DOCSLIB.ORG

Strategic Competition in China-US Relations MICHAEL NACHT SARAH LADERMAN JULIE BEESTON

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Strategic Competition in China-US Relations MICHAEL NACHT SARAH LADERMAN JULIE BEESTON Strategic Competition in China-US Relations MICHAEL NACHT SARAH LADERMAN JULIE BEESTON Livermore Papers on Global Security No. 5 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Center for Global Security Research October 2018 Livermore Papers on Global Security # 1 Lewis Dunn Redefining the U.S. Agenda for Nuclear Disarmament (2016) # 2 Yukio Satoh U.S. Extended Deterrence and Japan's Security (2017) # 3 Dave Johnson Russia's Conventional Precision Strike Capabilities, Regional Crises, and Nuclear Thresholds (2018) # 4 John K. Warden Limited Nuclear War: The 21st Century Challenge for the United States (2018) Available in hard copy from CGSR or download at cgsr.llnl.gov Strategic Competition in China–US Relations MICHAEL NACHT SARAH LADERMAN JULIE BEESTON Livermore Papers on Global Security No. 5 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Center for Global Security Research October 2018 Table of Contents About the Authors...................................... vii Preface ...............................................ix Introduction ...........................................1 China’s Grand Strategy ...................................5 Modernization of the Chinese Military ......................43 Potential China–U.S. Military Flashpoints ....................73 China in U.S. Security Policy ..............................99 U.S. Competitive Strategies and China ..................... 109 Conclusions ..........................................117 About the Authors Michael Nacht is the Thomas and Alison Schneider professor of public policy at the UC Berkeley Goldman School of Public Policy, where he was dean from 1998–2008. Nacht has twice served in Sen- ate-confirmed positions, most recently as assistant secretary of de- fense for global strategic affairs (2009–1010), for which he garnered the Distinguished Public Service Award, the department’s highest civilian honor. Under President Clinton, he was assistant director for strategic and Eurasian affairs (1994–1997) of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarma- ment Agency, participating in five presidential summits—four with Rus- sian president Yeltsin and one with Chinese president Jiang Zemin. His latest publication, co-authored with Zachary Davis, is Strategic Latency: Red, White and Blue: Managing the National and International Security Consequences of Emerging and Disruptive Technologies (Livermore: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2018). Sarah Laderman recently graduated from the University of Califor- nia, Berkeley, with an M.S. in nuclear engineering and M.A. in public policy. She served as a research fellow in the Nuclear Science and Security Consortium while working on nonproliferation and conflict escalation issues. In 2016–2017, she was a graduate research fellow with the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Sarah now works for the International Atomic En- ergy Agency, Department of Safeguards. Julie Beeston has an M.A. in international studies from North Caro- lina State University (2017), where she served as a research assistant sponsored by the Consortium for Nonproliferation Enabling Capabili- ties. She has a B.A. in Asian studies with a focus on China-area studies and is proficient in Mandarin Chinese. Beeston was a research fellow with the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 2017. STRATEGIC COMPETITION IN CHINA–US RELATIONS | vii Preface How should the United States approach strategic competition with China? This has been a central question in U.S. foreign and defense policy for decades. Each new presidential administration has tried to find the right balance between competition and cooperation in an evolving bilateral relationship with complex political, economic, and security dimensions. The Trump administration has reset the balance with a sharp shift toward competition and even confrontation. In its National Security Strategy, it has described both China and Russia as challengers to American power, influence, and interests, “attempting to erode Ameri- can security and prosperity.” It criticizes past U.S. engagement with Russia and China and their inclusion in international institutions and global commerce as having been based on a “false premise” that this “would turn them into benign actors and trustworthy partners.” In its National Defense Strategy, the administration has described China, along with Russia, as a revisionist power seeking to undermine the international order, to reorder the Indo–Pacific region to its advantage, and to compete with the United States across all dimensions of power to achieve regional hegemony in the near term and displacement of the United States as the globally preeminent power in the long term. In its Nuclear Posture Review, it has set out its specific concerns about Chi- na’s program of strategic military modernization in support of China’s efforts “to substantially revise the post–Cold War international order and norms of behavior.” The administration has not entirely set aside cooperation, as in each document it expresses a commitment to work with China where the interests of the two countries overlap. But the net result of the Trump administration’s policy reviews is a comprehen- sive reframing of the U.S. approach to China—an embrace of a “return to rivalry.” The Trump National Defense Strategy also enjoins the United States to foster a competitive mindset, calling on the Department of Defense “to out-think, out-maneuver, out-partner, and out-innovate” potential U.S. adversaries. This suggests a long list of potential ques- STRATEGIC COMPETITION IN CHINA–US RELATIONS | ix tions in China–U.S. relations. How should a more competitive mindset be applied to China–U.S. relations? What forms of competition should the United States pursue? Are there any it should avoid? What reac- tions from China are likely? What can be learned from past U.S. efforts to gain long-term advantages through competitive strategies? It re- quires also that we explore related questions: What are we competing for? What does it mean to win, or lose? And how broad or narrow are the features of competition in the U.S.–China relationship? If narrow, how can we keep them from overwhelming the broader cooperative agenda? If broad, how can we sustain elements of cooperation? In anticipation of a widening discussion of these matters within the United States, with U.S. allies, and also of course in China, we turned to Michael Nacht. As a scholar of international relations and as a policy practitioner in two presidential administrations, he has deep insight into the China–U.S. strategic relationship and the enduring challenge of how best to balance competition and cooperation. This paper provides essential context for the current policy debate, as well as insights and recommendations of immediate relevance. Dr. Nacht then turned to two research fellows at CGSR for assistance with this project, who played a significant role in writing the report. Sarah Laderman and Julie Beeston contributed importantly to the analytical work reflected here. We are grateful to all three coauthors for such a timely and important piece of analysis. We are also grateful for the good counsel of an exter- nal reviewer and for supplemental research support provided by other members of the CGSR research team. Brad Roberts Director Center for Global Security Research x | MICHAEL NACHT, SARAH LADERMAN, AND JULIE BEESTON Introduction For many years, the United States has been reluctant to embrace strategic competition with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), prefer- ring to balance competition with cooperation and take an optimistic view of the relational trajectory. The Clinton administration sought a “constructive strategic partnership” in which China was integrated into the emerging post–Cold War order and conflict over Taiwan was avoided. The George W. Bush administration initially cast China as a rising challenger, but after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 tried to engage China as a “responsible stakeholder” in the international order. The Obama administration attempted to “rebalance” political and economic engagement with an Asia–Pacific policy that was prominently a military posture aimed at countering increased Chinese assertiveness. The Trump administration has expressed a clear commitment to working with China in areas of shared interest, such as North Korean nuclear proliferation. Nevertheless, the administration emphasizes strategic rivalry with China, especially as to military modernization, economic coercion, and China’s diplomatic attempts to roll back the existing regional and global orders. Historically, China has been reluctant to embrace strategic compe- tition as a central theme in any bilateral relationship, though this stance has shifted in the last decade or so. While Beijing must necessarily balance competition and cooperation, it perceives U.S. policies as op- positional to China’s rise and recovery. China interprets the military modernization of the U.S. as aimed primarily at the encirclement and containment of China—in direct challenge to Chinese sovereignty—and as preparation for armed confrontation over Taiwan and other peripheral lands. Beijing has felt directly threatened by U.S. military polices and taken steps to improve its position without provoking “China-threat STRATEGIC COMPETITION IN CHINA–US RELATIONS | 1 syndrome” in the U.S.—that is, the view that China embraces the United States only to hold its enemy close while quietly readying for war against the U.S. and its allies.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • US-China Relations in a Changing Asia-Pacific by TJ Pempel
    BUILDING A REGIONAL ORDER IN EAST ASIA: Community, Competition, Conflict CHU SHULONG EVANS J. R. REVERE YOICHI KATO SUN ZHE YUICHI HOSOYA NOBORU YAMAGUCHI MICHAEL A. MCDEVITT STEPHEN M. YOUNG T. J. PEMPEL March 2016 Our Mission The National Committee on American Foreign Policy (NCAFP) was founded in 1974 by Professor Hans J. Morgenthau and others. It is a nonprofit policy organization dedicated to the resolution of conflicts that threaten U.S. interests. Toward that end, the NCAFP identifies, articulates, and helps advance American foreign policy interests from a nonpartisan perspective within the framework of political realism. American foreign policy interests include: • Preserving and strengthening national security; •Supporting the values and the practice of political, religious, and cultural pluralism; • Advancing human rights; • Addressing non-traditional security challenges such as terrorism, cyber security and climate change; • Curbing the proliferation of nuclear and other unconventional weapons; and • Promoting an open and global economy. The NCAFP fulfills its mission through Track I½ and Track II diplomacy. These closed-door and off-the-record conferences provide opportunities for senior U.S. and foreign officials, subject experts, and scholars to engage in discussions designed to defuse conflict, build confidence, and resolve problems. Believing that an informed public is vital to a democratic society, the National Committee offers educational programs and issues a variety of publications that address security challenges facing the United States. Critical assistance for this volume was provided by Ms. Rorry Daniels, Associate Project Director of the NCAFP’s Forum on Asia-Pacific Security (FAPS); Ms. Juliet Lee, Project Assistant, FAPS; and Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of UN Peacekeeping in China's Expanding Strategic Interests
    UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org SPECIAL REPORT 2301 Constitution Ave., NW • Washington, DC 20037 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063 ABOUT THE REPORT Marc Lanteigne This Special Report assesses China’s evolving participation in international peacekeeping missions in the context of its rise as a major economic and military power. The report is based on data collection on Chinese foreign and security policy issues as well as fieldwork in China and Norway. Supported by the Asia The Role of UN Center at the United States Institute of Peace, the report is part of USIP’s broader effort to understand China’s engagement in the peace processes and internal conflicts of other nations. Peacekeeping in ABOUT THE AUTHOR Marc Lanteigne is a senior lecturer in security studies in the China’s Expanding Centre for Defence and Security Studies at Massey University in New Zealand. Previously, he was a senior research fellow at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, where he specialized in Chinese and Northeast Asian politics and foreign Strategic Interests policy, as well as Asia-Arctic relations, international political economy, and institution building. He has written on issues related to China’s regional and international relations as well as Summary economic security, the politics of trade, and energy issues. • Despite its growing status in the international system, including in the military sphere, China continues to be a strong supporter of United Nations peacekeeping operations (UNPKO), a stance commonly considered to be more the purview of medium powers. China is also a major contributor of peacekeeping personnel and support.
    [Show full text]
  • China's Domestic Politics and Foreign Policy After the 19Th Party Congress
    China's Domestic Politics and Foreign Policy after the 19th Party Congress Paper presented to Japanese Views on China and Taiwan: Implications for U.S.-Japan Alliance March 1, 2018 Center for Strategic & International Studies Washington, D.C. Akio Takahara Professor of Contemporary Chinese Politics The Graduate School of Law and Politics, The University of Tokyo Abstract At the 19th Party Congress Xi Jinping proclaimed the advent of a new era. With the new line-up of the politburo and a new orthodox ideology enshrined under his name, he has successfully strengthened further his power and authority and virtually put an end to collective leadership. However, the essence of his new “thought” seems only to be an emphasis of party leadership and his authority, which is unlikely to deliver and meet the desires of the people and solve the contradiction in society that Xi himself acknowledged. Under Xi’s “one-man rule”, China’s external policy could become “soft” and “hard” at the same time. This is because he does not have to worry about internal criticisms for being weak-kneed and also because his assertive personality will hold sway. Introduction October 2017 marked the beginning of the second term of Xi Jinping's party leadership, following the 19th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the First Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the CCP. Although the formal election of the state organ members must wait until the National People's Congress to be held in March 2018, the appointees of major posts would already have been decided internally by the CCP.
    [Show full text]
  • Afghanistan Anam Ahmed | Elizabethtown High School
    Afghanistan Anam Ahmed | Elizabethtown High School Head of State: Ashraf Ghani GDP: 664.76 USD per capita Population: 33,895,000 UN Ambassador: Mahmoud Saikal Joined UN: 1946 Current Member of UNSC: No Past UNSC Membership: No Issue 1: Immigration, Refugees, and Asylum Seekers Afghanistan is the highest refugee producing country with roughly six million refugees. Regarding immigration and refugees, Afghanistan believes that all neighboring countries to those with the highest refugee count, such as Syria and Afghanistan, need to have an open door policy to these individuals. The refugees would need to be approved by the government in order to enter and live in the country; however, if denied access they must not be forced back. Refugee camps with adequate food, water, medical help, and shelter must be provided by the UN and its members in order to reduce refugee suffering. Although many of the countries around the world will disagree with this plan, they fail to realize the severity of this issue. In Afghanistan millions of individuals are left to fend for themselves in a foreign land with literally nothing but the clothes on their back. As a country with over six million refugees, we are able understand the necessity for a change in the current situation. The UN distinguishes between asylum seekers and refugees, however those who are not accepted by others need not be excluded from having a proper life. With the dramatic increase of refugees and immigrants around the world resulting from the dramatic increase of wars of crises, the UN must acknowledge and call all people fleeing from their country refugees and not distinguish between the two.
    [Show full text]
  • New Challenges and Opportunities in the Taiwan Strait: Defining America’S Role
    New Challenges and Opportunities in the Taiwan Strait: Defining America’s Role By Thomas J. Christensen PREFACE Nations define their identities in many ways – through language, culture, political ideology, religion, ethnicity, and territory. When one or more of these elements becomes contested either between nations or within them, the potential for conflict and war arises. In the case of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, all six of these elements are now to a greater or lesser degree being contested. The official view of the PRC is that Taiwan is part of a yet-to-be-defined “one China.” The ROC no longer claims to be the legitimate government of all of China; its official position is that it is a separate, independent state, reunification is only an option, and an option that could only be achieved should both sides of the Strait, as equals, come to a mutually satisfactory agreement. Adding to the complexity of what is known as cross-Strait relations is the deep involvement of the United States, which maintains close but “unofficial” ties with Taiwan and ever-expanding, official relations with the mainland, and whose policies and military support for Taiwan are designed to dissuade both parties from actions that would lead them to violent conflict. Developments of major historical significance have taken place in the PRC and the ROC since Truman first involved the United States by sending the Seventh Fleet to patrol the Taiwan Strait shortly after the outbreak of the Korean War. The two most relevant to current cross-Strait relations are the PRC’s “Reform and Opening” and its resulting economic growth, and the development of multi-party democracy in the ROC.
    [Show full text]
  • Beijing Consensus
    Review China in Africa: the Washington Consensus versus the Beijing Consensus Ronald I. McKinnon Professor of International Economics Stanford University 9 August, 2010 _______________________________________________________________________ Deborah Brautigam, The Dragon’s Gift: The Real Story of China in Africa, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009 Vivien Foster, William Butterfield, Chuan Chen, Natalyia Pushak: Building Bridges: China’s Growing Role as Infrastructure Financier for Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington: The World Bank, PPIAF, 2009. Stephan Halper, The Beijing Consensus: How China’s Authoritarian Model Will Dominate the Twenty-First Century. New York, Basic Books, 2010. These three books complement each other in describing the truly astonishing growth of China’s aid, investment, and trade in Sub-Saharan Africa since 2000. For China, foreign aid, investment, and trade are not really distinct categories. As Deborah Brautigam emphasizes, these parts are bound together by intricate financial arrangements under China’s Export-Import Bank with other commercial arrangements orchestrated by the Ministry of Commerce, within which the Department of Foreign Aid is nested. Foster, Butterfield, Chen and Pushak are World Bank economists who bring additional data to bear on aid by China compared to Western sources. Stephan Halper focuses more on the political implications of the remarkable rise of China, and worries about the decline of the United States and its “Washington Consensus” as a model for developing countries. In contrast to China’s, foreign aid agencies of the mature capitalist countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) are typically lodged in ministries of foreign affairs, which decide on worthy poor recipients. The U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Halper, S. (2010). the Beijing Consensus: How China's Authoritarian
    THE Halper, S. (2010). The Beijing consensus: How China's authoritarian model will dominate the 2r' century. New York: Basic Books. INTRODUCTIOH SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON'S decision to visit China within weeks of assuming office in 2009 provided evi• dence of the importance Washington now attached to Sino- American cooperation.' CUnton called for a "deeper" and "broader" U.S.-China partnership, saying that cooperation be• tween the United States and China on global issues such as the economy was "imperative."^ In similar tones;Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao told former U.S. President Jimmy Carter shortly before Clinton's arrival that the only path for China and the United States was to "strengthen mutual trust and cooperation, and pass through the difficulties together."^ Wen's words were a perfect iteration of the so-called new China that we've seen emerging on the world stage over the last decade. Long gone are the ideological crusades of the 1960s—crusades that took Maoism to Africa, spread revolution in Southeast Asia, and sought to overthrow the great powers of the West. On the contrary, capitalism is now a global phenomenon—with China among its greatest champions. And since this new incarnation has embraced the capitalist road, the country has come to rely on international markets, global institutions, and free trade to achieve economic growth. This 2 The Beijing Consensus Introduction 3 has allowed living standards to rise, contributing to poHtical economic power; meanwhile, today's emerging markets are stabihty at home. In the process, China has progressively en• increasingly drawn to a new and compelling doctrine of state- gaged with the international community it once spurned, show• managed capitalism.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 China Dreaming
    5 China Dreaming Representing the Perfect Present, Anticipating the Rosy Future Stefan Landsberger Abstract As China has developed into a relatively well-offf, increasingly urbanized nation, educating the people has become more urgent than ever. Rais- ing (human) quality (素质) has become a major concern for educators and intellectuals who see moral education as a major task of the state. The visual exhortations in public spaces aimed at moral education are dominated by dreaming about a nation that has risen and needs to be taken seriously. The visualization of these dreams resembles commercial advertising, mixing elements like the Great Wall or the Tiananmen Gate building with modern or futuristic images. This chapter focuses on posters, looking at the changes in contents and representation of government visuals in an increasingly urbanized and media-literate society. Keywords: visual propaganda; governmentality; normative propaganda; Chinese Dream; Beijing Olympics 2008 Sometimes one still encounters hand-painted faded slogans in the coun- tryside urging those working in agriculture to learn from Dazhai, or to energetically study Mao Zedong Thought. By and large, political messages and the images they use have disappeared from Chinese public spaces, in particular in urban areas. Yet, the production of these images, of what we would call propaganda, has not stopped; the government remains com- mitted to educating the people, as it has over the millennia. Compared to the fijirst three decades of the People’s Republic, the messages have shifted to moral and normative topics, and their visualization has become much more sophisticated than in the earlier periods. This is partly because they Valjakka, Minna & Wang, Meiqin (eds.), Visual Arts, Representations and Interventions in Contemporary China: Urbanized Interface.
    [Show full text]
  • “New Type of Major-Country Relationship” with the United States
    U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Staff Research Backgrounder June 25, 2013 China Seeks a “New Type of Major-Country Relationship” with the United States by Caitlin Campbell Research Director and Policy Analyst, Foreign Affairs and Energy and Craig Murray Senior Policy Analyst, Military and Security Affairs Disclaimer: This paper is the product of professional research performed by staff of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, and was prepared at the request of the Commission to support its deliberations. Posting of the report to the Commission’s website is intended to promote greater public understanding of the issues addressed by the Commission in its ongoing assessment of U.S.-China economic relations and their implications for U.S. security, as mandated by Public Law 106-398 and Public Law 108-7. However, the public release of this document does not necessarily imply an endorsement by the Commission, any individual Commissioner, or the Commission’s other professional staff, of the views or conclusions expressed in this staff research report. China is seeking a “new type of major-country relationship”* with the United States, according to official statements from Chinese leaders. Beijing has deliberated this concept since at least 2011, and it has been referenced frequently by high-level Chinese officials and widely discussed in Chinese media since February 2012, when then presumptive Chinese president Xi Jinping evoked it during a visit to the United States. 1† This approach likely is intended to create an environment more conducive to China’s rise by promoting more stable relations with the United States and avoid or, if necessary, manage tension that history suggests is inevitable between established and rising powers.
    [Show full text]
  • Socioterritorial Fractures in China: the Unachievable “Harmonious Society”?
    China Perspectives 2007/3 | 2007 Creating a Harmonious Society Socioterritorial Fractures in China: The Unachievable “Harmonious Society”? Guillaume Giroir Édition électronique URL : http://journals.openedition.org/chinaperspectives/2073 DOI : 10.4000/chinaperspectives.2073 ISSN : 1996-4617 Éditeur Centre d'étude français sur la Chine contemporaine Édition imprimée Date de publication : 15 septembre 2007 ISSN : 2070-3449 Référence électronique Guillaume Giroir, « Socioterritorial Fractures in China: The Unachievable “Harmonious Society”? », China Perspectives [En ligne], 2007/3 | 2007, mis en ligne le 01 septembre 2010, consulté le 28 octobre 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/chinaperspectives/2073 ; DOI : 10.4000/ chinaperspectives.2073 © All rights reserved Special feature s e Socioterritorial Fractures v i a t c n i in China: The Unachievable e h p s c “Harmonious Society”? r e p GUILLAUME GIROIR This article offers an inventory of the social and territorial fractures in Hu Jintao’s China. It shows the unarguable but ambiguous emergence of a middle class, the successes and failures in the battle against poverty and the spectacular enrichment of a wealthy few. It asks whether the Confucian ideal of a “harmonious society,” which the authorities have been promoting since the early 2000s, is compatible with a market economy. With an eye to the future, it outlines two possible scenarios on how socioterritorial fractures in China may evolve. he need for a “more harmonious society” was raised 1978, Chinese society has effectively ceased to be founded for the first time in 2002 at the Sixteenth Congress on egalitarianism; spatial disparities are to be seen on the T of the Communist Party of China (CPC).
    [Show full text]
  • Program Submissions
    PRI Submission Guidelines About PRI: Celebrated as a driver of innovation in public media, Public Radio International (PRI) was founded in 1983 to diversify and expand the content available on public platforms, enabling U.S. listeners to "hear a different voice™" and to connect with one another and the larger world. PRI leads by identifying critical but unmet content needs and partnering with producers, stations, digital networks and funders to develop multi-platform resources to meet those needs. By creating an environment in which innovation can thrive, PRI supports the creation and distribution of content that would otherwise be unavailable and that brings new voices, global journalism and cultural perspectives to the American public. PRI content is available on pri.org and via podcasts, and is broadcast on over 824 public radio stations. More than 13 million people access PRI content each week through these sources. PRI's newest production is "The Takeaway™," a groundbreaking morning-drive news show co-produced with WNYC Radio. Its best known programming includes "This American Life," produced by Chicago Public Radio; PRI's "The World," a co- production of BBC World Service, PRI and WGBH Radio Boston; "Living on Earth," produced by World Media Foundation Inc.; "Michael Feldman's Whad'Ya Know?," produced by Wisconsin Public Radio; "The Tavis Smiley Show," produced by Smiley Radio Properties Inc.; and "Studio 360 from PRI and WNYC®," produced by PRI and WNYC; as well as 24-hour program services — "Classical 24®," produced by American Public Media; and BBC World Service, produced by the British Broadcasting Corporation. For more information, visit www.pri.org.
    [Show full text]
  • The Taiwan Issue and the Normalization of US-China Relations Richard Bush, Brookings Institution Shelley Rigger, Davidson Colleg
    The Taiwan Issue and the Normalization of US-China Relations Richard Bush, Brookings Institution Shelley Rigger, Davidson College The Taiwan Issue in US-China Normalization After 1949, there were many obstacles to normalization of relations between the United States and the new People’s Republic of China (PRC), but Taiwan was no doubt a key obstacle. The Kuomintang-led Republic of China (ROC) government and armies had retreated there. Washington maintained diplomatic relations with the ROC government and, in 1954-55, acceded to Chiang Kai-shek’s entreaties for a mutual defense treaty. After June 1950 with the outbreak of the Korean conflict, the United States took the position that the status of the island of Taiwan— whether it was part of the sovereign territory of China—was “yet to be determined.” More broadly, PRC leaders regarded the United States as a threat to their regime, particularly because of its support for the ROC, and American leaders viewed China as a threat to peace and stability in East Asia and to Taiwan, which they saw as an ally in the containment of Asian communism in general and China in particular. It was from Taiwan’s Ching Chuan Kang (CCK) airbase, for example, that U.S. B-52s flew bombing missions over North Vietnam. By the late 1960s, PRC and U.S. leaders recognized the strategic situation in Asia had changed, and that the geopolitical interests of the two countries were not in fundamental conflict. Jimmy Carter and Deng Xiaoping not only reaffirmed that assessment but also recognized a basis for economic cooperation.
    [Show full text]