Sino-American Relations

Challenges Ahead

Yufan Hao

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN:
  9781409407973
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317054818
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

More than thirty years have passed since the normalization of Sino-American relations in 1979. The United States and China are becoming more interdependent economically, yet at the same time, significant movement and improvements in Sino-American relations are constrained by major economic, security, political and other differences between the two countries. This volume analyzes current problems and issues in Sino-American relations in the context of regional and global strategic patterns and their historical development in the last thirty years. These problems and issues such as the international financial crisis, development of global reserve currencies, regional conflicts and competition for international domination have significant impacts on both world powers, and important implications to the world economy and politics.

PART I
Past and Future

Chapter 1
Relations in Need of Better Management: Reflections on Sino-American Relations During the Past Three Decades1

NIU Jun

No one today can deny that, after 30 years of normalization, Sino-American relations are becoming increasingly important and complex, not only for the two countries themselves, but also for the world as a whole. In one of my previous papers, I summed up the basic characteristics of Sino-American relations at the beginning of the twenty-first century, which were “important,” “comprehensive,” “complicated,” and “mutually penetrating.”2 These basic characteristics will fundamentally determine the future development of Sino-American relations. So far, Sino-American relations have not significantly changed, and may not change dramatically for a long period of time. The basic characteristics of Sino-American relations are determined by a basic structure that has been constructed over the past three decades, during the process of reconciliation and normalization, and is also the result of the constant “transformation” of bilateral relations.

Taking the “transformation” of Sino-American relations as its starting point, this paper will observe and analyze the basic processes and main features of Sino-American relations in the past three decades, and suggest possible ways in which they will develop. It should be noted that this paper synthesizes a number of points developed in my previous research.

Sino-American Relations in Constant Transformation

Ever since the reconciliation of the 1970s, the Sino-American relationship has always been in a process of transformation, which is true even today. This means that the main impetus that has pushed forward the development of Sino-American relations as well as the broad content and structure of the bilateral relations have been changing all the time.

The Sino-American relationship has undergone ups and downs in the past 38 years since President Nixon’s visit to Beijing in 1972. The first period stretched from Nixon’s visit to China to Deng’s visit to the United States in 1979, a time during which Sino-American relations changed from hostility to reconciliation, and finally to normalization. Later, from the summer of 1989 to Jiang’s visit to the United States in 1997 and Clinton’s visit to China in 1998, Sino-American relations transformed from confrontation to reconciliation and finally to the joint announcement for the establishment of a strategic partnership.3 After the tense relations that marked the beginning of the George W. Bush Administration, Sino-American relations enjoyed six years of steady development, during which the leaders of the two countries reached a consensus to jointly build constructive and cooperative relations.4 In such a complicated and somewhat haphazard transformation from hostility to stability, the impetus, content and structure of Sino-American relations have undergone profound changes, which in turn has given birth to more productive and stronger relations between the two countries.

From the reconciliation in the 1970s, Sino-American relations have undergone three major transformations. The first transformation took place from the early 1970s through the end of the Cold War. Previous research has amply demonstrated that, during this period, the major driving force that propelled China and the United States to abandon confrontation and reconcile was their common interest in countering the Soviet Union’s expansion and ending the Indo-China War.5 During the so-called “honeymoon period” of Sino-American relations after Nixon’s visit to China through to the 1980s, the main driving force for the development of bilateral relations came from the common external threats faced by the two sides, which in turn helped the two nations to form a so-called “external forces driven” relationship.

The second transformation started from the end of the Cold War and lasted to the beginning of the twenty-first century. After the Cold War, both China and the United States seriously reviewed the bilateral relationship in a self-oriented way, each trying to position the relationship in a way that conformed to their own interests. The Chinese government put forward the principle of “enhance trust, reduce trouble, develop cooperation and avoid confrontation,” while the US government developed a “comprehensive engagement” policy toward China.6 It was during this running-in process that the leaders of China and the United States gradually reached the consensus that the relations between the two countries still had an important strategic value to both sides after the Cold War, so that the two countries needed to attend to the intrinsic value of bilateral relations and create a new basis for their normal and stable development. As they went through the ups and downs of this process of consensus-building, China and the United States established a new kind of “internal and external forces driven” relationship. “External forces” here refer to cooperation on global and regional security affairs, while “internal forces” refer to bilateral cooperation based on trade and economic ties. Emergencies such as NATO’s bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999 and the collision between Chinese and US military aircrafts in 2001 could lead to varying degrees of volatility, but could never lead to a fundamental reversal of bilateral relations.

It is important to recognize that, from the beginning of the twenty-first century to the present, Sino-American relations have gone through yet another significant change, or “third transformation,” and that new characteristics have been formed. In short, in the 30 years since normalization, especially after the running-in period at the beginning of this century, China and the United States have developed an “increasingly interdependent competitive relationship.” On the one hand, the degree of mutual dependence between China and the United States has been increasing and will continue to increase rapidly. The current financial crisis triggered by the United States, as well as the management of this crisis undertaken by China and the United States so far, are very likely to strengthen and accelerate the cooperation between the two countries and increase mutual dependence. On the other hand, it goes without saying that rivalries between the two sides in various fields are also increasing and intensifying. This is especially true with regard to their competing interests in the East Asia and Western Pacific regions, where the relative status of China and the United States has been, and is still, undergoing changes that are becoming favorable to China. At the same time, China’s global political status has enjoyed significant improvement. Owing to the existence of the recognized “structural contradictions” in Sino-American relations, competition does exist between the two countries in a number of important regional and global affairs.7 Of course, the existence of competition does not mean that the two countries would necessarily resort to confrontation and conflict.

All in all, words such as “competitive adversaries” or “cooperative partnership” cannot encapsulate the current complex state of Sino-American relations. In this respect, the establishment of “constructive cooperative relations” with China as proposed by the Bush Administration is quite a pragmatic and pertinent aim. After George W. Bush took office, Sino-American relations enjoyed a six-year period of stable and constant development collision and the two sides gained a more rational understanding of the complexity of bilateral relations and the possible range of conflict and cooperation between the two countries. As a consequence, leaders of the two countries now have more realistic targets when managing Sino-American relations. This is evident in the much decreased use of ostentatious rhetoric in bilateral contact. At the same time, the two sides have been striving to establish a multifaceted, multilevel, and multifunctional exchange platform to ensure that the two sides can control conflicts, manage crises, and settle disagreements and contradictions more effectively. The establishment of an effective management mechanism is one of the most important achievements of Sino-American relations during the early years of the twenty-first century.

Competition with Interdependence

As mentioned above, in the first eight years of the twenty-first century China and the United States have developed a “competitive relationship with increasing interdependence.” The nature of this relationship still reflects the coexistence of common interests and conflicts between China and the United States and the increasingly complex structure of interests and conflicts at different levels. The difference is that “gains”—that is, the common interests—are constantly expanding, and the degree of mutual influence, mutual complementaries, and mutual needs are also increasing in many areas.

At the beginning of the Clinton Administration in 1993, the US government showed deliberate enmity toward China. However, in the second term of Clinton’s office, the administration claimed that they wanted to set up a “strategic partnership” with China. At the beginning of George W. Bush Administration, the US government also stressed that China and the United States were not “strategic partners” but “strategic competitors.” However, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the US government proposed to set up “constructive cooperative relations” with China. The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (2002) stated that the Sino-American relationship is an important part of its “strategy to promote a stable, peaceful, and prosperous Asia-Pacific region”; the United States, it went on, welcomes the emergence of “a strong, peaceful, and prosperous China” and “seeks a constructive relationship with a changing China.”8 During 2008’s US presidential election China policy was no longer a focus of attention for the candidates, and the convergence of the two parties’ China policy indicated that a general consensus on US China policy was gradually being reached.

On the Chinese side, since Clinton took office in 1993 it had been made clear that “cooperation benefits both [countries], while confrontation injures both.” This statement clearly reflected the Chinese government’s judgment on the growing interdependence of China and the United States. In the 1993 APEC summit in Seattle, the Chinese government put forward the principle of “enhance trust, reduce trouble, develop cooperation and avoid confrontation.”9 Since then, no matter how the United States has changed its China policy or whatever vicissitudes have emerged in Sino-American relations, the Chinese government has always taken the stability and development of Sino-American relations as an important foreign policy goal. The handling of the global financial crisis by China and the United States indicates that after Obama took office Sino-American relations could be expected to continue to develop in a stable way.

The policies of the Chinese government and the US government and their handling of bilateral relations fully reflect the increasing interdependence of the two countries. Because of this growing interdependence, the two governments can reach consensus, overcome difficulties and further promote Sino-American relations, despite the existing structural contradictions. It is clear that the “growing interdependence” has become a driving force for the progress and a brake against any retrogression in Sino-American relations. Both China and the United States benefit from this interdependence. This is also true for the world as a whole and the Sino-American relationship is today one of the most important bilateral relationships in current world politics. From a macro perspective, the interdependence of China and the United States is asymmetrical. Although it is not always the case in every area and at every stage, generally speaking, China’s dependence on the United States is greater than the United States’ dependence on China. This is an important reason why the United States can often take the initiative in Sino-American relations and most of the twists and turns in Sino-American relations in the past 30 years have been caused by negative actions from the US side. We will need to wait and see to judge whether the current American financial crisis, which has impacted more seriously on the United States, will lead to a fundamental change to the asymmetric “interdependence” of China and the United States.

‘Competition’ between the two countries can be construed as having two meanings. On the one hand, China and the United States have disagreements and conflicts in many areas of bilateral relations and global affairs, and the process of problem solving usually tests the influence of each country. Those areas are complicated and cover such fields as geopolitics, the economy, culture, and human rights. The main issues involved in Sino-American relations are economic and trade issues, the issues relating to China’s national unity and sovereignty, such as the Taiwan and Tibet iss...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• List of Abbreviations
• Notes on Contributors
• Introduction
• PART I: PAST AND FUTURE
• PART II: STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES
• PART III: SHARED GOVERNANCE
• PART IV: THE CHALLENGES AHEAD
• Index