论文部分内容阅读
U.S. President Barack Obama’s second inauguration triggered a new round of discussion among Chinese observers about the U.S. adjustment of its Asia-Pacific strategy. Old questions cropped up again: Is the move targeted at China? Will it lead to confrontational China-U.S. relations? And how should China deal with the situation?
Objective judgment
Answers to those questions hidden within several key facts.
Washington’s strategic adjustment is under the framework of its global strategy of “rebalancing.” As U.S. interests are overstretched, it is still a bit early to conclude that Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment means that it has shifted its global strategic focus to the East. The United States generally deals with Middle East events with caution and consolidation. A more likely scenario is one in which Washington stands with one foot in Asia, while leaving the other in the Middle East.
The United States’ Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment entails economic actions in addition to military deployment. The Obama administration has been advertizing the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. To make up for lagging economic influence in Asia, the United States proposed a plan to expand economic ties with ASEAN aimed at paving the way for a future U.S.-ASEAN free trade zone. In the meantime, it adjusted policies toward Southeast Asian nations like Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos, strengthened strategic relations with Viet Nam, and became actively involved with regional affairs, such as South China Sea territorial disputes and water resource development in the upper reaches of the Mekong River. These acts, in effect, place wedges between China and its neighbors.
Washington’s strategic adjustment is less alarming than it sounds. Bogged down in a serious financial crisis, the United States will be forced to restrict spending and reduce deficits to solve its economic problems. Although the Obama administration has declared that nothing could influence its military input in the AsiaPacific, it must accept a limited scope as to its development plans in light of the current crisis.
By analyzing the true intentions behind Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategy, Beijing can reach a rational and objective judgment concerning U.S. actions toward China during its strategic adjustment.
Debating endlessly whether the U.S. strategic move targets China is ultimately fruitless. The United States has repeatedly asserted that its Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment is not meant to target China. However, China should not be swayed by such public relations efforts. The United States has already made it plain that it sees China as its top competitor, and the lat- ter’s emergence is a major reason for the AsiaPacific and global strategic adjustment of the United States. Still, it would be a kneejerk reaction to say that Washington’s strategy is entirely focused on containing, or even smothering, Beijing’s rise. The United States has long alternated between its dual tactics of engagement and containment. It is strengthening both policies as China’s status changes, forming a network that can regulate China effectively. Washington needs China’s cooperation in order to deal with economic, political, security and other global problems, which is why it has to stick to the basic framework of hedging its bets.
Rather than taking a confrontational approach, China should adopt a mix of competition and cooperation as an answer to the United States’ Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment.
Comprehensive approach
China should first steadily strengthen relationships with neighbors. While ensuring its key interests are well protected, it needs to deepen friendly relations with neighboring nations, forming an amicable, tranquil and prosperous neighborhood by boosting trade, investment and cultural exchanges. This is the basic way in which China could grow from an Asian power to a positively viewed global power, and is also the most effective method to release strategic pressures launched by the United States. As long as China acts prudently, its neighbors will not turn entirely to Washington.
China also needs to carefully and smartly deal with issues on the sea. The 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) set a goal of building China into a maritime power. The goal, which conforms to China’s peaceful development path while rejecting maritime hegemony, calls for strengthened marine cooperation. Regarding its maritime disputes with neighboring nations, China’s best choice should be peacefully solving these disputes through consultations and negotiations.
Maintaining the stable development of China-U.S. relations is necessary for China to manage Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment. Although the United States isn’t as powerful as it once was, it is still too early to say that the nation is on the decline from its zenith as the only superpower in the world. Currently, the United States cannot shake the foundation of China’s development, but it can surely raise the cost. The United States is the main rival of China’s rise, but it also is a major partner in fields concerning development and security.
China and the United States share the most important bilateral relationship in today’s world. A stable, predictable relationship is a common need of China and the United States, as well as most other countries in the Asia-Pacific. A growing China will inevitably become a competitor to the United States in various fields, but as long as their competition is positive, it won’t damage the reciprocal and win-win pattern between them; it may also serve as a motivator for promoting the healthy development of the whole Asia-Pacific region. China and the United States can make the most of their respective advantages to support regional cooperation while helping other countries in the region improve their development capability.
The two sides should minimize the possibility of future direct collisions at sea, and continue deeper and more pragmatic communication to keep differences under control and reduce misunderstanding. The excuse given by the United States to get involved in South China Sea affairs is its concern about navigation freedom and safety. This stems from Washington’s anxiety that China might conduct “area denial” if it were to have complete control over South China Sea waters. China must therefore make it clear to the United States that it will not behave like Japan before and during World War II, to show that Washington’s suspicion is unjustified. It will be very dangerous if Washington creates real friction based on an incorrect assumption.
Proper handling of the China-Japan relationship is a test China must pass to launch its marine strategy and become a mature power. The United States has been using its alliance with Japan as the cornerstone of its Asia-Pacific strategy since the end of World War II. China must make necessary gestures when dealing with Japan, so as to tell Washington two facts: China is in a position to shape the direction of the China-Japan relationship, and the relationship is at the center of Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategy. It is therefore impossible for Washington to pursue its Asia-Pacific agenda by keeping a balance between China and Japan. Japan should be a supporting point instead of a trouble spot in the interaction between China and the United States.
Washington’s strategic adjustment, which combines its Pacific strategy and Indian Ocean strategy, entrusts India as another important figure. China is sure that the China-India strategic partnership will operate as smoothly as before. India, in the meantime, will not heed all of Washington’s demands as it seeks to fulfill its own dream of becoming a global power.
Australia has been in an awkward position as it hedges on both China and the United States in recent years. Insisting on the principles of mutual respect and cooperation, China can positively develop its relationship with Australia and convince it that a U.S. ally can also be a partner of China. This has been proved throughout the history of China-Australia relations, and will continue to be so.
China’s development depends on its own efforts, rather than what the United States has done. The U.S. Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment will definitely continue through Obama’s second term, but it will not alter China’s path of development. During a visit to the United States in February 2012 as Chinese vice president, Xi Jinping, now General Secretary of the CPC Central Committee and expected to assume the presidency in March, pointed out that the wide Pacific Ocean has ample space to hold both the great powers of China and the United States. History will turn his prophecy into a reality.
Objective judgment
Answers to those questions hidden within several key facts.
Washington’s strategic adjustment is under the framework of its global strategy of “rebalancing.” As U.S. interests are overstretched, it is still a bit early to conclude that Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment means that it has shifted its global strategic focus to the East. The United States generally deals with Middle East events with caution and consolidation. A more likely scenario is one in which Washington stands with one foot in Asia, while leaving the other in the Middle East.
The United States’ Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment entails economic actions in addition to military deployment. The Obama administration has been advertizing the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. To make up for lagging economic influence in Asia, the United States proposed a plan to expand economic ties with ASEAN aimed at paving the way for a future U.S.-ASEAN free trade zone. In the meantime, it adjusted policies toward Southeast Asian nations like Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos, strengthened strategic relations with Viet Nam, and became actively involved with regional affairs, such as South China Sea territorial disputes and water resource development in the upper reaches of the Mekong River. These acts, in effect, place wedges between China and its neighbors.
Washington’s strategic adjustment is less alarming than it sounds. Bogged down in a serious financial crisis, the United States will be forced to restrict spending and reduce deficits to solve its economic problems. Although the Obama administration has declared that nothing could influence its military input in the AsiaPacific, it must accept a limited scope as to its development plans in light of the current crisis.
By analyzing the true intentions behind Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategy, Beijing can reach a rational and objective judgment concerning U.S. actions toward China during its strategic adjustment.
Debating endlessly whether the U.S. strategic move targets China is ultimately fruitless. The United States has repeatedly asserted that its Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment is not meant to target China. However, China should not be swayed by such public relations efforts. The United States has already made it plain that it sees China as its top competitor, and the lat- ter’s emergence is a major reason for the AsiaPacific and global strategic adjustment of the United States. Still, it would be a kneejerk reaction to say that Washington’s strategy is entirely focused on containing, or even smothering, Beijing’s rise. The United States has long alternated between its dual tactics of engagement and containment. It is strengthening both policies as China’s status changes, forming a network that can regulate China effectively. Washington needs China’s cooperation in order to deal with economic, political, security and other global problems, which is why it has to stick to the basic framework of hedging its bets.
Rather than taking a confrontational approach, China should adopt a mix of competition and cooperation as an answer to the United States’ Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment.
Comprehensive approach
China should first steadily strengthen relationships with neighbors. While ensuring its key interests are well protected, it needs to deepen friendly relations with neighboring nations, forming an amicable, tranquil and prosperous neighborhood by boosting trade, investment and cultural exchanges. This is the basic way in which China could grow from an Asian power to a positively viewed global power, and is also the most effective method to release strategic pressures launched by the United States. As long as China acts prudently, its neighbors will not turn entirely to Washington.
China also needs to carefully and smartly deal with issues on the sea. The 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) set a goal of building China into a maritime power. The goal, which conforms to China’s peaceful development path while rejecting maritime hegemony, calls for strengthened marine cooperation. Regarding its maritime disputes with neighboring nations, China’s best choice should be peacefully solving these disputes through consultations and negotiations.
Maintaining the stable development of China-U.S. relations is necessary for China to manage Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment. Although the United States isn’t as powerful as it once was, it is still too early to say that the nation is on the decline from its zenith as the only superpower in the world. Currently, the United States cannot shake the foundation of China’s development, but it can surely raise the cost. The United States is the main rival of China’s rise, but it also is a major partner in fields concerning development and security.
China and the United States share the most important bilateral relationship in today’s world. A stable, predictable relationship is a common need of China and the United States, as well as most other countries in the Asia-Pacific. A growing China will inevitably become a competitor to the United States in various fields, but as long as their competition is positive, it won’t damage the reciprocal and win-win pattern between them; it may also serve as a motivator for promoting the healthy development of the whole Asia-Pacific region. China and the United States can make the most of their respective advantages to support regional cooperation while helping other countries in the region improve their development capability.
The two sides should minimize the possibility of future direct collisions at sea, and continue deeper and more pragmatic communication to keep differences under control and reduce misunderstanding. The excuse given by the United States to get involved in South China Sea affairs is its concern about navigation freedom and safety. This stems from Washington’s anxiety that China might conduct “area denial” if it were to have complete control over South China Sea waters. China must therefore make it clear to the United States that it will not behave like Japan before and during World War II, to show that Washington’s suspicion is unjustified. It will be very dangerous if Washington creates real friction based on an incorrect assumption.
Proper handling of the China-Japan relationship is a test China must pass to launch its marine strategy and become a mature power. The United States has been using its alliance with Japan as the cornerstone of its Asia-Pacific strategy since the end of World War II. China must make necessary gestures when dealing with Japan, so as to tell Washington two facts: China is in a position to shape the direction of the China-Japan relationship, and the relationship is at the center of Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategy. It is therefore impossible for Washington to pursue its Asia-Pacific agenda by keeping a balance between China and Japan. Japan should be a supporting point instead of a trouble spot in the interaction between China and the United States.
Washington’s strategic adjustment, which combines its Pacific strategy and Indian Ocean strategy, entrusts India as another important figure. China is sure that the China-India strategic partnership will operate as smoothly as before. India, in the meantime, will not heed all of Washington’s demands as it seeks to fulfill its own dream of becoming a global power.
Australia has been in an awkward position as it hedges on both China and the United States in recent years. Insisting on the principles of mutual respect and cooperation, China can positively develop its relationship with Australia and convince it that a U.S. ally can also be a partner of China. This has been proved throughout the history of China-Australia relations, and will continue to be so.
China’s development depends on its own efforts, rather than what the United States has done. The U.S. Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment will definitely continue through Obama’s second term, but it will not alter China’s path of development. During a visit to the United States in February 2012 as Chinese vice president, Xi Jinping, now General Secretary of the CPC Central Committee and expected to assume the presidency in March, pointed out that the wide Pacific Ocean has ample space to hold both the great powers of China and the United States. History will turn his prophecy into a reality.