Pages

Share This

Showing posts with label China-US relations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label China-US relations. Show all posts

Thursday, March 25, 2021

US can't accept painful fact that China is now its equal: Martin Jacques

Chinese diplomats state China's position in the opening remarks of the China-US high-level strategic dialogue in Anchorage, Alaska, on Thursday local time. Photo: cnsphoto

 

We learnt two things from the China-US high-level dialogue held in Alaska last week.


The first was from the session at the beginning when the media were present. This would normally be conducted in a polite and somewhat anodyne fashion dressed up in diplomatic nicety. It could not have been more different. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan commenced the proceedings and made some sharp criticisms of China. In response, Yang Jiechi, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and director of the Office of the Central Leading Group for Foreign Affairs, gave a bravura performance. Far from pulling his punches or couching his words in diplomatic language, he let his American counterparts have it with both barrels, challenging not just the US position but its very legitimacy. And all this before the world's media.

Let me quote some of his choice barbs: "When I entered this room, I should have reminded the US side of paying attention to its tone." "The US is not qualified to say it wants to speak to China from a position of strength." "China and the international community…uphold the UN-centered international order…not what is advocated by a small number of countries of the so-called 'rules-based' international order." "On human rights, we do hope the US will do better on human rights. The challenges facing the US in human rights are deep-seated. They did not just emerge over the past four years, such as Black Lives Matter." "On cyber-attacks, let me say that whether it's the ability to launch cyber-attacks or the technologies that could be deployed, the US is the champion." "The US does not represent international opinion and neither does the Western world."

While delivering these shots, Yang spoke with passion but never raised his voice. There were no cheap jibes. He occupied the high ground in the argument and left the Americans bewildered and belittled.

This is not normally the Chinese manner on such occasions. It is a sign that something has changed. There is a new sense of confidence on the part of the Chinese. That they are - or can - win the argument. That they are at least the equals of America. That they speak from a position of strength and America from a position of weakness. That history is on their side. It feels like the diplomatic equivalent of moving from "keeping a low profile" to "striving for achievement," or from being a relative spectator in the global system to becoming a major architect. The Americans have hitherto always thought of themselves as running the show; the shock visible in the body language of Blinken and Sullivan was the realization, conscious or unconscious, that this was no longer the case. The same was apparent in the Western media. The BBC, for example, invariably critical of China, reported it with an unfamiliar neutrality, as if stunned by the role reversal.

The second thing we found out from the dialogue (albeit already evident from the signals emanating from the White House), was that there will be no return to the status quo ante. That Biden is desperately anxious to appear as hostile to China as Trump was before him. The underlying forces at work here are very deep. America is in the process of coming to the painful realization that China is now its equal. But it cannot bring itself to accept or acquiesce in what is already an historical reality. That is why there can be no return to 1972 (Mao-Nixon Accord) or 1979 (US recognition of China). The relationship that prevailed then between China and the US was entirely different: the US was the giant, China a minnow. That was the basis of the US-China relationship for 45 years from 1972 until Trump torpedoed it in 2017, even though, of course, by the end China's rise was already undermining America's assumptions about the relationship. The realization that China was on the verge of overtaking the US economically, that China enjoyed a huge global presence, that it was already in effect its equal, came as an enormous shock to the American psyche and body politic.

Addicted to its hubris, it failed to see the blatantly obvious coming. As there can be no return to the past, the China-US relationship, so crucial to both and to the whole world, will have to be rethought on an entirely new basis, namely one of mutuality and equality. The problem is that the US is very far from thinking like this. How America needs for these times a giant like Henry Kissinger: someone who understands - and admires - China in a very profound way.

For the time being we must think in more mundane ways. Cooperation will be confined to the foothills, it will be a case of issue by issue, a bit here and a bit there, rebuilding contacts and communications between the two countries, ending as best can be done the toxicity and wanton destruction wrought by Donald Trump. Even this will not be easy but it ought, at a pinch, to be possible, with climate change offering the most important challenge and opportunity. For without cooperation between the two countries, climate change will imperil the very future of the planet and humanity.

The author was until recently a Senior Fellow at the Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge University. He is a Visiting Professor at the Institute of Modern International Relations at Tsinghua University and a Senior Fellow at the China Institute, Fudan University. Follow him on twitter @martjacques. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

 

RELATED ARTICLES
 
 

China's 'wolf-warrior diplomacy' in Alaska meeting impresses world; behind it is the West-East battle: observers

The Chinese delegates' hard-hitting remarks at the talks, though new to their US counterparts and many foreign politicians, seemingly didn't surprise the international community greatly, as observers believe the remarks match China's national strength and international status today.

 

 Source link

 
Related posts:

 

China-US high level strategic dialogue: Chinese diplomats deal vigorous counterblows to condescending US representatives; common ground hard to reach on contrasting logics

 

Why Europe gravitates away from US to Eastern power center: Martin Jacques

 

 

China-Hong Kong union needs sense of inclusion

 

Human right violators: USA,Canada, Autralia, UK, EU - Racism against Asians: Forever foreigner, alien or pendatang

 

 

Why does the West fail to understand China? The West misreads, China is rising, said Cambridge Prof 

 


 
 

http://www.you-books.com/book/M-Jacques/When-China-Rules-the-World      

 

America’s 5 Stages of Grief Over China’s Rise; Trump and wife test positive for Covid-19

STILL AMRICA FIRST IN TRADE

Tuesday, May 26, 2020

Wolf warrior’ diplomacy a US trait

Wang Yi: China seeks global peace, development, not hegemony


https://youtu.be/d_Lq9IQevac


Wolf Warriors 2: Hollywood-style hit, made in China


https://youtu.be/652foE223co


A Conversation With Wang Yi


https://youtu.be/ujAj1E9kzsA

 
br /> Has China implemented the "wolf warrior" diplomacy? When Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi responded to 23 questions during a press conference on Sunday, which of his answers confirmed the "wolf warrior" diplomacy? Did his answers interfere in any country's internal affairs? Did he threaten to sanction any country? Wang called the abuse of litigation against China over the COVID-19 outbreak "a product of three nos" - it has no ground, has no factual basis and has no international precedence. Attempts to blackmail China for the epidemic are daydreaming, Wang said. This might be the toughest answer he has ever given during the 100-minute press conference.

In terms of "wolf warrior", the US has peaked in its diplomacy. Just look at how many countries are being sanctioned by the US, in how many places is the US stationing its troops and how many countries' internal affairs are being interfered with by the US?

China has always emphasized common interests and building a community with a shared future for mankind. We make only a reasonable but powerful counterattack when being attacked. There is a vivid metaphor that compares China to the Kung Fu Panda.

The negative trend in China-US relations has attracted global attention. Such a trend is a process of the two major powers' interactions. The two countries lack mutual trust and thus tensions escalate. Both countries say the other country is the reason for the worsening of their relations.

However, if we look at the China-US relations objectively, we can list the following basic facts.

First, China is a rising developing country. So far, it has not formed the strength to pose a substantial challenge to the US, nor does China have such a will.

Second, the US harbors strategic suspicions of China and China also has various expressions of its visions. But the core of China's foreign relations is development. Chinese actions that can be described as "overseas military expansion" are negligible. China has somewhat been active in areas in which it has territorial disputes with neighboring countries, but it has kept restraint in general. One proof is that China has not engaged in any military conflicts with its neighboring countries for over 30 years.

Third, China expands influence through its economic activities. This is a process whereby parties involved can mutually benefit and China does so under the US-led multilateral trading system. China hasn't forcibly changed trade rules but has accumulated a trade surplus under the current rules and with the hard work of its people.

Fourth, China has a different political system with the US and other Western countries, which has caused ideological disputes. But China is generally not a country that exports ideology. China's so-called overseas publicity aims only at increasing the external world's understanding and favor for China instead of subverting the Western system. The West is aggressive while China is defensive in their ideological disputes.

Fifth, the US elites always want to shape China. They are annoyed that China has firmly stayed on its own political path, and they worry that the successful Chinese path may affect Western society's confidence. But this is not China's fault since we have the right to walk on our own path without interfering in the development of any other countries.

Sixth, the Trump administration has launched the trade war against China, which is indeed bullying. The "America First" doctrine has caused widespread resentment worldwide and China is not the only victim. Since the COVID-19 outbreak, Washington has been passing the buck to Beijing. This is the odious move of the White House and the Republican Party for the sake of the 2020 election. This is typical international hooliganism.



Labeling Chinese diplomacy as "wolf warrior" reflects an extreme ideology. If Western public opinion uses the label to describe Chinese diplomacy, then it is vulgarizing its international political thinking and playing to the crowd.

Source link

RELATED ARTICLES:

Chinese professors dismiss 'wolf diplomacy' theatrics

China's tough diplomacy against provocations is a reasonable response to defend national interests. How can such a diplomacy be regarded as “wolf warrior” diplomacy? If China's diplomacy is “wolf warrior” diplomacy, then what should US diplomacy be called? Perhaps “lion roar” diplomacy.

National security law a 'death knell' for US intervention in HK

Will a national security law that is to be implemented in Hong Kong undermine the “one country, two systems” principle? Before answering this question, we'd like to ask: Which country does not have national security laws? Which country would allow its administrative regions to become a void of national security where some internal forces collude with foreign forces and jeopardize national security?


US sanction card over HK won't intimidate China: Global Times editorial

Hong Kong belongs to China, not the US. The latter has only two choices when it comes to the city: be a friendly cooperator, or stay away. China will never offer the US a third option.

National security legislation offers overdue remedy for HK

Chinese mainlanders support Hong Kong in maintaining its political system and unique social style. It is unnecessary for Hong Kong to exercise what the Chinese mainland possesses. It is foreseeable that HKSAR national security legislation would serve the city's best interests and provide a better future for the “Pearl of the Orient.”

US should make bio-labs more transparent: Global Times editorial

The US should not be exempted from international screening for biological risks, but rather be at the forefront of such inspections. The vast number of laboratories in the US, with their complex and diverse management bodies and methods, needs a clean-up test that will reassure the international community.