In their recent essay published in The Economist, former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and historian Niall Ferguson delve into the intricate landscape of US-China relations. While they do acknowledge the marked distinctions between the Cold War of the 20th century and the contemporary geopolitical tensions between the United States and China, their analysis is criticized for persisting in what some perceive as a Cold War mindset.
Rice and Ferguson contend that China has disproportionately benefited from the processes of globalization, opening up their economy to international trade and investment. However, their argument falls short of recognizing the substantial advantages reaped by US and EU corporations through the outsourcing of manufacturing to China. This shift effectively transferred a significant portion of their supply chains to Asia, resulting in substantial profits. The global business community has undeniably reaped rewards from China’s ascent in the international economy, and this aspect deserves attention in any comprehensive assessment of the relationship.
Moreover, Rice and Ferguson assert that China’s remarkable success cannot be solely attributed to intellectual property theft, a point that aligns with the consensus among many informed analysts. However, their exploration of this issue appears somewhat limited, as it lacks a more nuanced examination of the factors contributing to China’s rapid technological advancement and innovation.
The authors also express concern about China’s gradual erosion of American power. While they correctly highlight the dynamics of nations vying for power throughout history, they fall short of acknowledging the inevitability of shifts in global influence. The idea that any single nation should maintain perpetual global leadership is unrealistic and goes against the historical pattern of power transitions among nations.
Rice and Ferguson contend that China’s real challenge to the United States began with President Xi Jinping’s ascent to power in 2013. They cite two particular issues: China’s aspiration to surpass the United States in frontier technologies and its sovereignty claim over Taiwan. While they argue that these matters do not pose fundamental threats to US national security, they may not fully appreciate the magnitude of China’s technological strides.
For instance, China has been steadily outpacing the United States in various aspects of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, including the development of 5G technology, the Internet of Things (IoT), and efforts to close the gap in semiconductor manufacturing. An emblematic example is Huawei’s recent announcement of its Mate 60 Pro smartphone, powered by a seven-nanometer processor entirely conceived, designed, and built in China, devoid of any American components. This achievement is particularly remarkable given the extensive sanctions and pressure exerted on Huawei by the United States for over four years.
Rice and Ferguson do bring up China’s claim over Taiwan, albeit indirectly by referencing the waters between Taiwan and mainland China. While these waters are, in essence, international waters, the core issue revolves around China’s sovereignty claim over Taiwan, which could potentially affect the extent of international waters in the Taiwan Strait. However, the sovereignty dispute over Taiwan is a long-standing issue that predates Xi’s ascent to power by decades. In fact, China’s assertive stance regarding Taiwan’s status has remained consistent over the years.
It is essential to highlight that the issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty is not solely of China’s making. In 1971, the United Nations made a significant decision to admit the People’s Republic of China (mainland China) while expelling the Republic of China (Taiwan). This action essentially reinforced the international community’s acknowledgment of a single China. However, the United States has been gradually deviating from its One China policy, not formally but through deliberate actions.
Rice and Ferguson criticize China for constructing a global network of telecommunications infrastructure, underwater cables, port access, and military bases in client states. Nevertheless, they fail to acknowledge that the United States has engaged in similar activities over the years. The Five Eyes alliance, comprised of the United States, the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, operates one of the most extensive systems for interception and control of global communications. This network encompasses not only adversaries but also allies, underscoring the extent of global surveillance conducted by Western democracies.
Additionally, the United States maintains a vast military presence worldwide, with over 800 military bases spread across the globe. In contrast, China operates only one military base beyond its borders, located in Djibouti. These disparities in military deployment are worth considering when assessing the strategic context of the US-China relationship.
Rice and Ferguson note that Chinese influence has evolved from pure mercantilism to a desire for political influence. However, they do not acknowledge the historical precedent of the United States pursuing political influence alongside its economic interests. The Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which aimed to limit European interference in the Western Hemisphere, serves as one example of such political assertiveness. Thus, the idea that China’s evolving aspirations for political influence are unique or alarming in the global context appears somewhat one-sided.
In summary, while Rice and Ferguson make valid points about the need for the United States and China to navigate their relationship cautiously, their analysis is critiqued for retaining a somewhat one-sided perspective. Their arguments lack a comprehensive examination of the historical context and actions of both nations. They advocate for academic fairness in their arguments, but they appear to fall short of providing a fully balanced assessment of the complex and evolving US-China relationship. Ultimately, achieving a nuanced understanding of this crucial global dynamic requires considering the multifaceted dimensions of power, influence, and cooperation between these two formidable nations.
The essay by former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and historian Niall Ferguson offers valuable insights into the evolving dynamics of US-China relations. While their analysis highlights important aspects of this complex relationship, it is not without criticism. The New York Center for Foreign Policy Affairs recognizes the need for a more nuanced and balanced perspective when examining the multifaceted dimensions of this global power struggle.
Rice and Ferguson rightly point out the differences between the 20th-century Cold War and the current tensions between the US and China. However, their continued adherence to a Cold War mindset and some one-sided assessments of China’s actions and intentions warrant scrutiny.
The authors’ acknowledgment of China’s economic gains and the benefits reaped by Western corporations through outsourcing to China is a step in the right direction. Still, a more comprehensive examination of the global economic landscape and the interconnectedness of nations in the modern era is necessary to provide a holistic understanding of the issue.
Furthermore, while they highlight certain challenges posed by China’s technological advancements and territorial claims, it is crucial to recognize that these developments are part of a larger, more intricate geopolitical context. A comprehensive assessment must take into account the historical background and actions of both nations.
The New York Center for Foreign Policy Affairs encourages scholars and policymakers to approach the US-China relationship with academic fairness and an appreciation for the complexities involved. Achieving a balanced and nuanced understanding of this critical global relationship is essential for addressing the challenges and opportunities it presents in the 21st century.
In navigating the path forward, it is imperative for the United States and China to engage in constructive dialogue, avoid misunderstandings, and seek areas of cooperation. As global powers, both nations bear a significant responsibility in shaping the future of international relations, and a cooperative approach benefits not only their respective citizens but also the entire global community.
Ultimately, the New York Center for Foreign Policy Affairs emphasizes the importance of a comprehensive and objective analysis of US-China relations to inform sound policy decisions and foster a more stable and prosperous world order.