Connect with us
Next, observers need to grasp the highly adverse structural and attitudinal trends driving the current negative dynamic, the serious dangers these trends pose for both countries and the world including the possibility of a new Cold War , and the high stakes involved in correcting or mitigating them.
From that vantage point, policymakers may better discern which actions each side must take to stabilize and strengthen the relationship for their mutual benefit. Since January , the U. On the positive side, the two nations have developed a mutually productive array of ties and interactions in a growing multitude of areas, from trade and investment to social and cultural exchanges, as well as common initiatives for dealing with global threats such as climate change, WMD proliferation, and pandemics.
In the process, China has become vastly more integrated with the rest of the international community; more observant of international laws, norms, and procedures; and more open to a much greater level of social, economic, and political influence than ever obtained prior to For serious students of the history of U. These advances have introduced greatly increased standards of living, improved social infrastructure, wider freedom to travel and express a variety of views, and more openness to foreign influences of all sorts.
- Ages Of Delirium (German Edition).
- Projektmanagement im Gesundheitswesen: Ist die Pflege fit für Projekte (German Edition).
- Russia and China in Eurasia: The Wary Partnership | SpringerLink.
- Si hubiéramos escuchado más y adivinado menos... (Spanish Edition);
- Russia and China!
At many intervals along the way, understandings between Washington and Beijing in particular have provided a major impetus for such Chinese gains. On the contrary, these advances have tangibly benefitted the United States and many other countries. Until the Trump Administration made the destructive decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord, Beijing and Washington had cooperated to pursue benefits not only for themselves but for the world in curbing climate change.
Moreover, even though Beijing has certainly stolen U. Americans have also obtained economically priced and increasingly well-made products designed, assembled, or manufactured in China. Finally, for nearly two decades prior to , the United States benefitted from close military and security cooperation with Beijing directed at their common adversary, the Soviet Union.
This strategic alignment directed at Moscow was one of the main reasons for establishing U. At most, some U. Nor would they have occurred if the United States had limited its diplomatic opening in the s and s to a few narrow areas of military cooperation and assistance.
- Creative Ideas for Godparents.
- Account Options.
- Please Consider Donating.
On the negative side, a number of challenges and setbacks have also accompanied the many advances. Since the two sides established full diplomatic relations in , Beijing and Washington have differed significantly over the handling of many critical issues, in ways that often reflected their differing political systems, the legacy of hostility and conflict resulting from the Korean War and the Cold War, and their contrasting political and social cultures and beliefs. They have extended as well to disputes over reciprocity and fairness in trade and investment, cyber and other forms of espionage, human rights practices within and beyond China, and other international laws and global norms.
Many of these differences have existed since For the most part, however, until recent years, these differences, while generating significant temporary downturns in the relationship usually following disruptive or unexpected actions such as the Tiananmen Square massacre of , did not fundamentally alter the underlying strategic, economic, and political interests of both countries in maintaining workable and productive relations.
In fact, by the advent of the twenty-first century, it had become clear that, in addition to the above long-standing bases for a strong U. These included unprecedented levels of interdependence among the U. It became increasingly clear that the United States and China could not effectively deal with such deeply-rooted problems on their own, or even bilaterally.
Successful management would require truly international forms of cooperation, guided largely by those nations with the most wealth, resources, capabilities, and intellectual capital, namely the West led by the United States, and both China and Japan. Unfortunately, the positive momentum in the relationship has not lasted. While new challenges and opportunities initially served to justify and compel greater U. These trends greatly aggravated the differences between the United States and China and eventually overshadowed the many positive factors at work in the relationship.
To compound this blow to the relationship, Chinese leaders have become more deeply suspicious of Western and especially U. Indeed, by the mids, the CCP leadership concluded that Washington and other democratic nations had contributed decisively to the collapse or weakening of one-party systems elsewhere and might be seeking similar ends for the PRC regime. A second set of highly negative trends that emerged in the s involved domestic developments in the U.
Russia and China : a theory of inter-state relations / Alexei D. Voskressenski - Details - Trove
Specifically, the global recession, the deepening polarization of American society, and the resulting near-paralysis of the U. This approach has largely eclipsed the long-standing emphasis of the Deng Xiaoping era on maintaining a relatively low international profile. Even more worrisome, in the United States and other Western countries, worsening domestic economic and social problems--exacerbated by the unprecedented surge of both legal and illegal non-white immigrants into Europe and the United States that began in the shave led to the emergence of chauvinistic forms of nationalism hostile to China and other countries.
In the United States, such hyper-nationalism is reflected most distinctively in the extremist views of President Trump. He has criticized U. Most notably for U.
A third major factor contributing to the overwhelming negative dynamics emerging in U. Over the last eighteen years, China has become the largest trading power in the world, surpassed the Japanese economy to become the second largest economic power overall, become a major source of innovation in key high-tech sectors, accumulated massive foreign exchange reserves, and transformed its military from a defense-oriented force focused mainly on the homeland and Taiwan to a more expansive, sophisticated force capable of operating at significant distances from China.
While contributing to global growth and the rise of living standards in many countries, the systemic changes arising from these developments have enhanced Chinese confidence abroad while greatly stoking American fears. In addition, Beijing is using its economic resources to create what it hopes will become a vast network of interlinked economic structures and relationships extending from China to Europe and Africa via both land and maritime routes, the so-called Belt and Road Initiative BRI.
It is also supporting or leading a variety of other multilateral and bilateral economic and security initiativessuch as new investment banks, Asian economic associations, and strategic partnerships with U. Further, as mentioned above, China is more assertively advancing, by economic, political, and military means, its claims to disputed areas along its maritime periphery from Northeast to Southeast Asia, thus alarming many nearby states.
Chinese confidence and assertiveness has increased, but certain more pessimistic Chinese sentiments have surfaced as well, providing more fuel for the fears of American hyper-nationalists. For instance, while spending billions of dollars on legitimate research and development, some Chinese entities now also engage in unprecedented levels of cyber espionage, physical theft, coercive contract arrangements, and other underhanded efforts to obtain cutting- edge technologies. Of particular note, they have contributed greatly to the general souring of attitudes toward the China market evident among many U.
As a result of all the negative changes outlined above, the common and in some areas growing strategic logic, economic incentives, and societal ties that long anchored the U. Although this is happening in both Washington and Beijing, it is at this time particularly evident in the United States. American policy under Trump has turned its back on the shared Chinese and American interest in combating common transnational threats such as climate change, and has withdrawn from or undermined potential mechanisms such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and a revised World Trade Organization agreement for more effectively managing bilateral and multilateral economic problems.
Instead, the Trump administration has adopted crude, sledgehammer-like economic policies centered on the imposition of legally questionable tariffs to force Beijing to submit to fully open its markets and eliminate state involvement in the Chinese economy. Even more ominously, Trump Administration strategy statements like the U. These statements allege that Beijing is plotting to build a revisionist, Sino-centric world order fundamentally incompatible with the U.
To support this distorted viewpoint and justify its draconian actions, U. In truth, these accusations grossly inflate and oversell genuine American and Western concerns rooted in observable facts. For example, while several recipients of Chinese infrastructure and development loans face serious repayment problems often due to reckless and inexperienced practices on both sides, there is no conclusive evidence that China is intentionally seeking to drive countries into debt problems to gain control over their assets, policies, etc.
Proponents of the debt trap diplomacy argument generally base their conclusion on a single case — Hambantota Port in Sri Lanka — while ignoring the other tools China uses to deal with bilateral debt problems. And even in that case, there is no publicly available information indicating that, when the Export-Import Bank of China made its first loan to Sri Lanka to support this project, the ultimate purpose was to help China gain a concession to develop and operate the port.
These are problems that, although by no means unique to China, need addressing forthrightly. Yet they should not obscure the fact that China is absolutely not a non-market economic power. The core of its economy remains driven by a huge number of privately-owned, market-driven small and medium-sized enterprises and the majority of its exports are produced or assembled by foreign corporations or joint Chinese-foreign ventures.
Moreover, if China were a purely predatory economic power, it would not be the largest single contributor to global growth since , according to the World Bank. Thirdly, despite constant repetition by officials and pundits alike, there is no substantive evidence that Beijing is pursuing a deliberate strategy to dominate Asia and the world militarily and overturn the existing global order. And it at times uses its military and para-military power to intimidate other claimants to disputed maritime territories in the East and South China Seas.
The latter behavior is certainly very troubling, but speaks to the need for a binding code of conduct that prohibits such actions, along with limits on specific types of militarization in sensitive areas. Beijing has shown no signs that it would reject either development; to the contrary, it has professed some support for them and should be pressed more to back up its words with concrete actions.
Chinese Foreign Policy in Transition. New York: Aldine De Gruyter, pp. Dittmer, Lowell b. Kim ed. The International Relations of Northeast Asia. Dugin, Aleksandr Moscow: Arktogeia. The Economist The Economist a. The Economist b. Ferdinand, Peter Gelman, Harry Blank and Alvin Z.
The Military Balance Jingjie, Li Blackwill and Sergei A. Karaganov eds Damage Limitation or Crisis? Russia and the Outside World. XV, no. Karaganov, Sergei London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, pp. Kazantsev, Andrei Kerr, David Kuchins, Andrew Lampton, David M. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lanteigne, Marc Chinese Foreign Policy: An Introduction.
London: Routledge. Legvold, Robert New York: Council on Foreign Relations, pp. Levy, Clifford J. Li, Rex Liebman, Alex Swaine, Andrew N. Young, and Evan S. Lo, Bobo London: Royal Institute of International Affairs.
Russia and China: A Theory of Inter-State Relations / Edition 1
Lukin, Alexander Ferguson eds Russian Strategic Thought toward Asia. Lukin, Vladimir Lukyanov, Fyodor a. Lukyanov, Fyodor b. Marat, Erica Margelov, Mikhail McDermott, Roger N. Mearsheimer, John The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York and London: W. Ethical Principles of authors of scientific articles. Information for Authors.
ISBN 13: 9780700714957
License contract. Current Issue. Archive Issues. Authors Index.
Rubric: Around Books. For citation: Strezhneva M. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya , , vol. Contents Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Comments 0.