Limits to Chinese-American Cooperation
|
A good article in the Wall Street Journal that highlights why, despite a lot of commentary abo=ut a "G-2" partnership between the current superpower and the rising one, there are serious limits to cooperation.
I agree. I understand the necessary symbiotic relationship American and China currently have, but domestic issues and geopolitical imperatives do not allow for a seamless integration. There will be friction and distrust on both sides and both will seek to hedge against an uncertain future. This will not remain solely within the economic sphere.
In the meantime, here are the reasons given in the article why cooperation will be challenging,
"First, both governments remain largely focused on formidable domestic challenges. Mr. Obama knows his political fortunes depend largely on the resilience of the U.S. economy and its ability to generate jobs. He's occupied for the moment with a high-stakes poker game with lawmakers in his o= wn party over ambitious health-care and energy-reform plans.
China's leadership faces competing internal demands from those who want to stimulate the economy toward another round of export-driven growth and others who want to shift quickly toward greater dependence on domestic consumption. Given the trade deficit, Washington would like Beijing to focus on the latter, but China won't move as fast as the U.S. would like, in part because the leadership recognizes that the loss of millions of manufacturing and construction jobs in recent months could fuel further turmoil in a country that already sees tens of thousands of large-scale protests each year.
Second, there's the bureaucratic problem. For the past several years, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson chaired a strategic dialogue with Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan. Washington and Beijing have now expanded the scope of talks to include the State Department and China's fore= ign ministry. Leaving aside the difficulties in building trust between U.S. and Chinese negotiators, State and Treasury don't coordinate well on strategy, and there's no guarantee that China's foreign and finance ministries will work seamlessly together either. The new formula for talks is bureaucra= tic infighting squared.
The third reason the U.S. and China won't build a durable strategi c partnership is that Beijing has little appetite for the larger geopolitical role Washington would like it to play. Why should Beijing accept the risks that come with direct involvement in conflicts involving Iran and Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, Israelis and Palestinians, Somalia and Sudan, and other sources of potential turmoil? It has more immediate problems at home." |
Comments