Pomfret's China

« Previous Post | Next Post »

The G2 Mirage

There's a really smart piece in the current issue of Foreign Policy by Elizabeth Economy and Adam Segal on, basically, the stupidity of the ideas behind the US-China "G2."

The link is above but I've included some excerpts below:

Elevating the bilateral relationship is not the solution. It will raise expectations for a level of partnership that cannot be met and exacerbate the very real differences that still exist between Washington and Beijing. The current lack of U.S.-Chinese cooperation does not stem from a failure on Washington's part to recognize how much China matters...It derives from mismatched interests, values, and capabilities.

The United States is not alone in recognizing that China affects all the critical issues of the day or in seeking more from China as an emerging global power. Throughout the world, countries are realizing that the issues that currently define their relationships with Beijing cannot simply be negotiated bilaterally.

The Obama administration should sit down with Japan, the EU, and other key allies to begin coordinating their policies toward China. Much of what the United States does, or is proposing to do, with China on the environment, human rights, and food and product safety is also being discussed or undertaken by Canada, the EU, Japan, and other states in Asia. Yet there is presently no coordination, which means these simultaneous efforts will be inefficient and may work at cross-purposes.

Washington does not want to undermine European and Japanese efforts by competing to cooperate with China. There is frequently a cost to cooperating with Beijing: Chinese government agencies often require donations or impose high overhead costs on foreign partners, and these fees could well rise as the Chinese play foreign actors off against one another.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration opened three offices in China with a total staff of 13 people -- an admirable beginning but far from sufficient. At the same time, the EU and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are running their own food-safety programs with China, and Japan and South Korea have begun negotiations with China on the topic. A single, integrated response would be far more effective, and consumers worldwide would be much safer if U.S. inspectors worked alongside their European, Japanese, and South Korean colleagues.

The year 2009 marks 30 years since the normalization of relations between the United States and China. Three decades of peace and stability in U.S.-Chinese relations should be celebrated. Further elevating the bilateral relationship, however, without addressing the very real differences in values and enforcement capacities between the two countries will lead nowhere -- except to the creation of more empty frameworks for dialogues and never-ending dialogues to establish more frameworks. The time has come to acknowledge that although working with China sounds easy, it is not. If the United States wants to move its relationship with China forward for the next 30 years, it needs the rest of the world, not just China, on board.

Email the Author | Email This Post | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Comments (4)

Benkgee Author Profile Page:

Why G2? Europe as a whole is bigger than than US and Japan's economy is bigger then China's.
Although China's influence in the world is growing, its economy is small compared to the US or Europe as a whole. If China tries to save the world, it would be like a poor swimmer seeing someone felt into a river, if he jump into the river and try to save the drowning person may end up drowned himself. If China want to save the world, China must engage as many countries as it can, but must also stay alive. You can not help anyone if you are dead.
China has another problem. When China tries to help, many countries view China with suspicion. Many of these countries were colonized in the past, they do not know whether China will be their new colonizer even if that is not China's intention. China has to be patient, in time people will learn that people can give and recieve at the same time.

Peter34 Author Profile Page:

United Gangsters.

infoshop Author Profile Page:

yeah, let chain them up, use "enhance" method if necessary to get our allies falls into our orbit of influence.

iewgnem Author Profile Page:

Basically, the US alone will only be led around by China on a leash if it tried to talk one on one, it need to gang up with others and take on China together. The last few paragraphs are just unnecessary rhetoric.

If everyone in the Arab world ganged up on the US, the world would be a lot different too, but who will start first?

Post a comment



Recent Comments

Links & Resources

Visit Pomfret's Website
PostGlobal is an interactive conversation on global issues moderated by Newsweek International Editor Fareed Zakaria and David Ignatius of The Washington Post. It is produced jointly by Newsweek and washingtonpost.com, as is On Faith, a conversation on religion. Please send your comments, questions and suggestions for PostGlobal to Lauren Keane, its editor and producer.