New Dynamics in US-China Relations

Mingjiang Li, Kalyan M. Kemburi, Mingjiang Li, Kalyan M. Kemburi

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781317668220
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Política y relaciones internacionales
• Subtopic: Política

Washington's strategic pivot to Asia and Beijing's pursuit of new strategic and security interests in the region have led to increasing tensions between the two powers. US leaders have stressed that their increased interest in Asia is driven by a desire to benefit from the thriving regional economies, as well as to play the leading role in maintaining peace and stability in the region. However, Beijing is particularly concerned about US efforts to consolidate its alliances and deepen security partnerships with a number of regional states. Given the centrality of the two powers to the strategic stability and economic development of the region, these new dynamics in US-China relations must be properly understood and appropriately handled.

This book examines the growing Sino-US strategic rivalry in the Asia-Pacific alongside the strategies employed in the management of this relationship. In turn, it illuminates the sources of conflict and cooperation in US-China relations, looking specifically at maritime disputes, economic relations, energy security, non-traditional security, defence and strategic forces, and Taiwan. Finally, it explores the role of regional states in shaping US-China relations, and in doing so covers the influence of Japan, India, the Korean Peninsula, the Philippines, Vietnam, Myanmar, and Cambodia. With chapters from leading scholars and analysts this book deals with a diverse range of issues including strategic rivalry, expanding regional trade relations, non-traditional security issues, the role of energy security, maritime security and how Asian states view their relations with the US and China respectively.

New Dynamics in US-China Relations will be of huge interest to students and scholars of Asian politics, US politics, international relation and security studies, as well as practitioners involved in framing and implementing foreign, security and economic policy pertaining to the Asia Pacific.

Part I
Growing Sino-US strategic rivalry in the Asia-Pacific

1 US strategic rebalancing and the rise of China

Abraham M. Denmark

Introduction

The US–China relationship will have profound implications for the future course of global geopolitics. The ability of both sides to manage China’s rise peacefully in the context of a sustained American presence in the Asia-Pacific will be the most likely determinant of the future peace and prosperity in the world.

As the Asia-Pacific grows in geopolitical significance, and US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan draws to a close, the United States has begun to rebalance its strategic focus and investments accordingly. Though still in its opening stages, rebalancing has already driven several initiatives and has added new energy to preexisting efforts encompassing all elements of national power.

While rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific has already reinvigorated US engagement with the entire region, its implications for US–China strategic dynamics will be especially consequential for regional, and potentially global, stability and prosperity. This chapter will examine US strategic rebalancing and how it will affect power dynamics between the United States and China, as well as with the broader regional landscape. The chapter will conclude with a set of policy recommendations designed to sustain American leadership, as well as maintain regional stability and prosperity, in the Asia-Pacific.

Rebalancing: strategy of sustained attention and allocation

Rebalancing is not a revolution in America’s strategy toward the Asia-Pacific. Rather, it can best be understood as the latest evolution in America’s long-standing approach to the Asia-Pacific to sustain its access, presence and power in the region. While most analyses tend to focus on the policy initiatives that have been included within the rebalancing rubric, the most strategically significant implication of the policy is its promises of sustaining high-level attention and maintaining a continuous flow of resources and investments in an era of tightening budgetary constraints.

As the dominant power in global geopolitics, it is natural for the United States to focus on maintaining the geopolitical status quo. Yet the United States has to date wisely avoided the mistake that other dominant powers have made in the past: assuming that maintaining the status quo means opposing strategic change in any form. The power of nations naturally rises and falls, and it is incumbent on the dominant power to constantly maintain an understanding of trends in the international environment and adapt its strategy accordingly. At heart, this is the primary driver of strategic rebalancing – the latest evolution in US foreign and national security strategy and policy is to reflect current and emerging requirements.

While Washington understands that change and development among nations is inevitable, it also understands that its own security and prosperity rests on an international order that it created and has sustained since World War II. American foreign policy and national security strategy therefore is focused on preserving the sources of American power at home and on sustaining the fundamental elements of the international system abroad. Broadly speaking, these elements include open and free commerce; a just international order that emphasizes rights and responsibilities of all nations and a fidelity to the rule of law; open access by stable global commons; and the resolution of disputes without coercion or the use of force.

Since the end of the Cold War, global geopolitical power has gradually shifted toward the Asia-Pacific. The region is home to 40 per cent of the world’s population, produces over 50 per cent of global GDP, and includes some of the world’s fastest growing economies. It is also home to six of the world’s largest militaries, five of which are armed with nuclear weapons (six if you include the United States). For the first time in modern history, beginning in 2012, Asian military spending has outpaced that of Europe. While this is in part a testament to the tremendously beneficial peace that Europe enjoys, it is also a signal that Asia is rapidly becoming the world’s military centre of gravity.

Given the Asia-Pacific’s current and future geopolitical significance, the United States has a substantial interest in sustaining its regional access, power and influence. While the United States has consistently maintained a significant regional presence for decades, the Obama administration found American resources and strategic focus out of balance when it came to power in 2009. The United States was expending hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives in Afghanistan and Iraq, while the weight of geopolitical power was clearly elsewhere – in Asia.

The overriding goals of strategic rebalancing are to sustain and expand American influence throughout the region in order to ensure that the region develops in a manner that is compatible with American interests. To these ends, the US will utilize all elements of its considerable national power. Senior US officials have repeatedly stated that rebalancing is not targeted at any specific country, but rather is an adjustment reflecting the growing strategic importance of the Asia-Pacific. For example, speaking at the 2012 Shangri-La Security Dialogue, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta specifically rejected suggestions that rebalancing was a challenge to China.¹ Similarly, speaking at the US Naval Academy in April 2012, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated:

geopolitics today cannot afford to be a zero-sum game. A thriving China is good for America and a thriving America is good for China, so long as we both thrive in a way that contributes to the regional and global good.²

According to the Congressional Research Service, the US inaugurated rebalancing because of four interrelated factors:³

1. the growing economic importance of the Asia-Pacific region, and particularly China, to the United States’ economic future;
2. China’s growing military capabilities and its increasing assertiveness of claims to disputed maritime territory, with implications for freedom of navigation and the United States’ ability to project power in the region;
3. the winding down of US military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan; and
4. efforts to cut the US federal government’s budget, particularly the defence budget, which threaten to create a perception in Asia that the US commitment to the region will wane.

The United States therefore initiated a series of economic, diplomatic, and military initiatives eventually referred to as strategic rebalancing. It should be noted that many of the initiatives included in rebalancing – such as the push for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and military shifts in Southeast Asia – were initiated prior to the Obama administration coming to power. Nevertheless, the announcement of rebalancing raised the prominence of these initiatives, and committed the United States to investing the attention and resources necessary for their fulfillment. Even though rebalancing has already been a multi-year effort and will continue to develop for years to come, its contours have already begun to take shape.

Economic rebalancing

As the Asia-Pacific continues to emerge as the centre of global economic growth, it is imperative that the United States ensures its own long-term integration with the region. Further, it is in the interest of the United States that the region’s nascent integration be sustained and encouraged; integration efforts could be challenged by a regional propensity for protectionist policies and low-quality trade agreements. The heart of America’s approach has been to sustain principles of free trade and open commerce and foster further regional economic integration through high-quality bilateral and multilateral trade agreements.

Since the Korea–US Free Trade Agreement was ratified in 2010, Washington has focused on the TPP as the next phase in its efforts to promote regional economic integration with the United States.⁴ Japan’s announcement of its intention to join TPP negotiations is another significant step forward toward regional economic integration; this would make the TPP potentially encompass almost 800 million people and give it an annual combined GDP of 28 trillion dollars, an estimated 31 per cent of the global economy.⁵

Diplomatic rebalancing

The Asia-Pacific’s economic development is rapidly changing the region’s political dynamics. Countries that are more secure in their domestic economies and polities have begun to look at challenges and opportunities abroad, which demand a more active diplomatic posture. Regional forums have proliferated in recent years, many of which are tasked with ambitious mandates that include promoting economic integration, managing security issues, and addressing human rights.

To ensure the United States can participate in the region’s diplomatic developments and to shape regional politics toward American interests and principles, the US has enhanced its diplomatic engagement with the region in recent years, especially in Southeast Asia. As a result of rebalancing, high-level engagement with the Asia-Pacific is more frequent than ever before.

The United States has encouraged several regional multilateral organizations – such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) and the East Asia Summit (EAS) – to play a more significant role in influencing regional politics. Such engagement was likely driven by several factors, but two are prominent. First, Southeast Asia is quickly rising as a significant economic and political centre of power in its own right, and as a fulcrum between the economic power-houses of the Indian Ocean and the Western Pacific.

Second, encouraging Southeast Asian cooperation and cohesion enhances the region’s ability to resist possible Chinese assertiveness. This dynamic was brought into sharp relief during the 2010 meeting of the ARF in Hanoi. Several countries, including the United States, rebuked China for its assertive behaviour in the South China Sea. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s remarks that freedom of navigation was a national interest of the United States, and her call for peaceful, multilateral negotiations to resolve maritime disputes, clearly demonstrated that the United States intended to engage in the region’s most difficult challenges.

Of even greater significance was the decision for the United States to join the EAS, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attending in 2010 and President Obama attending in 2011 and 2012. While attendance alone was widely interpreted as a demonstration of Washington’s commitment to the region, the US has demonstrated its commitment to the mechanism by using its meetings to advance significant policy initiatives on issues as diverse as nuclear proliferation, the importance of ASEAN, managing maritime challenges, and addressing climate change.

Military rebalancing

Economic development has enabled several of the Asia-Pacific’s rising powers to expand their investments in military capabilities. In 2012, for the first time in modern history, military spending in Asia surpassed that of Europe, accounting for 20 per cent of worldwide military expenditure.⁶ Yet whether this investment will make the region more secure remains to be seen. While enh...