The Rising China’s policy towards US

Faryal Saeed
Exclusive Article

Nationalism has played an important role in shaping the Chinese foreign policy over the last 100 years. The divergence of Chinese and American strategy has become increasingly apparent and China’s posture towards the US has adapted to changes in the strategic environment.

China, long a rising power, has now arrived on the world stage. The US, for two decades the sole global power, is reeling from the global economic downturn and entangled in two difficult wars. Meanwhile, global threats like the economic crisis, global warming and nuclear proliferation only grow more intense. These shifts in the international environment raise some major questions about the shared responsibilities of China and the US. The questions are of signs of China’s help in solving global problems and signs of US readiness to share leadership. The answers can only be found out through the policies of both states.

The Sino-US relations have historically suffered from mutual misperceptions, cultural differences and unrealistic expectations. The Chinese understanding of America and Americans understanding of Chinese had been shallow and seriously distorted. Many Chinese and American analysts held highly negative, suspicious and stereotyped views of both the US and China. An analyst argued in his article that the end of Cold War exposed underlying weaknesses in Chinese understanding of US but the improvements in Chinese understanding of the US had not translated into more stable bilateral relations. Many Chinese analysts interpreted a string of bilateral disputes during 1990s as evidence of an American strategy to contain China.

Focusing on the period from mid 1990s to the present, Chinese analysts’ views on the US China Policy found that the perceptual gap in their relations remains today, though Chinese understanding of America continues to improve. Now, there seems to be a lessened diversity of opinions and an emerging consensus on the hegemonic nature of US Foreign Policy, particularly its intention of containing a rising China though its dual strategy (of containment and engagement) continues to exist. Many Chinese analysts remain highly critical and negative; indeed negative views regarding America have become deeper. Chinese simply do not trust American motives given their perception of American hegemony. They fear American manipulation of China in international strategic terms, exploitation in economic terms and subversion in political and ideological terms.

Nationalism is relatively new for China in its relations with the rest of the world. Before the 20th century, the predominate Chinese approach to foreign relations was culturalism. After the success of nationalism of the Western powers, China also adopted nationalism and later it became the key driving force of China’s handling of foreign relations. After the collapse of culturalism, Nationalism was summoned in the Chinese 3,000 years’ history. Nationalism admits foreign ideas but it will blaze against foreign material incursions.

Beijing’s prediction to attribute to the US a highly reasoned, largely criticize global strategy bent on power expansion defines how Beijing perceives American China policy. Such a perception breeds a conspiratorial view, which in turns predisposes China to see ill intention and disturbing motives in every U.S act. As the US seeks to maintain its superior power position, it logically wants to contain a rising power like China. Seen in its light, the revitalization of the US-Japan security alliance is evidently targeted primarily against China.

Between 1992 and 1995, China policy elites shared a view that their country’s security environment was the best since the Opium War (1839-1842). Frustration with a perceived U.S containment strategy to deny China’s entry into the great power club fueled anti-American nationalism. Those anti-American sentiments reflected the public’s emotional reactions to events such as rejection of China’s membership in WTO in 1999, denial of China’s right to host the 2000 Olympic Games and growing U.S arrogance in the treatment of China.

China’s international strategy is identified as consisting of some issues: first, create a peaceful international environment so that China can concentrate on its economic development; second, bring about national reunification with Taiwan; third, strengthen China’s comprehensive national power to enhance the Chinese pole in a future multi-polar world; finally, build a new international political and economic order with less inequity of power and wealth between the rich and poor and a more strict obedience to the principle of sovereignty. America and Chinese strategic interests do not always coincide; they conflict over Taiwan, over the vision of global order, and over views on the desirability of the existing international structure.

Both states support peace in the Asia-Pacific region, but they differ on what ‘peace’ means and what a regional order in East Asia should look like. The two countries fundamentally differ over issues concerning the architecture of the post-Cold War global order, the continued relevance of sovereignty, the emerging role of UN and NATO, the legitimate use of force and the place of humanitarian interventionism in world politics. Chinese analysts contend that the U.S regards China as its potential threat and strategic rival in the twenty-first century.

More clearly, Sino-American conflict is ‘structural’, as China is on the rise and US wants to maintain its uni-polar dominance. Chinese new perceptions underscore the structural conflict driving the US-China relations. The two countries may share certain interests in specific issues or in realms such as trade, environmental protection, cracking down on terrorists’ activities and international crimes and preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, but the vital security interests defined by the two sides are fundamentally at odds with each other at bilateral, regional and global levels.

From the Chinese perspective, North America, the European Powers and Japan have coalesced into a grand alliance underpinned by common political values and foreign policy outlook as well as shared interests. China’s external security and vital status ultimately rely on a secure domestic base and a more developed economy. China’s ability to play its market card to compensate for its political-military vulnerabilities hinges upon a healthy economy.

Today, many Chinese continued to hold negative attitudes towards the U.S. they see that being the sole superpower in the world, the US is well in the position of practicing hegemonism. Now, China is on rise, America deems it necessary to contain China in order to preserve its own status. Above research shows, despite of continued progress, there remains a perceptual gap between the US and China, which contributes to the fluctuating nature of Sino-American relations to a certain extent.

Reduced misperceptions and improved mutual understanding would help in prevailing stability in US China relations. Necessary adjustments for mutual accommodation and measures such as enhanced strategic dialogue would help to improve relations between the two countries, among other things. Sino-US relation will continue to be a critical, if not more important, issue for both to manage well, into the coming years.

-Faryal Saeed is DDS student at the Fatima Jinnah Women University, Rawalpindi.

The article is contributed to pkarticleshub.com