u.s. expert: u.s. strategy toward china must change
2024-10-01
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
reference news network reported on october 1an article entitled "washington's china strategy must change" was published on the website of the us magazine "foreign policy" on september 24. the author is evan, chairman and ceo of chubb insurance group and executive vice chairman of the board of directors of the national committee on u.s.-china relations. · greenberg. the full text is excerpted as follows:
i have spent the past 40 years starting and operating businesses throughout asia, including china. during this time, i watched u.s. attitudes toward the region change under one president after another. over the past decade, bipartisan priorities in washington have increasingly converged on protecting american workers from global competition. in the process, the u.s. strategic community became keen to regard the u.s.-china competition as a new cold war.
this emerging policy orthodoxy is misguided and counterproductive. the next president of the united states should recalibrate its asia policy and strengthen deterrence while promoting regional economic integration. without such a shift, u.s. leadership and interests may face erosion and damage.
the united states and china are both big countries. they have very different visions for the future of the international system. but unlike the cold war, washington and beijing are in the only international system in which they are vying for greater influence.
during the cold war, the soviet union was an isolated but resource-rich economy whose industrial and economic power never came close to that of the united states. in contrast, china is deeply integrated into the global economy. china's share of the global economy dwarfed even that of the soviet union at its peak. china is the largest trading partner of more than 120 countries and regions.
the economies of the united states and china are highly interdependent. despite policies in recent years to reduce interdependence and the united states' policy to control exports of dual-use products that may contribute to china's military advancement, the two countries' recent annual trade volume is still close to $700 billion.
leading companies in both countries remain intricately linked through dense global value chains.
this depth of interdependence does not limit washington's requirements to defend key interests but rather heightens them. the extent of u.s. economic exposure to china requires washington to use every tool at its disposal to protect intellectual property and guard against espionage to gain military or economic advantage.
in 1992, when i first started doing business in china, there were not many cars on the streets of shanghai. people traveled by bicycle and relied on human-powered coal trucks to heat their homes. today, shanghai has a stunning modern skyline. hundreds of millions of chinese have escaped extreme poverty in one generation.
the center of u.s.-china competition is asia. if china wants to replace the united states' global leadership, it must first dislodge the united states from its leadership position in the region where china is located. the region will become a major engine of the global economy in the coming decades. i see a general desire in asia for prosperity and for stabilizing forces such as the rule of law and balance among major powers. however, the united states and china have very different visions for the region's future.
if washington wants to outmaneuver beijing and maintain its leadership, it needs to accept several troubling truths. for example, the united states cannot overemphasize its values as a source of attraction. washington has exaggerated the appeal of human rights and democratic principles in the asia-pacific region. in my experience, i find that the united states’ approach to promoting its political values is simply unconvincing in this region. in asia, the concept of individual rights is balanced with support for collective rights.
in the long-term competition with china, the united states’ global alliance network is its asymmetric advantage. if the united states frames its foreign policy around constant confrontation with china, it will have a hard time finding followers. maintaining this network requires ongoing attention and the pursuit of common interests. this is where the rhetoric of america’s leaders and aspiring leaders matters. ideological rhetoric that advocates a new cold war or a complete decoupling of the world's two largest economies will distance the united states from its partners.
we are competing for relative power, not absolute power, which is consistent with the concept of coexistence. direct dialogue with china through diplomatic channels is a way to explore the conditions for such coexistence. engagement is not weakness, nor is it surrender. this is an acknowledgment of reality. the united states has the ability to exercise strategic patience even while steadfastly defending our interests and principles.
relative to china, the united states maintains a leading advantage in overall national strength. u.s. policymakers should act with the confidence these advantages give us, rather than using poor historical analogies to justify policies that are self-inflicted at home and divisive with allies abroad. (compiled/liu zongya)
