Why We Should Not Overestimate America

Published in China Times
(Taiwan) on 31 May 2020
by Yong-Lin Su (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Pinyu Hwang. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
After several days of public reaction, President Donald Trump has finally spoken out regarding the Hong Kong National Security Law, threatening to cancel Hong Kong's special treatment under the "one country, two systems" principle, sanction Chinese officials who participate in the legislation, suspend the visas of certain Chinese students, and withdraw from the World Health Organization, which, he claimed, China totally controls.

These responses come like someone exhaling after holding their breath for a long time, and in general, they are well within the expectations of all parties. There have even been comments that despite Trump's seemingly “domineering" attitude, the fact that the U.S. still has not terminated the first phase of the U.S.-China agreement or cut off the Hong Kong-U.S.-linked exchange rate system through administrative means suggests that these sanctions are nowhere as spicy as expected.

The essence of the Hong Kong issue concerns China and the United States, and it is a process in which each side makes its own moves in order to up its own game. As such, in the coming month, as drafting of the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law is considered, voted on, and implemented in Hong Kong, we can expect the U.S. to take further countermeasures. However, an increasing number of observers are coming to recognize the "all talk, no action" nature of Trump's anti-China ruse.

It is undeniable that the group of right-wing political elites around Trump truly views the Chinese mainland as "the second Soviet Union," formally placing a new Cold War with China on the American political agenda. Some Western media compare the National Security Law to the first brick in Beijing's construction of a Berlin Wall in Hong Kong. In reality, however, it is clearly the West, led by the United States, that has allowed the "Berlinization" of Hong Kong to become the front line in a great power struggle. The problem lies in the fact that, although globalization is stagnant for the short term, the current state of international political forces and the patterns of national interests are no longer comparable to that during the period of the U.S.-Soviet Cold War. This brings us back to age-old questions: How determined is the United States to uphold its anti-China attitude and keep China contained? What else can the U.S. do?

First of all, in terms of determination (i.e., a subjective willingness), Trump's anti-China approach comes more from a starting point of self-interest, which is completely different in nature from the ideological confrontation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union in the 1950s. In 2016, Trump relied on a wave of populist recognition to win the election; the "anti-China card" was only one piece of the puzzle. However, for this election, it is clear that Trump is making the "anti-China card" the staple of his campaign, which, ultimately, is meant to serve his own interests in the election. That being the case, will fierce sanctions against China and even the "destruction" of Hong Kong help advance Trump's agenda? Not necessarily.

On the one hand, the United States has huge business investments in Hong Kong, and almost every major U.S. company has a piece of its pie in Hong Kong. Last year, the anti-extradition protests did not end up causing much loss to American businesses in Hong Kong. Moreover, the Hong Kong National Security Law will be interfaced with Hong Kong's basic legal system, resulting in only limited impact on Hong Kong's business environment, tax system and judicial system. Trump using a "big stick" to smash Hong Kong would be tantamount to offending all the major U.S. companies, completely working against Trump's goal of reelection.

On the other hand, the Trump administration is now deeply entangled in the condemnation of police violence in Minnesota. Based on the current situation, the ever sensitive issue of race, coupled with public discontent and unemployment caused by the pandemic, has set off a firestorm in the United States. At this juncture, the United States’ haste to impose sanctions will only make the mainstream public and the middle of the road voters in the U.S. more aware of Trump’s attempts to divert attention from his own hypocritical blame-shifting, exacerbating existing doubts about Trump's competency.

Moreover, in terms of objective ability, in Trump’s hands, U.S. economic influence and business appeal have fallen to the lowest point in nearly 100 years. Couple that with the current disparity between the strength of China and the United States, and Trump's intention to take advantage of the Hong Kong issue and make trouble for China will likely be nothing more than a "one-man show." Recently, some have taken to fantasizing about the subjugation of Beijing by the so-called Eight-Nation Alliance of 1900. However, judging from the recent moves by British, European, Japanese, Australian and Canadian stakeholders in Hong Kong, most seem to maintain verbal solidarity and hold an attitude of "concern and nonintervention," showing no signs of any intent to toughen sanctions. The most critical point here is that by linking sanctions against China and Hong Kong to U.S. withdrawal from the WHO, Trump has all at once devalued the legitimacy and moral value of any opposition to the Hong Kong National Security Law. China has pledged to inject $2 billion into the WHO, and Europe has strongly endorsed the continuation and funding of the WHO. Western leaders such as Angela Merkel and Scott Morrison have also clearly stated their positions on the issues related to Hong Kong. The post-pandemic world will need China more than before. Trump's linking together of "anti-China" and "anti-globalization" is foolish, and will only attract more eye-rolling from the international community. Hong Kong is a mirror that shines light on the self-serving nature of Trump's actions and the reality of international trends after China’s rise to power. If this plan of "mutually assured destruction" initiated by Hong Kong's localist groups ends up being met by the West's cold shoulder, Taiwan is bound to be the most distressed of all.

The author does research for a think tank.


經過數日輿論鋪陳,美國總統川普終於就「香港國安法」發聲,揚言取消「一國兩制」下香港特殊待遇、制裁參與立法的中方人士、停發部分中國留美學生簽證,以及退出他口中「已由中方控制的」世界衛生組織(WHO)。

上述反制措施如同一隻靴子落地,總體在各方意料之內。甚至有評論認為,雖然川普此次看似「霸氣十足」,但美方並沒有撕毀中美第一階段協議,也沒有透過行政手段打破港幣─美金聯繫匯率制度,制裁的「辣度」不如預期。

香港議題本質是中美博弈,是一個各自出招,層層加碼的過程,美方當然不會一下亮出底牌,故未來1個月內,隨著港版國安法草案審議、表決以及在香港實施,預料美方還會有反制動作。不過,愈來愈多的觀察者都逐漸摸清了川普「嘴炮反中」的套路。

不可否認,川普身邊的右翼政治菁英的確認真地把大陸視為「第二個蘇聯」,將「新冷戰」正式納入美國對華政策議程。有西方媒體比喻,國安法是北京在香港「築柏林牆」的第一塊磚。但實際上,讓香港「柏林化」淪為大國鬥爭前線的,明明是以美國為首的西方陣營。 問題在於,儘管全球化短期內退潮,但當下國際政治力量對比、利益格局,早就不能和美蘇冷戰時期同日而語。這又回到了這個老問題:美國反中、遏華究竟有多大決心?究竟還有多少能力?

首先,在決心即主觀意願上,川普的反中更多是從自利角度出發,和1950年代的美蘇意識形態對抗,性質完全不同。2016年,川普靠民粹浪潮贏得大選,「反中牌」只是其一環。但此次大選川普明顯把「反中牌」當做主打,歸根究柢還是要服務於自己的選舉利益。既然如此,激烈制裁中國乃至「毀港」有助於川普的基本盤嗎?未必。

一方面,美國在香港有巨大商業利益,幾乎所有美資巨頭在香港都有一杯羹。去年「反送中」並沒有給在港美商帶來太大損失,而港版國安法又將與普通法系對接,實際上對香港營商環境、稅制、司法體系的影響有限。川普大棒打下去砸爛香港,等於得罪所有美資巨頭,完全違背川普連任目標。

另一方面,川普政府目前已深陷明尼蘇達警察暴力的口誅筆伐之中,從目前情勢看,向來敏感的種族議題再加上疫情導致的民怨、失業等因素,已在全美引發燎原之勢。在這個節點,美方急忙端出制裁,只會讓美國主流輿論和中間選民更認識到,川普在搞轉移矛盾的「甩鍋」之舉,質疑將更加強烈。

其次,在客觀能力上,美國的經濟影響力、價值號召力已經被川普拖到了近百年來最低點,再加上當前中美實力對比,此時川普藉香港問題向大陸發難,恐淪為「獨角戲」。最近,有些人幻想所謂「八國聯軍」討伐北京的盛況。但是,以近日英、歐、日、澳、加等在港「持份者」的舉動而言,多半以口頭聲援、「關心不介入」姿態為主,並沒有跟進強硬制裁措施的跡象。 最要害的一點,是川普將「制裁中國/香港」和退出WHO掛鉤,此舉一下子就把其反制港版國安法的正當性、道德價值貶得一文不值。中方已承諾向WHO注資20億美元,歐洲也強烈認同WHO的存續和資助,梅克爾、莫里森等西方首腦也清晰就涉港議題表態。後疫時代的世界更需要中國,而不是相反。川普把反中與反全球化掛鉤,相當愚蠢,只會招致國際社會的更多白眼。 香港是一面鏡子,照出川普之流的自私自利,也照出了中國崛起下真實的國際大勢。如果香港本土派發起的「攬炒」大計以西方的冷處理而落幕,相信最心有戚戚焉的,是台灣。

(作者為智庫研究員)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

China: 3 Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China

United Kingdom: We’re Becoming Inured to Trump’s Outbursts – But When He Goes Quiet, We Need To Be Worried

India: Trump’s Tariffs Have Hit South Korea and Japan: India Has Been Wise in Charting a Cautious Path

Ethiopia: “Trump Guitars” Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

Topics

Ecuador: Monsters in Florida

Austria: It’s High Time Europe Lost Patience with Elon Musk

Singapore: The US May Win Some Trade Battles in Southeast Asia but Lose the War

Ethiopia: “Trump Guitars” Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

Egypt: The B-2 Gamble: How Israel Is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics

China: 3 Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China

United Kingdom: We’re Becoming Inured to Trump’s Outbursts – But When He Goes Quiet, We Need To Be Worried

Poland: Jędrzej Bielecki: Trump’s Pyrrhic Victory*

Related Articles

Ecuador: Monsters in Florida

Singapore: The US May Win Some Trade Battles in Southeast Asia but Lose the War

Ethiopia: “Trump Guitars” Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

Egypt: The B-2 Gamble: How Israel Is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics

China: 3 Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China