The adage "actions speaks louder than words" can be amended to "thoughts count more than words" when it comes to serious diplomacy. Frankly, whatever is written into the Communique or a Declaration of Principles means little in itself. It is the understandings between the two leaders that is of the utmost importance. That is to say, agreed understandings as to how they view the shape and structure of world affairs, where their interests clash or converge, and how to meet the dual challenge of 1) handling those points of friction, and 2) working together to perform 'system maintenance' functions in both the economic and security realms.
i have no confident comprehension of Chinese perceptions on these matters. As to our own, Washington does not seem prepared to engage in this exercise. It's world view is still that framed by post-Cold War triumphalism. Our mind has been fixed on the policies for maintaining or extending American dominance. That is why we have committed ourselves to a military security doctrine of dominance at all levels in all regions. That is why we are building a base network across Southwestern and Central Asia while working feverishly to suppress any forces hostile to us.
We are psychologically and intellectually not ready to think seriously about the terms for sharing power with China and developing mechanisms for doing so over different time-frames. Washington is too preoccupied with parsing the naval balance in East Asia to reflect on broad strategies. We are too complacent about the deep faults in our economic structures, and too wasteful in dissipating trillions on chimerical ventures aimed at exorcising a mythical enemy to position ourselves for a diplomatic undertaking of the sort that a self-centered America has never before faced.
Beijing's leaders must be shocked by the accelerated pace of our relative decline. They too may be unprepared for addressing the consequences. China's traditional goal always has been to exact deference from other countries while bolstering their own strength -- not to impose an imperium on them. Much less do they share our impulse to arrange the affairs of the entire world according to a universalization of their own unique civilization. Therein lies an opportunity to avoid a 'war of transition.' However, I don't see anyone in the Obama administration -- or for that matter many outside it -- appreciating this overarching reality.
Instead, we see a mode of address that is the near antithesis to the kind of exchange between (near) equals that is best suited to fostering a healthy working relationship. Last week, Hillary Clinton devoted most of her speech on Sino-American relations to the prodding, hectoring and instructing that has become Washington's standard voice in addressing other governments. She was in exceptional form a few days after having given a stern rebuke in Doha to an assembly of Arab leaders for not bringing their peoples change that they can believe in. No mention was made of the unstinting support we've extended to all those in the audience out of dread that real democracy might bring to power forces less sympathetic to our obsessive 'war on terror.' That group included the unlamented Mr Zine El Abazine Ben Ali of Tunisia -- a country where days earlier we had declared ourselves neutral in the autocratic government's contest with a spontaneous popular movement that forced his ouster.
As to China, a similarly cajoling attitude was struck by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner who waxes indignant on a regular basis at Beijing's resistance to complying with our demands as to how they should amend their economic policies. In short, the Obama people are willing to work with the Chinese leaders so long as they accept Washington's strictures -- on the rate, on Iran, etc.
Part of our difficulty in making necessary changes of attitude and behavior is that we operate on the premise that there has to be a Number 1, a king of the hill, someone at the top of the BCS ratings. If that is taken as the natural order of things global, then it makes sense to hold onto the top slot we believe is ours by Divine Right using all means and no matter what. If we reject that possibility, a plethora of opportunities beyond the "it's us or them" mentality present themselves.
What is noteworthy is less the position we strike on this or that issue than the smug superiority that creeps into nearly all our communications with others. It is now a major liability in conducting diplomacy. Our ingrained sense of superiority is rooted in both recent circumstances (the sole superpower/unilateral moment) and our enduring national self-image as the as the exalted nation destined to show the world the path of virtuous truth.
It has been confirmed over the years by the routine deference we have received from so many countries. The deference is not as universal or automatic as it used to be, but we don't acknowledge that shift or the profound implications. In The Planet Of The Apes, the critical moment comes when the legendary simian hero first says 'No' to his masters. That ushers in the epochal role reversal whereby the formerly servile apes and orangutans turn the tables on humans.
Nothing so dramatic is in the offing for the United States. The true stake is the terms of engagement in a power and authority sharing world. We are deaf to Brazil's Lula saying 'No,' to Turkey's Erdogan, to Iraq's Maliki, to Afghanistan's Karzai, to Pakistan's Musharraf and Kayani, and of course to the Chinese leadership. We had better take note that indeed the times are a'changin' lest we wind up worse off than we need to be. Then we'd be chumps.
James Zogby: Reflections on Tunisia
Barry Lando: A Tale of Two Tyrants
I'm sure they could see it clearly from a across the Pacific.
Most Americans don't know that Chinese presidents have term limits.
Most Americans don't know that there is a National People's Congress.
Most Americans can't name any Chinese cities aside from Beijing and Shanghai.
I wouldn't bet on any country surpassing the US anytime soon. Mr. Brenner wants to play a new game with old players, and not even China would trust that kind of action.
The United States’ trade gap is the proverbial “leak-in the-dike” with its de-simulative effect on our recovery. In November 2003, Warren Buffett in his Fortune, Squanderville versus Thriftville article recommended that America adopt a balanced trade model. The fact that advice advocating balance and sustainability, from a sage the caliber of Warren Buffett, could be virtually ignored for over seven years is unfathomable. Media coverage that China has kept it currency undervalued is a gross understatement, it has actually been keeping the U.S. dollar over-valued; which adversely affects all U.S. trade with all U.S. trading partners, not just trade with China. Until action is taken on Buffett’s or a similar balanced trade model, by the powers that be, America will continue to squander time, treasure and talent in pursuit of an illusionary recovery.
Bang on. It amazes me that a nation that has expended so much of the vast political, diplomatic, and economic capital it had accumulated in the preceding century and is manifestly in decline and overwhelmed by its internal probelms believes it has the right to lecture anyone about anything.
Yet, Americans without health care will lecture Canadians and French who are quite happy with theirs in practice that it's irreparably broken in theory; Americans who crashed the entire world's economy when they destroyed their own in 2008 and who still haven't recovered will lecture the Germans and Chinese who are kicking their butts on how they just don't understand capitalism.
America, take the log out of your own eye before lecturing the world about the dust they have in theirs!
All of this talk of learning to be a second rate power is rubbish.
China objects to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, while the U.S. was caught off guard when the Chinese military test flew a stealth fighter jet during Defense Secretary Robert Gates' visit last week.
They've actively developing an anti-ship missile which we would not currently be capable of stopping at this point. They're Currently building 5 aircraft carriers and will soon be a more powerful navy in the region then our USN Pacific Fleet.
They are supporting nuclear North Korea in it's stated objective to install in Venezula, working with Hugo Chavez and soon to be nuclear Iran, missile sights with much of the US mainland easily within range.
They been on a rapid build up in all things military for a few years now, each year devoting more and more GDP percentage for such.
But they're still behind the US and the real question is...do we surrender now and accept a second world (Europe) world outlook. It does seem unavoidable doesn' it?
Huh??
Europe is "First World" in every sense. You are using that expression wrong, and it's outdated anyway. And if you think Europe is a second rate power, you've got some surprises coming.
Thanks for writing this.
Unless, of course, they happen to be named Tibet.
China has made great progress over the past 30 years. Elevating a population from destitute peasant poverty to an incredibly uneven but nonetheless elevated standard of living is the easy part. It's far easier for me to double my net worth than it is for Bill Gates to double his. Sustaining this trajectory is an entirely different matter. China has some very powerful attributes in this, but it's more prudent to abide by the old saw, "Past performance is no guarantee of future results".
Even assuming that China continues to grow, in violation of every scientific and economic principle, indefinitely at its present rate, that still only addresses the size of the Chinese economy. There are a multitude of factors that determine the diplomatic and cultural influence of a nation, besides the size of their economy. The UK has continued to exert outsized influence even as their relative economic might has declined. Russia maintains similarly outsized influence despite an economy 1/4th the size of China's.
So my conclusion is that a) China "overtaking" the USA economically is far from a settled deal, and b) even if they do, in gross terms, that doesn't directly translate into equivalent diplomatic and cultural influence.
Finally, to put a cherry on top of this thing, some folks need to get out in the street. The USA is catching on, the people are getting it. Individuals and States are taking the steps needed to rebuild prosperity, I see it every where, every day. The federal government has been lagging due to their distance and isolation from the rest of the country, but I think that even the federal government is getting it.
There are things that are too good to go on forever, and things that are too bad to go on forever, and in those cases, they don't.
Wah wah wah, from slavery to standard oil we have pillaged the wealth of the earth wherever we found it and whoever owned it in the name of America or Capitalism or Free Trade or God or whatever would justify the taking, but now someone else seems to be doing it almost as well as us! Wah! They're big mean cheaters! I only like the game when I'M the only on who can do and take whatever I want! Wah! Wah!!!