Managing a challenging relationship

President Donald J. Trump joins Xi Jinping, President of the People’s Republic of China, Photo by Shealah Craighead. Wikimedia Commons

Most commentators have come to recognise the China-US relationship as the most critical state-to-state relationship in global politics. That's an enormous transformation, obviously, from the Cold War era, when most were focusing on the former Soviet Union and the United States, or focusing on the Warsaw Pact and NATO.

However, we're now focused on the China-US relationship. Given the rise of the People’s Republic of China, we’re also concerned with how to manage those ties. This is important to countries because they expect that China will soon become the largest economy in the world and its political influence will also grow further as a result of that.

Others argue that it already has the largest economy. It's also beginning to rival the United States in terms of its defence budget and military capability. As such, there are several strategic actions that the United States can no longer take that it once had the freedom of manoeuvre to undertake.

Who has the upper hand?

Although some would suggest China has already overtaken the United States, I think that is too simple an understanding of the transition that is taking place. The United States is still a major global actor. Other states look to it for leadership on a number of issues.

Furthermore, the United States has a global reach in terms of its military. There are approximately 800 American bases in 70 different countries. China has one overseas base in Djibouti, which it describes as a logistical facility. Overall, there are areas of soft power as well as hard power where the United States remains the leading actor.

It is also unclear the extent to which China is viewed positively as a global actor. There are questions about its domestic political system. There are also concerns about its rise to power and the associated costs. This is particularly true of the environmental costs involved as well as the costs of its political-economic model.

The cutting edge

China has developed and heavily invested in dual-use technologies. Dual-use technologies are technologies that have high commercial value and potentially high military value.

Looking to the future, there is concern that China will become the leading actor in fields such as artificial intelligence, robotics or quantum computing. This reality is difficult for the United States to accept. It has forced the United States to realise it has not invested the necessary resources in developing the new technologies.

Leapfrogging

Photo by Dmitry El’marovich

In the past, the United States essentially believed that mutually beneficial exchange was possible with China, but that it would always remain ahead in terms of technological advancement.

Yet, about five years or so ago, there was a realisation that China was beginning to surpass the United States technologically. It was developing its own high-tech capabilities independently, although the US has argued that China has accomplished these developments by stealing US intellectual property. This largely accelerated the deterioration of the relationship.

Thucydides Trap

The deterioration in the China-US relationship has often been attributed to structural causes in parts of the academic literature. Academics argue that there are several historical examples whereby a rising power begins to challenge the status quo or otherwise dominant power. These moments are the most serious for power transitions. At these times, conflict is most likely to occur.

In our era, this archetypal situation is often referred to as the ‘Thucydides Trap’. The term draws on the writings of the Athenian historian and General Thucydides who has written a history of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides tells the story of the war between Sparta and Athens.

Nevertheless, I'm not convinced by this particular argument. I believe that there are many ways in which countries can manage conflictual relationships. We saw that during the Cold War. Governments make choices. They can make choices that don't necessarily promote a broad range of cooperative outcomes, but still allow for forms of coexistence between parties that otherwise are in opposition.

Interacting with the United Nations

Examining the China-US relationship in third-party venues such as the United Nations provides a clear example of the deterioration in ties. It also provides a perspective on the roles of the two countries.

In particular, the Chinese view the UN as an authoritative and universal body. China believes the UN is a useful platform in which it can express its beliefs, demonstrate its status as a great power and influence other states, particularly states in the developing world.

The United States, on the other hand, has always had a more ambivalent relationship with the UN. This is because the US is so powerful that it can act unilaterally. It can also form coalitions of the willing and work outside the UN on security questions. Yet it's also supported the maintenance of the UN. It's been the primary contributor to the UN budget since the UN was first established in 1945.

Trumping the UN

Photo by lev radin

The Trump administration took an especially negative attitude towards the UN. It saw the UN as an ephemeral place not crucial to the promotion of United States interests. It viewed the UN as a body that was inimical to US interests in many ways.

President Trump stood before the UN General Assembly and argued that the most important value was patriotism. He claimed that the love of one's country and putting one's country first were most important. Furthermore, he suggested that working collectively with a body such as the UN was tantamount to betraying your own country and people.

And the United States, under the Trump administration, made good on some of those views. It took itself out of the Human Rights Council very quickly, and it took itself out of UNESCO and the World Health Organization. It also held back on payment of its UN dues. Indeed, there has been a real sense of absence within the UN in recent years. This absence provided a vacuum which China was willing to fill. It did so by offering additional resources and playing a more active role.

Pushback during a Biden administration

This situation is likely to be reversed under the Biden administration. It contains several advisers who are multilateralist in approach, and Joe Biden himself is essentially a more multilateralist thinker. He realises that US power is multiplied if it can generate support for some of the policies that it would like to see enacted.

I expect the United States to re-engage within the Human Rights Council and to re-engage with the UN more broadly. This is welcomed. Indeed, I think there's a kind of a collective sigh of relief within the UN Secretariat that the United States will be back and involved. Of course, the United States is not an easy actor under any administration, and it will continue to protect its interests within that body. Nevertheless, it will be a presence that will challenge China on various issues about which the two sides disagree.

So there will be pushback. It's complicated for weaker states within the UN system to push back against policy positions advanced by China. This is true because China is the leading trading partner of so many countries, and it's challenging for them to stand alone against policies that the Chinese regard as necessary. If the United States becomes more active within the United Nations, then at least there's the possibility of protective cover for nations in a subordinate position to China and who themselves may not agree with the positions that Beijing takes.

Discover more about

The China-US relationship

Christensen, T. J. (2015). The China Challenge: Shaping the Choices of a Rising Power. Norton and Company.

Foot, R. (2018). China-US Relations in a Changing Global Order. In Wu & Frazier (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Contemporary China, Sage Publications Inc.

Foot, R., & King, A. (2019). Assessing the deterioration in China–U.S. relations: U.S. governmental perspectives on the economic-security nexus. China International Strategy Review, 1, 39–50.

China-US Relationship?