THE NEW MODEL OF RELATIONS US-CHINA IN ASIA-PACIFIC

ACADEMIC (INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS) SEMINAR

The University of Hong Kong

Thursday, 24 April 2014.

MAIN ISSUES on the model of relations US-CHINA, to this date:

(a) On first instance: AVOID CONFRONTATION (however, is it enough to avoid it?);

(b) DILEMMA: confrontation vs. COOPERATION;

(c) Does the People’s Republic of CHINA (PRC) have ENOUGH LEVERAGE to oppose

interests of the US?

In the case of the United States of AMERICA (US), the Obama administration has been crucial

in recent years, as point of inflection to re-define (International) relations between his country

and the PRC…

However, despite efforts to harmonize the relation between the two powers there is ONE

IMPORTANT QUESTION that lingers still nowadays:

Is there MUTUAL SUSPICION between these two great powers (such as, the classic

example of rivalry between the established super-power and the quickly-rising power)?

In this regard, there are TWO SIDES OF THE STORY:

1. On one side, Obama has generated suspicion among the leadership of the PRC;

2. On other hand, there is some generalized American suspicion of the PRC intentions…

There is a LIST OF 3 ISSUES where there is a need to find common grounds:

· Global ECONOMY (balance of power);

· SECURITY Interests (in Asia-Pacific, even between their respective allies);

· VALUES in International POLITICS (Western culture vs. Confucian values)...

It is also very important to bear in mind that WE DO NOT LIVE IN TIMES OF THE COLD WAR

any more: confrontation and showdown of political and military capabilities is obsolete…

The problem is that confrontational paradigms are not clear nowadays, as they used to be

before: The US and the PRC are not the only two factors in the balance of power in Asia -Pacific

(there are other significant players, such as the Philippines, Japan, the two Koreas, the other 9

ASEAN Nations, even Australia and New Zealand, among others)…

However, CONFRONTATION HAS SHIFTED from military might and capabilities, to other fields

such as trade, politics, finance, culture… Especially since we are living now in a MULTI-POLAR

WORLD!

· North and South hemispheres;

· East and West (and even the Middle-East);

· First World, Third World, and Newly Industrialized Countries (NIC’s);

· G-7, BRICS, G-20, etc…

And even now, perhaps more than ever before, HONG KONG is meant to play a very important

role (AS rather NEUTRAL GROUND), at least in the fields of trade and finance…

CONSENSUS BUILDING IS THE KEY: especially in aspects such as approaching ASEAN,

improve negotiation techniques and panels, and avoid adversarial approach in transactions…

Generally, try to create a WIN-WIN OUTCOME within the International Politics arena, in the

long run, FOR AND AMONG ALL PLAYERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES IN THE REGION.

PIVOT? STRATEGIC “RE-BALANCING”?

Such Foreign Policy of Obama in the Asia-Pacific region has generated suspicion among most

of the Chinese political and diplomatic leadership…

Before the financial crisis of 2008, the PRC had a more friendly relationship with its neighbors,

but now the PRC leaders ask: What do Americans mean with “re-balancing”?

Would “re-balancing” mean to make friends with China’s adversaries? Strengthen ties with

them?

Are the relevant TERRITORIAL DISPUTES in the region (intervention), one significant part of

the US “re-balancing” policy?

(a) The South China Sea;

(b) The Diayous/ Senkakus & Paracel Islands;

(c) Philippines;

(d) The historical conflict with Taiwan;

(e) Even China vs. India…

However, since the financial crisis of 2008, the PRC has created more enemies in the Asia-

Pacific region;

So, are Southeast Asian nations now claiming for the US to protect them? Especially because

their leaders now want to talk to the US “about China”…

In the current context of US-PRC relations in Asia-Pacific, there are still TWO MAIN POINTS

OF CONFLICT:

1. MILITARY BUILD-UP of the US in the region;

2. REINFORCEMENT of the PRC STRATEGIC RELATIONSHIPS within and outside Asia

(Russia, North Korea, Venezuela in Latin America, and some African countries, etc.)…

The dilemma in the overall current conflict in the Asia -Pacific region resides mainly in the fact

that, whereas America has the military muscle, China has quickly enhanced its economic

prowess.

Also, it is very important to remember that now we live in times of Interdependence (which has

changed paradigms), so an ADVERSARIAL APPROACH MOST LIKELY WILL HURT BOTH

ECONOMIES…

The conflict issue referred before tends to become an increasingly delicate issue, when we also

consider that the NEIGHBORING COUNTRIES SEEK TO HEDGE, or protect, THEIR

INTERESTS between the two powers:

· On one hand, not betting only in favor of the US;

· On the other hand, not betting only in favor of the PRC;

The RESULT in this game of interests, is finally a POLITICAL-ECONOMIC STALEMATE…

Then, WHO WILL CONTAIN WHO?

America has the (military) capacity and muscle to contain China, but it will hurt itself and

work against its own interests;

On the other hand, China needs to be a more proactive and responsible leader in the

Global arena, but;

The PRC has gained more leverage in the US economy, having owned a visible fraction of

all the secured debt in America…

Anyway, is it possible to build cooperation?

YES, but only with gradual, consistent and long-term TRUST-BUILDING!

In matter of multilateral relations in Asia, there have been good intentions, but : How to think and

adopt, implement the correct policy?

Compare and assess relationships between American and Chinese leaders:

· George Bush, and Hu Jintao (it was more passive, and stable (?));

· Barack Obama, and Xi Jinping (has been more dynamic, but with more ups-and-downs)…

Of course, the US remains as the sole superpower, but the PRC now acts (and IS) the

challenging, rising superpower (or great-power, at least), and they both possess a huge stake of

interests in Asia-Pacific, then:

· Both of them (the US and the PRC) have to WORK ON PAR, in an EQUAL-TO-EQUAL basis;

· But the PRC has to manage better its relations in the region, especially considering that the

Chinese nation has been a strong beneficiary of Globalization.

As conclusive remark: COLLABORATION IS THE KEY to building the NEW MODEL of

relationships BETWEEN GREAT POWERS in the arena of International Politics…

Final QUESTIONS and Comments:

1. What would be China’s position in the Ukraine conflict, or generally in Eastern Europe?

(Taking into account the historical relations between empires)

The PRC is not now in a position to oppose the US military interests. China’s enemy is

China itself, it still has to attend many domestic affairs, before aspiring to become a

challenge to the interests of other great powers (such as the US, the European Union, or

even Russia), or become also a more proactive leader in the Global political and law-

enforcement arena…

So far, it is better if the PRC stays neutral to military conflicts, better working in promoting

conciliation and peacemaking.

2. At what extent has the status-quo changed about the balance of power in the Asia-Pacific

region, or at what extent can we expect it to change in the foreseeable future?

At what extent should it be compelled to change?

This remains as an open question, especially because, at least from a point of view outside

China’s borders, many people, including policy experts and academics, do not know

exactly where is China standing now, or what is the current state of Chinese affairs

(basically, the case of a “black box”: this lets us know that it may be also important that the

PRC should work more on transparency, regarding its foreign policy)…