Training U.S. Officials in China

Published in China Times
(Taiwan) on 3 May 2010
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Yalin Yuan. Edited by Amy Wong.
In recent years, elite U.S. schools have trained many Chinese government officials. It wasn’t until April of this year, however, that the U.S. sent government officials from NASA, the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Agriculture, and Treasury to Tsinghua University in Beijing to attend China–U.S. training courses.

For China and the U.S., two powers who see each other as the biggest security threat, this is unprecedented. It shows that the U.S. needs to understand China. Besides, this may set an example for other western countries.

As a superpower, the U.S. plays a guiding role in global politics. In the 1960s, while facing the Vietnam War, the U.S. established East Asian studies programs in many universities. In the 1990s, it established Chinese studies programs. The continuing contradictions and conflicts between China and the U.S. show that the White House still needs to learn more about policymakers’ thoughts in Beijing today.

At the end of 2008, the global financial crisis led to a new wave of discussions about China’s development model. Afterward, the D.C.-based think tank, Center for Strategic and International Studies, published an over-130-page report, “Smart Power in U.S.–China Relations.” The report emphasized the cooperation and competition between China and the U.S. in Third World countries. In China’s eyes, the U.S. still has misunderstandings about China.

Since the end of last year, there have been constant setbacks in Sino–U.S. relations. There are still differences in the two countries’ positions on key international issues despite slight convergences.

The consensus between Beijing and Washington is that candid conversations would help prevent bad decisions and that more knowledge about each other would help decrease wrong judgment. This training in Beijing is different from other official interactions because both sides can discuss sensitive or military issues in class.

For example, U.S. officials could directly ask, “Which country is China’s biggest security concern?” People’s Liberation Army’s generals could honestly answer, “The U.S. is China’s biggest security concern. U.S. officials could openly show their concerns about Taiwan’s security, and the mainland could respond that, as long as the U.S. sees China as a strategic competitor, the Taiwan issue will be an obstacle in Sino–U.S. relations forever.

It is historically meaningful that the U.S. is sending officials to China for training. Since the Opium Wars, Western countries have seen China as lagging behind. If not for China’s globally influential rise and China’s attractive development model, why would the U.S., which has always been proud of its Western values, tarnish its reputation in order to explore the keys to China’s success?

American think tanks rarely discuss 'who needs whom.' Obviously, the White House wants policymakers to know more about China’s future development and strategy through these training courses. Rather than criticizing the one-party Communist government as a dictatorship, U.S. officials are exploring how this 'unique political party system' maintains long term social stability without healthy competition.

The future of Sino–U.S. relations is key to the security and stability of the Asia–Pacific region. That the U.S. is willing to send officials to China for firsthand observation and experience may not change its policy toward China, but it should help policymakers in the White House change their thinking toward Chinese policy. Similarly, China should also have a better understanding of Western values. If the balance is lost, the two sides will always view each other as a threat.

Of course, the interactions between Chinese and U.S. officials will also shed some light on cross-strait relations. In other words, achieving long term stability and harmony requires open minds, and similar training courses need to be created to strengthen mutual understanding and respect.


社評-美官員赴中培訓影響深遠
近些年來,美國各大名校培訓了許多中國政府的各層級官員,但到今年4月下旬,美國才首次派遣17名來自太空總署(NASA)、國防部、國土安全部、農業部及商務部等廳、處、局級官員,前往北京清華大學參加「中美高級政府官員培訓班」的課程。此舉對相互視為最大安全威脅的兩個強權而言,可謂開創歷史先例,它除了顯示美國確實需要徹底了解中國之外,未來亦可能成為其他西方國家的仿傚。

 超級強權的美國,對全球政治舞台向來都扮演指導角色。1960年代美國面對越南戰爭,因為需要而在各大學普設東亞研究所,1990年代再為應中國的崛起而於許多名校成立中國研究所。然而,延至今日,從美中兩國的矛盾與衝突不斷來看,白宮官員對北京決策者的思維,顯然還需要加強了解。2008年底,全球金融風暴引發國際社會新一波探討中國發展模式的熱潮,隨後華府重要智庫「戰略暨國際問題研究中心」(CSIS)就公布一份長達130餘頁的「中國軟實力及其對美國意涵」報告書,全文對美中雙方在第三世界的競爭與合作多所著墨,不過看在中方的眼裡,美國對中國仍然存有誤解。

 自去年年終迄今,美中關係不斷出現波折,雙方對若干國際重大議題的立場,雖較以往略有趨同,但依然存在分歧。北京與華府的共同認知是,坦誠對話才不致於做出錯誤的決策,加強相互了解與認識,應有助於減少誤判。這次美國官員前往中國取經,與以往雙方官式互動的最大不同處在於,一些敏感的政治或軍事議題都可以在課堂上攤開來討論。例如:美方官員針對「中國的最主要安全威脅是那一國」,會直截了當地提問,解放軍將領也坦白地回應「美國是中國的最大安全顧慮」; 美國官員毫不忌諱地表示關切台灣安全,大陸方面也會不客套地回應,只要美國把中國視為戰略競爭對手,台灣問題就永遠會是雙邊關係的障礙。

 美國派遣官員前往中國接受培訓,對中國人來說確實具有歷史性意義。鴉片戰爭以來,在西方社會的眼中,中國始終是落後的代名詞。於今,如果不是中國崛起已經在全球引發重大效應,若非中國發展模式正受到發展中國家普遍的傾慕,向來自傲於西方價值觀的美國,又怎會願意放低姿態去探索中國模式的成功秘訣?目前美國智庫已很少再提到美中雙方「誰需要誰」的問題,白宮顯然想藉此培訓課程,讓相關決策的政府官員更深入地掌握中國未來的發展方向與戰略布局。這次美方官員用「獨特政黨模式」取代對中共一黨專制的批評,用心正在於探究「一個沒有外在良性競爭對象的政治運作體系,如何可能長時間維繫社會穩定」?

 未來亞太地區維繫安全和穩定,美中關係的前景絕對居中關鍵。美國願意派遣官員至中國社會實地觀察和體驗,雖未必因此改變美國對中國的戰略作為,但應有助於白宮決策者改變中國政策的思維。同樣地,中國社會似乎亦應該加強對西方價值觀的了解和體認,雙邊互動若失去平衡,就永遠都會把對方視為威脅。當然,美中官員的這種互動模式,也帶給兩岸關係一些正面啟示;換言之,兩岸關係如想維持長期穩定與和諧,又何嘗不應該開放胸襟,設計類似的培訓課程,試圖加強相互間的了解和尊重。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Spain: Charlie Kirk and the Awful People Celebrating His Death

Germany: Donald Trump’s Failure

Germany: Trump Declares War on Cities

Austria: Donald Is Disappointed in Vladimir

Venezuela: China: Authoritarianism Unites, Democracy Divides

Topics

Spain: Charlie Kirk and the Awful People Celebrating His Death

Germany: Trump Declares War on Cities

Japan: US Signing of Japan Tariffs: Reject Self-Righteousness and Fulfill Agreement

Russia: Trump the Multipolarist*

Turkey: Blood and Fury: Killing of Charlie Kirk, Escalating US Political Violence

Thailand: Brazil and the US: Same Crime, Different Fate

Singapore: The Assassination of Charlie Kirk Leaves America at a Turning Point

Germany: When Push Comes to Shove, Europe Stands Alone*

Related Articles

Taiwan: Trump’s Japan Negotiation Strategy: Implications for Taiwan

China: Trump’s Tariff Policy Bullies the Weak, Fears the Strong and Applies Double Standards

Taiwan: Trump Stacks the Deck: EU-Canada Trade Talks Forced To Fold

Taiwan: 2 Terms Won’t Satisfy Trump

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice