symbiotic relationship between American consumer needs and the Chinese need to practice a neo-mercantilist policy of exporting for economic growth.

This has led essentially every US Administration since Nixon and Kissinger opened the door to Beijing in the 70s to play an intriguing double game. The current Obama Administration is no different. It recognizes the key relationships that have been developed in the private sector between US firms and China and well understands its national indebtedness. However, it also feels it must give a little to its political constituency by placing tariffs on certain products, thus opening the door to a possible trade war. This is really no different from the second Bush Administration which recognized the same economic relationship, but occasionally had to sound "alarms" at Chinese military expenditures and what they might portend in the future in order to assuage concerns of ever nervous hawks.

Indeed, the American policy to China will likely always remain somewhat stuck playing this kind of double game. The need for economic cooperation between the two powers and the growing need for cooperation on issues of global warming will remain. However, friction will also be a permanent fixture of this relationship. Not only economic competition, but military competition seems very possible given the intricacies and demands associated with securing access to natural resources for heavily industrialized nations.

It should also be noted that American fears of a "peer rival" combined with Chinese nationalism and a not unwarranted sense of having been damaged by both Western and Japanese colonial powers in the past, will conspire to make the relationship rather rocky at times even if it never declines to the point of outright belligerency.

So what should America do? It must do what it always has: hedge its bets.

A naïve belief in perpetual economic interdependence could leave America "shocked" and woefully unprepared if relations suddenly deteriorate over any number of issues like Taiwan or access to resources. Conversely, a predetermined mindset that conflict is inevitable will assure such an outcome does materialize.

America and China will have to stumble along, cooperating where they must on economic issues and, potentially, on global warming. Meanwhile, America must also retain a robust presence in East Asia while maintaining its relations with other key powers like India, South Korea, and, most pivotally, Japan. A continued naval presence as well as further enhancements of land and sea based missile defense systems must remain a priority.

'Hedging' often seems a dirty word for those that prefer moral absolutes. In the case of China's rise, such absolutes are not possible. The nature of the regime, and the nature of the international system itself preclude such certainty. No matter how China develops, America must be prepared. It cannot afford not to be.

Mr. Lawson is the Director of Communications for a US based political advocacy organization and is a life long observer of political and foreign affairs.

Related material from the Atlantic Community

I like this Article! What's this?

Comments

October 25, 2009

May Hu, NYU, (5)

I like this comment! What's this?

Should the US continue to maintain a strong military presence in East Asia is debatable in my opinion. China has increasingly asserted itself as the regional hegemon and that position has become more widely accepted, whether other states choose to openly admit it. The delicate relationship between N.Korea and S.Korea will no doubt continue to rely upon US influence and power to maintain open dialogue and negotiations, but China will play an increasingly important role to maintain order and stability in the region. Japan is still suffering from its domestic political and economic issues, yet even it has ambitions to re-establish its military and once again become a major international player. No doubt the US will align its interest with Japan to counter the rise of China. Another issue of importance is that of Taiwan and China. Though recently under a new administration in Taiwan, there have been some improvement between the two, there is still much tension. Obviously Taiwan will look to the US for military back up should China really take an aggressive approach, but what will the US do then? Would it risk open war with China? I think the US should re-evaluate its real interests in the Asia-Pacific region. It has already seen the consequences of over-extending itself and the negative repercussions that follow, both abroad and in its own domestic politics. I feel the US would be better off trying to negotiate better foreign economic policies with China rather than trying to maintain its police-like status in the East Asia region.