Skip to content

US-China Relations - 106. page

Jin Canrong: A Weak U.S. President Is Not Good for Sino-U.S. Relations

While talking to a reporter from the Global Times about the U.S. political situation and its impact on Sino-U.S. relations, Jin Canrong, Associate Dean of the School of International Studies, Renmin University of China, analyzed the poor economic situation in the United States. In his analysis, Jin said that this situation is a very important reason for the escalation of the American political struggle, as it has led the voters of each party to become more extreme. In addition, psychologically, the Republicans do not accept a minority president. As for the national decline of the U.S, as reflected in the worries that appear in the media, it is mostly due to objective reasons. China’s rise places the U.S. influence in a position of relative decline. However, it is also undeniable that Obama is personally to blame for the situation. Some of his policies often sound good but are unenforceable. This places the U.S. on a sliding trajectory. For [the interest of] China, it is better that the United States has a relatively strong president. In such a condition, it is more likely for cooperation between the two countries to be carried out and for agreements to be executed. Otherwise negotiations might not make sense. Republicans may not really sue Obama, but it would embarrass Obama and make him more vulnerable and weaker. This is not a good thing in terms of Sino-U.S. relations. 

Source: Global Times, August 1, 2014 
 http://world.huanqiu.com/exclusive/2014-08/5092779.html
Briefings | | |   US-China Relations

Chinese Think Tank: It’s Obvious that U.S. Air-Sea Battle Strategy Is Targeting China

On July 23, the Association of China Strategic Culture Promotion [a “civil” Chinese think tank] issued a "2013 U.S. Military Assessment Report" in Beijing. The report said that the United States plans to develop an "Air-Sea Battle" strategy to meet the challenges of "anti-access and area denial." The report pointed out that "Air-Sea Battle: a military collaboration dealing with the challenge of ‘anti-access and area denial,’" as the first official U.S. document to explain "Air Sea Battle," will have a significant and far-reaching impact in four areas. 

First, it will have an impact on the transformation of the U.S. Army. 
Second, it will damage the Sino-U.S. strategic relationship of mutual trust. According to the analysis in the report, the U. S. “defense strategy guide" clearly stated that China’s rise broke the balance of power in the Asia-Pacific region and the Chinese military’s "anti-access and area denial" capabilities posed a serious threat to the U.S. military. The intention of the American "Air-Sea Battle" against China is very clear. China cannot help but suspect the sincerity of the U.S.’s cooperation and its true strategic intentions. 
Third, it will, under the influence of the overall U.S. military strategy, force its allies to undergo military expansion. 
Fourth, it will eventually have a negative impact on the peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. This impact will manifest mainly in the following areas: an increase in the U.S. military deployment in the Asia-Pacific region; the expansion of naval and air bases in Guam, Hawaii, and other places; as well as the conduct of several large-scale multinational military exercises. 

Source: People’s Daily, July 24, 2014 
http://military.people.com.cn/n/2014/0724/c1011-25337744.html

Briefings | | |   US-China Relations

Red Flag Manuscript: Chaos” in Western Democracy

On July 23, Red Flag Manuscript (红旗文稿) published an article, which Qiushi then republished, titled "’Chaos’ in Western Democracy." The following is a translation of some excerpts from the article.
The West, in particular the U.S., emerged as the triumphant side in the post-Cold War world and then promoted the so-called Third Wave of “Democratization” in the world. Twenty some years later, the records of the democracies that the U.S. exported are totally lackluster. In 2012, former U.S. national security adviser and renowned international expert, Zbigniew Brzezinski, when answering reporters’ questions, asked, "Will democracy still be prosperous? It really is a question." Recently, the British magazine the Economist published an article asking, "What’s gone wrong with democracy?" The article pointed out that "democracy’s global advance has come to a halt, and may even have gone into reverse." This statement was spoken loudly in the Western media, causing hot debates and discussions.
First, (in west democracy) it has become a norm to canvass for votes through the use of illegal bribes. Today, the Western democratic rule has developed to such an extreme that votes decide the seats and party politics has become purely electioneering politics. Therefore, a democracy based on parliamentary form has become a democracy of ballots. The ultimate goal of political parties is to court votes. Thus they have become the hostages of votes and votes have become the stepping stones for politician to be elected to “(the emperor’s) palace.” To win more votes, they would do their best to cater to voters in elections, which lead to illegal bribes for votes as a norm. 
Second, the system of representation has incurred a structural imbalance. As the U.S. Democratic and Republican Parties are tit-for-tat in the budget battle, resulting in delays in passing the budget act, and the federal government has to close down its non-core departments and repeat its mistakes of 17 years ago. Since 1977, this is the 18th time the federal government has closed down. From this, we can see there are problems in the three structural features in US politics. First, the US stresses the importance of checks-and-balances of the executive branch and the judicial and legislative branches, including the two major political parties. This results in the fact that the legislative branch ends up solving the executive branch issues. Consequently there is inconsistency and inefficiency in government functioning. Second the impact of interest groups and lobbying groups are increasing, which not only distorts the democratic process, but also erodes the government’s ability to operate effectively. Third, the legislative body is divided into two evenly matched bodies – the House and Senate, and different political parties control each body. Therefore, on the national level, more obstacles (for the government) keep in from acting in accordance with the wishes of the majority.
Third, money is the mother’s milk for "the game of democracy." The West has always preached that Western capitalist democracy is sacred and equal, and that the process is fair. In fact, money, business, media and vested interests groups often manipulate Western-style democracy. It has evolved into a kind of "rich man’s game" and a "democracy of money pockets." Democracy has been reduced to elections, elections to political marketing, and political marketing to the fight for political donations, to electoral strategy and to the fight for PR or shows. 
Fourth, the dissemination of democracy triggers social unrest. The externally existence of Western-style democracy is in the form of expansion and dissemination. In the process of dissemination of Western-style democracy, the Western powers have played a leading role. In March 1990, President George W. Bush proposed in the report of the "National Security Strategy," that one of the main goals of the U.S. in the 1990s was "to foster political freedom, human rights, and democracy" globally. He wanted to extend this democratic trend to the entire African continent. On this basis, the U.S. government announced that its aid to African countries would be pre-conditioned on these countries’ implementation of "multi-party democracy." That is, the US would invariably link its aid to African countries with democracy, in order to blackmail African countries.
We can look at today’s Africa, particularly at the countries that have implemented Western-style democracy like Tunisia and Egypt. These countries all have unbearable political instability, continued war, and conflicts. The ordinary people cannot even have the most basic social stability and a guarantee of a material life, let alone freedom and democracy. We can say that, to some extent, "democratization" has become synonymous with social disorder in these countries. 
In recent years, the global trend of democratic recession has been more obvious in non-Western regions. The introduction of Western values and political systems in these developing countries not only failed to promote the country’s economic development, political stability and social progress, but also caused a mushrooming of political parties, political instability, and social disintegration. A lot of pressing issues related to people’s lives are often put aside because of political strife. Many countries have been pushed into the "quagmire of democracy."
Source: Qiushi, July 23, 2014
http://www.qstheory.cn/dukan/hqwg/2014-07/23/c_1111750512.htm
Briefings | | |   US-China Relations

People’s Daily (Overseas Edition): The U.S. Has Become a “Paper Tiger.”

People’s Daily (overseas edition) published a commentary article in which it gloated that the United States has become a “paper tiger.” During the era of the first Chinese Communist leader, Mao Zedong, this name was once a household slogan: “The American imperialist is a paper tiger.”  

The article quoted one [U.S.] Republican senator’s words, “Before the world, the United States has behaved like a paper tiger." The commentary said that this expressed a lot of people’s feelings. The article further commented that many critics had other names for this "paper tiger," such as “an ass in a lion’s skin” [one of Aesop’s Fables], or “untrustworthy.” 
The article ascribed the American demise to its predestined fate. It said that America, in a world developing toward a multipolar direction, is in an era of in which its power is in relative decline and Obama is destined to live with criticism. “Perhaps Obama can only lament that he was not born at the right time." … “Who would not want to have the prestige of ‘the carrot and the stick?’  Now, however, the United States has been stretched beyond its capability. At such a moment, [who says] being ‘prudent’ and even ‘weak’ does not require courage?” 
The article didn’t spare words in blaming Obama, “Of course, for the United States to become a ‘paper tiger,’ in addition to objective factors, Obama is not without responsibility. Who allowed him to, on occasion, not control his impulse before the world to draw a ‘red line’ and then hopelessly watch the red line become a pink line, and then turn white [pale] — a lie showing it was impossible for him to keep his promise? After stumbling over the ‘red line’ on Syria’s chemical weapons, he could not resist the temptation again in the Crimea issue. Consequently, the ‘paper tiger’ image is starting to become ‘deeply rooted in people’s hearts.’” 
Source: People’s Daily (oversea edition), July 17, 2014 http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrbhwb/html/2014-07/17/content_1453746.htm http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2014-07/17/c_126762638.htm
Briefings | | |   US-China Relations

Huanqiu Editorial: Any Country That Is Hostile to China Will Have to Pay a Huge Price”

On July 14, 2014, Huanqiu (the Chinese edition of Global Times) published an editorial asserting that the U.S. has sided with Vietnam and the Philippines against China in the South China Sea disputes. The editorial was in response to the U.S. proposal on July 11 that Asian nations should freeze building new outposts or expanding existing ones in the South China Sea to prevent more tensions and conflicts.

The Huanqiu editorial asked the United States to stay away from the South China Sea disputes. “After all, the South China Sea is not the Caribbean. China has the capability to ensure there is a difference between these two seas.” The editorial suggested that China give the United States some unexpected lessons so as to “let the U.S. swallow its grievances like a dummy, without being able to speak out for himself.” The editorial continued, “China must be self-confident!”  “Any country that is hostile to China will have to pay a huge price; it must be very clear on this point.” 

Source: Huanqiu, July 14, 2014
http://opinion.huanqiu.com/editorial/2014-07/5061932.html

Briefings | | |   US-China Relations

BBC Chinese: State TV Report Labelled the iPhone “Dangerous”

BBC Chinese recently reported that, on Friday (July 11), as part of its national news program at noon, China Central Television (CCTV) broadcast news that labelled the Apple iPhone a "national security threat." CCTV criticized the "frequent locations" function of the Apple’s iOS 7 operating system, saying that researchers believe data points recorded by the feature could give those with access to this data knowledge of Chinese intelligence and even "state secrets." The TV report said, “The location data are very sensitive.” BBC Chinese mentioned in its report that official Chinese media have frequently criticized Apple about such issues as the “poor customer service” incident that occurred not long ago. [Editor’s note: On July 13, Apple responded to the CCTV report stating emphatically that the company has never and, in the future, will not obtain users’ “frequent locations” data and that the firm has never created a "backdoor’ in any of its products.”]
Source: BBC Chinese, July 11, 2014
http://www.bbc.co.uk/zhongwen/simp/china/2014/07/140711_china_cctv_apple_iphone.shtml
South China Daily, July 13, 2014
http://tx.southcn.com/tongxin/content/2014-07/13/content_104130252.htm
Briefings | | |   US-China Relations

Global Times: No U.S. Conspiracy? Kerry Please Prove It with Action

China’s state media the Global Times published a special invited commentary article about U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s remark in an interview with CCTV. Below is an excerpt from the article. 

“Recently, in an exclusive interview with CCTV, U.S. Secretary of State Kerry said that China really should abandon the so-called American conspiracy theory, which is to say that the U.S. Asia-Pacific rebalancing strategy is not against China or to contain China. Many [Chinese] netizens questioned whether that is true.”  
“Chinese netizens did not take this statement seriously. Many responded to Kerry: [It is] ‘deceiving,’ ‘adding insult to injury,’ ‘The villain is obvious,’ ‘Comrade Kerry, you got the wrong manuscript,’ ‘Every time China wants to give up the American conspiracy theory, the United States always hits your face with the facts,’ ‘Whenever the United States abandons its conspiracy, we will abandon the American conspiracy theory,’ and so on.” 
 “Americans [always] give [the best] explanation of the American conspiracy theory with their actions. U.S. officials, including Obama, have claimed on several occasions that the Asia-Pacific rebalancing strategy is not aimed at China. However, since the start of this year, the United States has frequently created troubles for China.” 
“Sino-U.S. relations are quite grim. The Washington Post reported on the 7th that some experts believe that China-U.S. relations are currently facing the most severe test since President Nixon’s visit to China in 1972. On June 26, the U.S. National Interest magazine website published an article by Michael Vlahos stating that history reminds people that the outbreak of a Sino-U.S. war is indeed possible. Some Internet users believe that if the United States does not change its policy of containment against China, talk will only be negotiations about some of the little specific things and it will not solve the Sino-U.S. friction and the deep-level contradictions.” 
“We really hope that the ‘American conspiracy theory’ is just ‘hearsay.’ We really hope that the U.S. realizes that ‘the containing China’s theory is wrong, a hundred percent wrong.’ It is of no use if the United States only says it. The key is to come up with action. Establishing new relations between big powers, one has to start bit by bit, rather than shout with exaggerated, empty words.” 
Source: Huanqiu (Global Times), July 10, 2014 
http://opinion.huanqiu.com/opinion_world/2014-07/5057164.html
Briefings | | |   US-China Relations

Global Times: Overly Exaggerating the Strength of the U.S. Is Not Good for China

In an article recently published in Global Times, Han Xudong, a professor at the National Defense University, stated that China has overly focused on the United States. Below is a partial translation of the article. 

"Today, Chinese in every profession all pay close attention to the United States’ every move. With its increasing international influence, China is bound to meet head-on with the United States in many ways. To study and pay attention to the United States is quite necessary. However, overly exaggerating the issues of the United States, engaging in some meaningless matters, or exaggerating China’s own things will only be detrimental to China’s development." 

"In fact, China’s ‘feverish’ focus on the U.S. originated during the Gulf War. In this war, the United States, for the first time, applied high-tech weapons to fight the first high-tech war. Subsequently, the Chinese territory started its own ‘Gulf War research fever,’ trying to ascertain how the United States won the Gulf War. Due to the use of precision weapons, China began to characterize the war as an information war. People began to overstate constantly the extent of informationization in the U.S. In fact, the level of information in the U.S. and the U.S. military is not as high as what the Chinese have imagined."　　　　 

“Currently, as to the United States’ action in the Asia-Pacific region, people tend to use their preconceived notions of ‘rebalancing’ to analyze and interpret the U.S. Asia-Pacific strategy. Americans say that its Asia-Pacific strategy is a ‘rebalancing’ strategy. So far, the substance of this ‘rebalancing?’ is something for which the Americans have not given an official explanation. Nevertheless, the Chinese people continually try to interpret its meaning. The Chinese people are currently doing what the Americans should do. In fact, the U.S. Asia-Pacific strategy should be a much more profound and broader strategy than a ‘rebalancing’ strategy. Because the United States has preset China as a ‘global strategic adversary,’ the concept of a mere ‘rebalancing’ presents difficulties in covering the strategic initiatives in the Asia Pacific region that the U.S. might take.” 

Source: Global Times, July 7, 2014 
http://mil.huanqiu.com/observation/2014-07/5050149.html 
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2014-07/07/c_126719716.htm

Briefings | | |   US-China Relations