The Direction of U.S.–China Relations
Recently, U.S.–China relations have been rocky. There are many reasons; the U.S. adjusting its Asian strategy and the midterm congressional elections in November are among them. As the U.S. returns to Asia, it has yet to adjust to the sudden emergence of China and inevitably tries to restrain China's rise. Moreover, U.S. foreign policy has always been affected by domestic policy. The upcoming midterm elections in November are even more so the focus of each party's ability to influence the political game. Take the Yellow Sea, for example: The U.S. Armed Forces claimed that the aircraft carrier will still enter the Yellow Sea to participate in military exercises, but the date is after "several months." If the U.S. Army is more adamant, it has no need to delay for several months. Therefore, after the midterm elections in November, a change is not out of the question. Of course, neither the U.S. nor China will give up the quibble over the Yellow Sea, but there are many ways to squabble that need not involve the risk of friendly fire. This is something both sides should agree on and is a test to both sides' wisdom.
Currently, the U.S. aircraft carrier U.S.S. George Washington has already entered Vietnam's port and will hold joint military exercises with Vietnam. Adding in the nuclear problem, the intention of the U.S. to involve Vietnam is extremely obvious; Vietnam is also neatly laying itself out as America's new ally. However, when all is said and done, there is the lingering shadow of the Vietnam War between the U.S. and Vietnam, and Vietnam must consider that it shares a border with China. In this regard, the U.S. and Vietnam are simply making use of each other. In deciding which relationship — U.S.-China or U.S.-Vietnam — is more important, it can be believed that the U.S. has a pretty good idea.
A few days ago, Newsweek magazine published an article mentioning that recently, with regard to the issue of the Yellow Sea, China has been emphasizing the U.S. in its debates with other Asian countries, enabling the U.S. to play more trump cards. In the recent ASEAN Regional Forum, the U.S. played such a card, leaving China to suffer from an inferior strategy. But the games are still in progress, with Newsweek implying that they have yet to desist. Foreign Minister Alberto Rómulo of the Philippines made clear his country's position on the issue of the Yellow Sea, saying that the Yellow Sea negotiations should be between ASEAN and China and do not need the intervention of the U.S. or any other third party. Taking into account the closeness of U.S.-Filipino relations, this declaration has caused America to lose a match in the political games.
From the Yellow Sea to the South China Sea, the U.S. and China have engaged in battles of wits and might, each playing its own cards, fighting measure for measure, taking turns on advantageous ground. Seeing that Asia originally did not have a sole source of power, it has no consensus on what constitutes a common threat, and many countries previously pursued anti-alliance policies. Even now, there are many conflicts of interest, and this factor must be taken into account in America's opposing China in Asia, including cooperating with Vietnam in military affairs.
Just as some analysts claim, U.S.-China relations continue to be tense. One of the causes is the lack of strategic mutual trust, especially in military exchange and communication in other areas. Another factor is the different standpoints of both sides, creating a lack of consensus. After President Obama took office, U.S.-China relations entered a honeymoon period, but many people believe that while the Obama administration showered China with goodwill, China did not cooperate with Americans on crucial issues. To the Americans, used to being the big kid on the block, China's conduct showed a lack of respect. However, to the Chinese, answering the questions of whether or not to cooperate and the extent of cooperation starts out with the interests of their own country. China believes that some things that were unattainable in the past can now be achieved, but it is the question of why China isn't doing anything towards the latter that the Americans cannot understand, resulting in the theory of "Chinese arrogance."
Solving the issue of strategic mutual trust needs time, and both sides can, through political games and collisions, gradually adapt and get used to each other. In regards to mutual military trust, even if warmongers on both sides are hardliners, they should still sit down for a chat and not give up discussions. Talking is always better than not talking, as silence prevents mutual trust. There is no benefit to the state of affairs in the world or Asia if a military confrontation occurs between the U.S. and China, and certainly there is nothing to be gained for either country. Newsweek, while criticizing China, also concluded that China's rise will induce the U.S. to use the trump cards in its hand to renew its dealings with the world, with the possible result of realizing or maintaining a win-win situation for both the U.S. and China. If China and America cannot reach some semblance of mutual trust, emergence and fighting against emergence, restraining and fighting against restraint will become the theme of a considerably lengthy competition.
The relations between China and the U.S. involve a wide range of issues. Especially important is the trade relationship, where, despite the existence of friction, there is also sustainable growth. Other areas of contention need not become a zero-sum game.
Currently, the U.S. aircraft carrier U.S.S. George Washington has already entered Vietnam's port and will hold joint military exercises with Vietnam. Adding in the nuclear problem, the intention of the U.S. to involve Vietnam is extremely obvious; Vietnam is also neatly laying itself out as America's new ally. However, when all is said and done, there is the lingering shadow of the Vietnam War between the U.S. and Vietnam, and Vietnam must consider that it shares a border with China. In this regard, the U.S. and Vietnam are simply making use of each other. In deciding which relationship — U.S.-China or U.S.-Vietnam — is more important, it can be believed that the U.S. has a pretty good idea.
A few days ago, Newsweek magazine published an article mentioning that recently, with regard to the issue of the Yellow Sea, China has been emphasizing the U.S. in its debates with other Asian countries, enabling the U.S. to play more trump cards. In the recent ASEAN Regional Forum, the U.S. played such a card, leaving China to suffer from an inferior strategy. But the games are still in progress, with Newsweek implying that they have yet to desist. Foreign Minister Alberto Rómulo of the Philippines made clear his country's position on the issue of the Yellow Sea, saying that the Yellow Sea negotiations should be between ASEAN and China and do not need the intervention of the U.S. or any other third party. Taking into account the closeness of U.S.-Filipino relations, this declaration has caused America to lose a match in the political games.
From the Yellow Sea to the South China Sea, the U.S. and China have engaged in battles of wits and might, each playing its own cards, fighting measure for measure, taking turns on advantageous ground. Seeing that Asia originally did not have a sole source of power, it has no consensus on what constitutes a common threat, and many countries previously pursued anti-alliance policies. Even now, there are many conflicts of interest, and this factor must be taken into account in America's opposing China in Asia, including cooperating with Vietnam in military affairs.
Just as some analysts claim, U.S.-China relations continue to be tense. One of the causes is the lack of strategic mutual trust, especially in military exchange and communication in other areas. Another factor is the different standpoints of both sides, creating a lack of consensus. After President Obama took office, U.S.-China relations entered a honeymoon period, but many people believe that while the Obama administration showered China with goodwill, China did not cooperate with Americans on crucial issues. To the Americans, used to being the big kid on the block, China's conduct showed a lack of respect. However, to the Chinese, answering the questions of whether or not to cooperate and the extent of cooperation starts out with the interests of their own country. China believes that some things that were unattainable in the past can now be achieved, but it is the question of why China isn't doing anything towards the latter that the Americans cannot understand, resulting in the theory of "Chinese arrogance."
Solving the issue of strategic mutual trust needs time, and both sides can, through political games and collisions, gradually adapt and get used to each other. In regards to mutual military trust, even if warmongers on both sides are hardliners, they should still sit down for a chat and not give up discussions. Talking is always better than not talking, as silence prevents mutual trust. There is no benefit to the state of affairs in the world or Asia if a military confrontation occurs between the U.S. and China, and certainly there is nothing to be gained for either country. Newsweek, while criticizing China, also concluded that China's rise will induce the U.S. to use the trump cards in its hand to renew its dealings with the world, with the possible result of realizing or maintaining a win-win situation for both the U.S. and China. If China and America cannot reach some semblance of mutual trust, emergence and fighting against emergence, restraining and fighting against restraint will become the theme of a considerably lengthy competition.
The relations between China and the U.S. involve a wide range of issues. Especially important is the trade relationship, where, despite the existence of friction, there is also sustainable growth. Other areas of contention need not become a zero-sum game.