A new strategy for US-China cooperation

Containment will not work

When the International order is making a space for China and shifting the balance towards multi-polarity, the ties between the US and China would shape the future global order – global peace, prosperity and governance. From the Russia’s relationship with the West, particularly over the Ukrainian crisis, to the disturbing situation in the Middle East, the agreements or disagreements between both states would have implications for the rules that govern the world today.

At present, it seems that powerful forces in both the US and China are on a collision course. In China, the current leadership of Xi Jinping is working on a proactive foreign policy and using its economic leverage to attract the world to its side. The formation of AIIB, for example, is not only the reaction of US policy of downgrading China in the IMF, World Bank and ADB, but also the Chinese policy for controlling the developmental narrative, particularly in Asia. Developmental narrative means that China is expanding its clout in the region by financing the infrastructural and developmental needs of developing nations on its own terms and conditions without any influence of the US. Naturally, it would bring the Asian countries closer to China than the US. In the present world order, economy has substituted the ideology, and the countries would go where they find funding.

There is growing perception among the Chinese that the US policy towards Asia is intend to isolate, contain and undermining China

Under Xi’s assertive leadership, China is no longer isolating itself by following the Deng Xiaoping’s injunction that the country should “hide its strength, bide its time, and never take the lead” in international affairs. By following Deng’s theory of dealing with the outside world, China has successfully managed to develop its economy which has spurred it onto the world stage. Now, when China is the ‘near-competitor’ of the US, it can no longer afford to adopt the policy of isolationism. This is the reason that China seems to have jumped onto the world stage. It has flexed its muscles and pursuing its territorial claims in the South China Sea. Also, it is resisting the continuation of American dominance in the region through its economy and military.

There is growing perception among the Chinese that the US policy towards Asia is intend to isolate, contain and undermining China. On the US ‘re-balancing strategy’, China believes that the US focus towards Asia is only meant to contain Beijing. Under the strategy, the US seems to be achieving two objectives: a) Contain China economically b) Militarise Japan. On the economic side, the US is working on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and for the second objective, the US is encouraging Japan to come out of its pacifist constitution and build its military to counter the growing threats of today. Whatever may be the US policy, the famous discourse is that the US is intent to remain the only dominant power, especially in Asia.

Such intentions of the US can be found in a report for the Council of Foreign Relations, by Robert Blackwill and Ashley Tellis, arguing that the US grand objective must be “preserving US primacy in the global system,” and for that, the report suggests aggressive economic, political, and military measures to “balance” China. Very cleverly, the world “containment” is replaced by the world “balance”, but in essence, both connotes the same meaning: countering China’s rise for sustaining American dominance. If such American strategy continues, there is every reason to believe that the Sino-American conflict will escalate in the near future. To stop that from happening, there is a need to have a new strategy, which is called “constructive realism” by Kevin Rudd, former Australian prime minister and now the head of the Asian Society Policy Institute. In a new report for the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Rudd outlines the blue print for the future US-China cooperation.

According to Rudd, issues such as Taiwan, South and East China Seas, China’s military modernisation of its political system, etc, area hard to deal with. Any solution to such issues require careful management or it risks open confrontation between the US and China. But there are other areas of cooperation and collaboration between the two countries. For any progress and collaboration to take place, the US needs to recognise China as an equal partner and appreciate its importance in the present world order. It needs to be clear on the fact that China has emerged as a rising power, sometimes substituting the US influence and at other times, complementing it. There are many difficult issues challenging global peace and order which require a collaborative and constructive approach by US and China. On issues such as terrorism, cyber security and nuclear proliferation, there is great room for both countries to engage bilaterally, regionally and globally to systematically sustain the world order.

Bilaterally, the US and China can work for a joint intelligence task force for countering the menace of international terrorism

Bilaterally, the US and China can work for a joint intelligence task force for countering the menace of international terrorism. On the issues of nuclear proliferation, the US can involve China in making new rules to counter proliferation of nuclear technology. For that matter, a good start would be the mutual ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

On a regional level, they could collaborate on the strategies to solve North Korea’s nuclear issue. Also, the joint strategies could focus on harmonising trade agreements. If Sino-US collaboration continues constructively, it can tackle the lingering sore of Japan’s war history.

At the global level, both the US and China have a common interest in combating climate change. Thus, this is one of the important areas for them to cooperate. More importantly, the US needs to work together with China to internationalise the renminbi, giving China a greater role in the IMF and World Bank. The over-reaction by the US over the formation of AIIB would not solve the problem, unless systematic structural changes are introduced in the Bretton woods institutions. Also, there is a need to reform other key institutions within the UN system to bring them in line with the changing post-World War II ground realities. In the present world order, China’s rise will continue and it has to be accommodated by the US. This time, the containment strategy will not work.