I’ve read several news stories in the last few weeks and it seems to me that Bush has cranked up the rhetoric against China. I saw an article where Bush asked China to open up a bit on its human rights record, and another where he was praising Taiwan as a model of democracy. Now, I agree with both of these stances…I think China DOES need to toe the line better on its human rights record (and I think they need to work and play better with others on things like international patents and trade), and I also think Taiwan is a model of democracy…compared to main land China at least.
I’m just curious as to why both of these issues are being raised now. Does it have to do with the internation trade talks going on…or is there something else in play? Has China finally pissed us off enough to start getting rough with them…and if so, what did they do to push us over the edge? Anyone have a handle on whats happening behind the rhetoric?
Mr. Bush has stated his intention to spread democracy and freedom where it does not now exist. He and his globetrotting Sec. of State are making a show of that message everywhere they go. In most cases, he has no intention of putting any muscle behind the intention.
We have a huge trade relationship with China, and he probably doesn’t mean to tamper with that. However, China has been quietly creeping toward capitalism and democracy for a long time. If some of that inching happens after Bush has suggested it, he can claim credit.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it’s intended to give the U.S. leverage in the trade talks. Presidents leaning on China’s rights record when negotiations are coming up is nothing new, if memory serves.
I won’t try to fathom what Bush’s foreign policy plans are. But if he is squaring off with China I think he’s biting off more than he can chew. History has shown the China is not likely to back down from a bluff - and the US military is stretched fairly thin right now to make a credible threat against China. I would hate to see the United States rattle a sabre and then have China use that as an excuse to launch a pre-emptive attack.
US foreign policy for years has been to support and encourage continued reform in China; every year or so the President (whoever he is) “cranks up the rhetoric” and says some vague things to remind people that in our opinion the status quo is not enough. We haven’t said anything in a while; if we kept not saying anything you’d have to start wondering if Bush was going soft.
It’s rather like the way every year or so China starts making noises about Taiwan. It’s not that something has suddenly spurred them … it’s that if they didn’t say things people would start to surmise that maybe they’d sort of come to peace with the situation. They haven’t, and they remind us of it, even if they aren’t going to do anything.
Saber-ratteling against China isn’t usually in the form of a military threat as it is in the form of our using economic leverage against China: tariffs, kicking them out of the WTO, pulling out US investments, that sort of thing. Invading a ginormous asian nuclear super-power isn’t something we can belivably threaten to do over a couple of human right violations, even if our military wasn’t already occupied with other tasks. Of course we could argue weather or not the US using it’s economic leverage isn’t equally unlikely.
I agree with the characterization of “sabre rattling.” Corporate America lusts after China too much for Bush to actually do anything more than wag his finger. My guess is that he’s grandiose enough to think that he’s going to get his own “tear down that wall” legacy if China happens to reform itself any time in the next decade or two. The post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy worked as political propaganda when it came to Reagan and the Soviet Union, so Bush is trying to put himself on the record as demanding that China change just in case the opportunity to claim credit ever arises,
We really don’t have any beef with China. Let’s face it, human rights have never been a major part of US policy. And right now we don’t have any sort of mandate regarding human rights issues. The only time we’d intervene on human rights causes is if we found out that it would raise our ability to trade with them. Right now China represents the biggest new market for our goods- a whole nation just waiting for all the cars and appliances and whatever that we can sell to them. Right now we want to do nothing but carefully encourage them to continue to open their markets to us.
What is interesting is that China and India are engageing in some talks. They’ve recently agreed to respect each other’s border in previously disputed areas. This is changing the very delicate balance of neutrality that India maintained through the cold war. Although we have plenty of business interest in India and enough historic ties to make us not an enemy, combined with China they make a nearly unstoppable force of over 1/3 of the world’s population. I doubt the US would join forces with India’s only real enemy- Pakistan- against this…especially with China in the picture. I think we will be seeing an intersting shift of alliances in the next few years.
‘a nearly unstoppable force of over 1/3 of the world’s population’…in what way exactly? Economically? Militarily? Culturally? Do you envision China and India getting together somehow to…what? Have a monopoly on cheap labor? Toss out US/European companies who have offshore manufacturing there? Trade with each other to the exclusion of the US/Europe? Set pricing on cheap electronics and help desk support?
I really don’t see what China and India could DO united that would be a threat.
Economically, they represent the largest emerging markets the world has ever seen. Businesses in the US will be loathe to accept any policies that would make trading harder. Which means diplomatically we are less likely to give them trouble as they settle their various territorial disputes. Any sort of tariffs or embargos would cost the US a lot more money than they are willing to spend.
Militarily, both coutries have a lot of land that they would like to control. India is at war. China has already swallowed up a few countries. The entire string of border states between them are either weak or in the midst of a civil war.
So it’s not really a threat, as much as a shift of power in Asia.
I’m afraid that Bush is as clueless on China as on any other nation.
But he’s not holding the reins of foreign policy, it’s the scary hidden cadre of hawks and big business lackeys.
I think the U.S. and China are preparing for a showdown over Taiwan. The United States is interested in keeping Taiwan and its democracy intact. China doesn’t want the U.S. involved in its “internal affairs”. The rhetoric seems to be increasing and China is making moves to contain Taiwan. Interestingly, both nations are to begin talks after 11/19/2005 over Taiwan even though:
That is almost 11%! If the Chinese got really mad they could just dump our dollars and damage our economy. I imagine this would hurt themselves in the process also.
I think this posturing is similar to his saber-rattling with North Korea. China is going to do whatever China feels like doing no matter what he says. Because they know that’s all he’s going to do-talk. Taking a slap at China costs him nothing, commits him to nothing, makes it appear as if he has some sort of foreign policy and plays well to his home base; people who are fond of symbols and are easily cowed by displays of “power.” As far as China is concerned, as long as the greenbacks keep streaming their way,* who cares* what the President of the United States says…it’s not as if any of the populace are going to hear him, anyway.
What effect do you suppose this would have on the Chinese economy? Or to use some Blazin Saddles imagery: pointing gun at one head ‘No one move or the <distasteful ethnic term> gets it!’
It’s not as if the Chinese have never contracted their economy purely for ideological reasons. The Great Leap Forward comes to mind. The Chinese government simply doesn’t operate under the constraints that democracies do. If they want to impoverish and starve their population to achieve some political goal, they’re perfectly capable of doing so.
However, I don’t think it’s going to happen anytime soon. The Chinese are in a favorable economic position for themselves, and they face no credible military threat from anyone with regards to their regional aspirations. Yeah, they’re probably not going to launch an invasion of Taiwan or Indian anytime, but they certainly have no need to drop their absolutist positions on where their borders should be.
As for Bush’s rhetoric, I agree with the idea that it’s lip service for his supposed spreading democracy platform. But I think it’s also a sop to his religious base who criticize Chinese laws against Christian prostelytizing. But given the US’s economic interests in China, many of the US tools for getting governments to change their behavior aren’t available. China’s integration into things like TRIPS and the WTO further IP protection for US property in China, and tarriffs would harm a number of US industries. Basically, IMO, Bush is rattling sabres just as the Chinese often do.
If they dumped all our dollers for Euro’s, the only effect negative effect I can think of is that, with the doller being then worth much less, the US would by fewer Chinese exports. But since jsmith is proposing this move by the Chinese in retaliation to a souring of relations with the US, then there would probably be a drop in US/Chinese trade anyways.
The real loosers would be other asian countries who have most of their savings in US dollars. They would see the wealth held by their treasuries plumet.
Of course I agree that this is unlikely to happen, since the current situation is far too beneficial to both nations to let relations get to that point. I think that the real danger will come when China’s economy hits the eventual economic slow down that every national economy hits every few decades. It won’t be able to buy off it’s people dissent with visions of a rising economy giving a car in every garage and a chicken in every pot. With a faultering economy and an angry populace, I could imagine the Chinese gov’t trying some crazy or violent antics to try and prolong their hold on power.