Do Not Count on the New US to be Moderate

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 1 February 2013
by Gao Wang (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Elizabeth Cao. Edited by Mary Young.
Today, Hillary Clinton formally retired as U.S. secretary of state, and John Kerry officially took over. Several heavyweight positions in the new cabinet have been determined: Hagel has been appointed as secretary of defense, Brennan has been appointed director of the CIA, and so on. In the past, these politicians have been “relatively modest” in their involvement with China.

Whether this class of moderate “newcomers” will continue to follow this “moderate path” is of course another matter. On matters dealing with China, these leaders have in fact been strongly opinionated in their thinking.

Hillary Clinton’s strategic thinking toward China had a Cold War style to it, to the point where she “polluted” the relationship between the U.S. and China, deepening the tensions and misunderstandings between them. But it should also be said that her negative impact on Sino-U.S. relations has been limited. Now the “moderates” are up. They should be able to make positive contributions and will probably not bring more negativity than Hillary did to the relationship between China and the U.S.

The complexity behind Sino-U.S. relations is very dense. It is full of ups and downs but in the long run is typically very strong. The U.S. cabinet and its policies may be undergoing changes, but these changes should not stray too far from where things are now.

The general risk America bears for China is diminishing. One reason is because China is becoming more powerful and has more say in relations between the two countries. This makes it harder for U.S. leaders to force China into acting in the way the U.S. wants, and the latter thus has to follow the law more rigidly.

When Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state, she engaged in “smart power” diplomacy with China. But the most important geopolitical outcome may not have been the alliance the U.S. pulled together, but rather, China’s ability to face and overcome these various difficulties and exercises. A few years ago, it was hard for Chinese people to imagine having these sorts of powers and forces in the South China Sea and East China Sea at the same time, but now we know that it is not actually that big of a deal. China has gradually gained a lot of experience in managing its own territory.

China has been very worried about the U.S.'s curbing development there, but in recent years, with Hillary Clinton in power, we have seen that the U.S. can only do so much, and that their control does not extend over all of Asia. The U.S. has treated China as it had treated the Soviet Union during the Cold War era, from which it is now trying to distance itself.

Putting Sino-U.S. relations on a road of opposition will only bring about struggle for the U.S. The U.S. has a long history of this, particularly towards China. The Chinese people, for their part, welcome this because it has only brought about further success for them. In some of the changes in Chinese society, it is hard to differentiate between Western ways of thought and traditional Chinese ways of thought.

The process of social pluralism in China continues to provide an energy that helps push the country forward, but it also brings about a very strange uncertainty. The competition between China’s national strength and mainstream society and that of the U.S. and the West produce this uncertainty.

Kerry and the rest of this new group of people may take a less aggressive military strategy toward China, doing fewer things to stir up issues. However, in the field of ideological competition with China, the U.S. will not back down. This is not an issue of American foreign policy. Rather, it is part of the U.S.'s cultural and political ideas, which govern how they react to the rise of China and deal with the collisions they face.

Chinese society will only become more prominent in the future. Anyone with power, such as the U.S. and the West, will see only more friction in terms of power. If China were unstable, the West would only try to meddle in its matters more and more. The so-called “advantages of values” that allow these states to meddle were accumulated over hundreds of years. If China could successfully diffuse this pressure from the West, China’s ability to compete with the West would change drastically.

Thus, the way in which the new U.S. team deals with China is important, but what is most important is how China deals with itself. The future of Sino-U.S. relations is much more than just the exchanges between two countries; it is the mutual influence of one on the other.


希拉里·克林顿今天正式卸任美国国务卿,约翰·克里接任。美国新内阁的几个重量级职位也基本确定人选,哈格尔被提名国防部长,布伦南被提名中情局局长,等等。在以往从政经历中,这些人涉及中国时的表现被认为“相对温和”。

  但这班温和“新人”会相加出一个美国对华总体上的“温和路线”吗?这显然是另一回事。在美国如何同中国打交道的问题上,领导者们的思想固然有作用,然而“势比人强”更不是虚的。

  希拉里·克林顿的对华战略思维是冷战式的,她一定程度上“污染”了中美交往的环境,加深了中美战略互疑,但也应当说,她对中美关系的负面影响又是有限的。现在“温和派”上来了。不过他们能带来的正面和积极修正,大概不会多于希拉里对中美关系朝负面推动的幅度。


  编织中美关系的内容和利益总量太大了,因此这种关系的惯性力量是所有力量中最大的。中美关系充满具体的跌宕,但拉长看又规律性很强,这次美国内阁换届制造的政策变化空间,不会与以往历次变化的平均值差太远。

  美国换届的风险对中国来说在逐渐缩小,另一个原因是中国正变得强大,对中美关系的决定权在增多。这使得美国领导人越来越难按个人好恶随意对华行事,他们得遵循利益规律。

  希拉里主持国务院期间对华搞“巧实力”外交,但最重要的地缘政治成果或许不是美国拉起了什么“联盟”,而是锻炼了中国面对各种麻烦的承受力。几年前中国人很难想象同时在南海和东海与不同力量摩擦,现在我们发现这其实并没什么了不起。中国渐渐积累了管理领土摩擦的经验。

  中国一直很担心美国遏制我们的发展,但希拉里活跃的这几年,让我们看到美国的资源就那么多,它的巴掌真的捂不住亚洲。美国以对付苏联的冷战方式对待中国,它作为历史机会逐渐远去。

  把中美关系往对立的方面想,美国今后最得心应手的对华斗争方式就是价值观进攻。美国在这方面资源雄厚,而且对华渗透渠道多。此外中国民间对美国这类行动的抵触最低,欢迎美国向中国输出价值观的人在增多。中国思想领域的一些变化已经很难分清哪些是从西方输入的,哪些是土生土长的。

  中国的社会多元化进程不断提供国家前进的新能量,但也埋下很陌生的一些不确定性。中国国家力量及主流社会作为一方,美国和西方作为另一方,将会在未来竞争对这些不确定性的驾驭权。

  克里这一班人有可能在军事布阵等方面采取不那么咄咄逼人的对华策略,少搞一些既刺激中国、又没啥实际作用的动作。但在对华意识形态竞争领域,美国作为整体不会退却。这甚至不是美国的外交政策问题,这就是美国上下对自己文化和政治“优势”情不自禁的使用,是西方各种力量面对中国崛起的“自然反应”和种种策略的不谋而合。

  中国社会有无政治定力将在未来具有决定性意义。如果定力很强,中国在美国及西方面前就会更有底气,不惧摩擦。相反如果它飘忽不定,西方撬动中国的杠杆就会越来越多。归根结底,所谓“价值观优势”是美国和西方发展几百年积累的家底,中国如果能成功化解它的压力,中国同西方竞争的形势就会根本改观。

  因此美国新班底如何对待中国虽然也重要,但中国自己如何对待自己更重要。营造未来中美关系态势的已远远不止两国政府各部所作所为,两国社会交往和相互影响的性质将具有突出意义。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

El Salvador: The Game of Chess between the US and Venezuela Continues

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

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

Israel: Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias: Congress Opens Investigation into Wikipedia

Poland: Marek Kutarba: Donald Trump Makes Promises to Karol Nawrocki. But Did He Run Them by Putin?

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

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?

France: Global South: Trump Is Playing into China’s Hands