China-U.S. Relations: Current Issues and Implications for U.S. Policy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
SOUTH KOREA BETWEEN EAGLE and DRAGON Perceptual Ambivalence and Strategic Dilemma
SOUTH KOREA BETWEEN EAGLE AND DRAGON Perceptual Ambivalence and Strategic Dilemma Jae Ho Chung The decade of the 1990s began with the demise of the Soviet empire and the subsequent retreat of Russia from the center stage of Northeast Asia, leaving the United States in a search to adjust its policies in the region. The “rise of China,” escalating cross-strait tension since 1995, North Korea’s nuclear brinkmanship and missile challenges, latent irreden- tism, and the pivotal economic importance of Northeast Asia have all led the United States to re-emphasize its role and involvement in the region.1 This redefinition of the American mission has in turn led to the consolidation of the U.S.-Japan alliance, exemplified by the 1997 Defense Guideline revision, as well as to the establishment of trilateral consultative organizations such as the Trilateral Coordination and Oversight Group (TCOG) among the U.S., Japan, and South Korea. The increasingly proactive posture by the U.S. has, however, generated grave strategic concerns on the part of China and Russia, which have sought to circumscribe America’s hegemonic parameters in Asia both bilaterally and multilaterally (i.e., the formation of the “Shanghai Six” and the Boao Asia Forum, as well as China’s call for an Association of Southeast Asian Nations Jae Ho Chung is Associate Professor of International Relations, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. The author wishes to thank Bruce J. Dickson and Wu Xinbo for their helpful comments on an earlier version. Asian Survey, 41:5, pp. 777–796. ISSN: 0004–4687 Ó 2001 by The Regents of the University of California. -
DIRECTING the Disorder the CFR Is the Deep State Powerhouse Undoing and Remaking Our World
DEEP STATE DIRECTING THE Disorder The CFR is the Deep State powerhouse undoing and remaking our world. 2 by William F. Jasper The nationalist vs. globalist conflict is not merely an he whole world has gone insane ideological struggle between shadowy, unidentifiable and the lunatics are in charge of T the asylum. At least it looks that forces; it is a struggle with organized globalists who have way to any rational person surveying the very real, identifiable, powerful organizations and networks escalating revolutions that have engulfed the planet in the year 2020. The revolu- operating incessantly to undermine and subvert our tions to which we refer are the COVID- constitutional Republic and our Christian-style civilization. 19 revolution and the Black Lives Matter revolution, which, combined, are wreak- ing unprecedented havoc and destruction — political, social, economic, moral, and spiritual — worldwide. As we will show, these two seemingly unrelated upheavals are very closely tied together, and are but the latest and most profound manifesta- tions of a global revolutionary transfor- mation that has been under way for many years. Both of these revolutions are being stoked and orchestrated by elitist forces that intend to unmake the United States of America and extinguish liberty as we know it everywhere. In his famous “Lectures on the French Revolution,” delivered at Cambridge University between 1895 and 1899, the distinguished British historian and states- man John Emerich Dalberg, more com- monly known as Lord Acton, noted: “The appalling thing in the French Revolution is not the tumult, but the design. Through all the fire and smoke we perceive the evidence of calculating organization. -
An Overview of Russian Foreign Policy
02-4498-6 ch1.qxd 3/25/02 2:58 PM Page 7 1 AN OVERVIEW OF RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY Forging a New Foreign Policy Concept for Russia Russia’s entry into the new millennium was accompanied by qualitative changes in both domestic and foreign policy. After the stormy events of the early 1990s, the gradual process of consolidating society around a strengthened democratic gov- ernment took hold as people began to recognize this as a requirement if the ongoing political and socioeconomic transformation of the country was to be successful. The for- mation of a new Duma after the December 1999 parliamen- tary elections, and Vladimir Putin’s election as president of Russia in 2000, laid the groundwork for an extended period of political stability, which has allowed us to undertake the devel- opment of a long-term strategic development plan for the nation. Russia’s foreign policy course is an integral part of this strategic plan. President Putin himself has emphasized that “foreign policy is both an indicator and a determining factor for the condition of internal state affairs. Here we should have no illusions. The competence, skill, and effectiveness with 02-4498-6 ch1.qxd 3/25/02 2:58 PM Page 8 which we use our diplomatic resources determines not only the prestige of our country in the eyes of the world, but also the political and eco- nomic situation inside Russia itself.”1 Until recently, the view prevalent in our academic and mainstream press was that post-Soviet Russia had not yet fully charted its national course for development. -
1 May 2016 U.S.-Japan-China Trilateral Report by Sheila Smith
May 2016 U.S.-Japan-China Trilateral Report By Sheila Smith June 2016 Introduction The Forum on Asia-Pacific Security (FAPS) of the National Committee on American Foreign Policy (NCAFP) hosted a one-and-a-half day Track 1.5 meeting in New York City on May 24-25, 2016, with participants from the United States, Japan and China. The participant list for the trilateral meeting appears in the appendix. This report is not so much an effort to summarize the rich discussion at the trilateral meetings, as it is an effort to analyze the complex and fragile nature of trilateral relations today and to offer suggestions to all three sides for improvement in their ties with each other. In contrast to our November 2015 report, which focused on the interactions between and among the bilateral relationships that comprise this trilateral, this meeting focused on the changing regional security balance and the tension between national strategies and regional institutions which might impede cooperation in resolving the growing tensions in the Asia-Pacific. I. Context Japan, China, and the United States once again found common purpose in the wake of North Korean nuclear and missile tests in early 2016. Pyongyang’s continued insistence on developing a nuclear arsenal resulted in a new United Nations Security Council resolution and stronger sanctions on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). China took some time to agree, prompting concerns yet again in Tokyo and Washington that Beijing was reluctant to punish Kim Jong Un for his belligerence. After Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Affairs Wu Dawei visited Pyongyang in early February,1 Beijing’s position solidified, however, and China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited Washington, DC three weeks later to meet U.S. -
Tuesday, November 15, 2016 Global Trumpism Why Trump's Victory Was
11/21/2016 Global Trumpism Home > Global Trumpism Tuesday, November 15, 2016 Global Trumpism Why Trump’s Victory Was 30 Years in the Making and Why It Won’t Stop Here Mark Blyth Mark Blyth is Eastman Professor of Political Economy at Brown University. Trump’s victory was predictable [1], and was predicted [2], but not by looking at polls. Polling has taken a beating recently having failed to predict the victory of David Cameron’s Conservative Party in the British general elections [3], then Brexit [4], and now the election of Donald Trump [5]. One can argue about what’s wrong with the methods involved, but more fundamentally what polls do is to treat these phenomena as isolated events when they are in fact the product of a common set of causes 30 years in the making. There are two issues at play here. The first is known as Galton’s problem, after Sir Francis Galton, the inventor of much of modern statistics. Galton’s problem is that when we treat cases as independent—the British election, Brexit, the U.S. election—they may not actually be independent. There may be links between the cases—think of Brexit’s Nigel Farage showing up at Trump's rallies [6]—and there could be subtler contagion [7] or mimicry [8] effects in play as information from one case “infects” the other, changing the dynamics of the system as a whole. Could there then be a higher set of drivers in the global economy [9] pushing the world in a direction where Trump is really just one part of a more global pattern of events? Consider that there are many Trumpets blowing around the developed world, on both the right and the left. -
The Lost Generation in American Foreign Policy How American Influence Has Declined, and What Can Be Done About It
September 2020 Perspective EXPERT INSIGHTS ON A TIMELY POLICY ISSUE JAMES DOBBINS, GABRIELLE TARINI, ALI WYNE The Lost Generation in American Foreign Policy How American Influence Has Declined, and What Can Be Done About It n the aftermath of World War II, the United States accepted the mantle of global leadership and worked to build a new global order based on the principles of nonaggression and open, nondiscriminatory trade. An early pillar of this new Iorder was the Marshall Plan for European reconstruction, which British histo- rian Norman Davies has called “an act of the most enlightened self-interest in his- tory.”1 America’s leaders didn’t regard this as charity. They recognized that a more peaceful and more prosperous world would be in America’s self-interest. American willingness to shoulder the burdens of world leadership survived a costly stalemate in the Korean War and a still more costly defeat in Vietnam. It even survived the end of the Cold War, the original impetus for America’s global activ- ism. But as a new century progressed, this support weakened, America’s influence slowly diminished, and eventually even the desire to exert global leadership waned. Over the past two decades, the United States experienced a dramatic drop-off in international achievement. A generation of Americans have come of age in an era in which foreign policy setbacks have been more frequent than advances. C O R P O R A T I O N Awareness of America’s declining influence became immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic and by Obama commonplace among observers during the Barack Obama with Ebola, has also been widely noted. -
Xi Jinping's Address to the Central Conference On
Xi Jinping’s Address to the Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs: Assessing and Advancing Major- Power Diplomacy with Chinese Characteristics Michael D. Swaine* Xi Jinping’s speech before the Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs—held November 28–29, 2014, in Beijing—marks the most comprehensive expression yet of the current Chinese leadership’s more activist and security-oriented approach to PRC diplomacy. Through this speech and others, Xi has taken many long-standing Chinese assessments of the international and regional order, as well as the increased influence on and exposure of China to that order, and redefined and expanded the function of Chinese diplomacy. Xi, along with many authoritative and non-authoritative Chinese observers, presents diplomacy as an instrument for the effective application of Chinese power in support of an ambitious, long-term, and more strategic foreign policy agenda. Ultimately, this suggests that Beijing will increasingly attempt to alter some of the foreign policy processes and power relationships that have defined the political, military, and economic environment in the Asia- Pacific region. How the United States chooses to respond to this challenge will determine the Asian strategic landscape for decades to come. On November 28 and 29, 2014, the Central Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership convened its fourth Central Conference on Work Relating to Foreign Affairs (中央外事工作会)—the first since August 2006.1 The meeting, presided over by Premier Li Keqiang, included the entire Politburo Standing Committee, an unprecedented number of central and local Chinese civilian and military officials, nearly every Chinese ambassador and consul-general with ambassadorial rank posted overseas, and commissioners of the Foreign Ministry to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Macao Special Administrative Region. -
Comparative Connections a Quarterly E-Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations
Comparative Connections A Quarterly E-Journal on East Asian Bilateral Relations China-Korea Relations: Year of China-DPRK Friendship; North’s Rocket Fizzles Scott Snyder Asia Foundation/Pacific Forum CSIS See-won Byun, Asia Foundation Top-level diplomacy between Beijing and Pyongyang intensified this quarter in honor of China- DPRK Friendship Year and the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations. Prior to the Lunar New Year holiday in mid-January, Kim Jong-il held his first public meeting since his reported illness with Chinese Communist Party International Liaison Department Head Wang Jiarui. In March, DPRK Prime Minister Kim Yong-il paid a return visit to Beijing. The Chinese have accompanied these commemorative meetings with active diplomatic interaction with the U.S., South Korea, and Japan focused on how to respond to North Korea’s launch of a multi-stage rocket. Thus, China finds itself under pressure to dissuade Pyongyang from destabilizing activity and ease regional tensions while retaining its 60-year friendship with the North. Meanwhile, South Korean concerns about China’s rise are no longer confined to issues of economic competitiveness; the Korea Institute for Defense Analysis has produced its first public assessment of the implications of China’s rising economic capabilities for South Korea’s long- term security policies. The response to North Korea’s rocket launch also highlights differences in the respective near-term positions of Seoul and Beijing. Following years of expanding bilateral trade and investment ties, the global financial crisis provides new challenges for Sino- ROK economic relations: how to manage the fallout from a potential decline in bilateral trade and the possibility that domestic burdens will spill over and create new strains in the relationship. -
Continuing Crackdown in Inner Mongolia
CONTINUING CRACKDOWN IN INNER MONGOLIA Human Rights Watch/Asia (formerly Asia Watch) CONTINUING CRACKDOWN IN INNER MONGOLIA Human Rights Watch/Asia (formerly Asia Watch) Human Rights Watch New York $$$ Washington $$$ Los Angeles $$$ London Copyright 8 March 1992 by Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. ISBN 1-56432-059-6 Human Rights Watch/Asia (formerly Asia Watch) Human Rights Watch/Asia was established in 1985 to monitor and promote the observance of internationally recognized human rights in Asia. Sidney Jones is the executive director; Mike Jendrzejczyk is the Washington director; Robin Munro is the Hong Kong director; Therese Caouette, Patricia Gossman and Jeannine Guthrie are research associates; Cathy Yai-Wen Lee and Grace Oboma-Layat are associates; Mickey Spiegel is a research consultant. Jack Greenberg is the chair of the advisory committee and Orville Schell is vice chair. HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH Human Rights Watch conducts regular, systematic investigations of human rights abuses in some seventy countries around the world. It addresses the human rights practices of governments of all political stripes, of all geopolitical alignments, and of all ethnic and religious persuasions. In internal wars it documents violations by both governments and rebel groups. Human Rights Watch defends freedom of thought and expression, due process and equal protection of the law; it documents and denounces murders, disappearances, torture, arbitrary imprisonment, exile, censorship and other abuses of internationally recognized human rights. Human Rights Watch began in 1978 with the founding of its Helsinki division. Today, it includes five divisions covering Africa, the Americas, Asia, the Middle East, as well as the signatories of the Helsinki accords. -
1 the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs
The Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs Oral History Project MARK S. PRATT Interviewed by: Charles Stuart Kennedy Initial interview date: October 21, 1999 Copyright 200 ADST TABLE OF CONTENTS Background Born and raised in assachusetts Harvard, Brown, Sorbonne and Georgetown Universities US Navy arriage Entered the Foreign Service in 1956 Tokyo, ,apan- .onsular Officer 195701959 Environment rs. Douglas acArthur Duties Taichung, Taiwan- FS2- .hinese language training 195901960 Political situation Elections .hiang 4ai0shek and adame 4uomintang .hinese ainlanders Environment Hong 4ong- ainland Economic Officer 196001963 ainland agriculture .hina6s 7Great 8eap Forward9 ao :edong Operations Foreign grain to .hina .hina0Soviet relations :hou En lai .hinese culture .hina and 2ndochina US .hina policy 7Domino9 theory 1 2ndia0.hina border war Vientiane, 8aos- Political Officer 196301968 Souvanna Phouma Political situation North Vietnamese US ilitary assistance 2nternational .ontrol .ommission Vietnam US Ambassadors US Air Force bombings Environment Government State Department- Desk Officer for 8aos and .ambodia 196801973 Vietnam Working Group Tet Offensive .omments on US Vietnam War policy 4issinger and .hina 2ndo .hina Working Group .ambodia Sihanouk .hina US ilitary influence on policy Paris, France- ember US Delegation to 2nternational 197301978 .onference on Vietnam .hina influence on Hanoi ASEAN US delegation .arter administration .ongressional interest Talks halted French concerns National 8eague of POW/ 2As Refugees -
PM Chou: Winston Lord, Senior Staff Member, NSC Dr. Kis Singer
既EMORANDUM THE WHITE HOUSE TOP SECRE曹/SENS工TIVE/EXCLUSIV臼LY EYES ONLY MEMORANDUM OF CONVERSAT工ON Participan七s ; Prime Minis七er Chou En-lai, People's Republic of China. Yeh Chien-ymg, Vice ChairmanI Military Affairs CommissionタChinese Communis七Partyl PRC Huang Huaタ PRC Ambassador to Canada Chang Wen-Chin・ DirectorJ Wes七ern Europe and American Depar七men七タPRC Minis七ry of Forelgn Affairs One Other Chinese Official' and Depu七y Chief of ProtocoI Tang Wen-Sheng and Chi Chao-Chu’Chinese工n七erpre七ers Chinese No七e七akers Dr・ Henry A. Kissinger, Assistan七to the Presiden七for Na七ional Securi七y Affairs John Holdridge, Senior S七aff Member, NSC Winston Lord, Senior Staff Member, NSC W・ Richard Smyserl Senior S七aff Member’NSC Place: Chinese Govemment Guest HouseタPeking Da七e and Time: July 9’197l, Aftemoon and Evening (4:35p・m. - 11:ZOp.m.) PM Chou: There is special news this af七emoon -- yOu are lost. (Premier Chou offers cigare七tes to the American par七y. ) No one wan七s One? I have found a party tha七doesnit smoke. Firs七ofall’工would like to welcome you’eSPeCially as Dr・ K王ssinger is the special representative of the President. Dr. Kis Singer: It is a great pleaLSure tO be here. I have looked forward a 1ong time to this opportuni七y・ PM Chou: As Chairman Mao Tse-tung has already spoken abou七this to Edgar Snow’there is no need to elabo±.a七e・工believe you have first-hand knowledge of this ar七icle by now. Dr. Kissinger I read it with great a七七ention. PM Chou: You do no七know Mr. Edgar Snow? TOP SECRET/SENSITIⅤE/EXCLUSIⅤELY EYES ONLY TOP SECRET/SENSITIVE/EXCLUSIVELY EYES ONLY _2_ Dr. Kissinger: I have never met him. PM Chou: Thir七y-five years ago he became a friend with us. -
China's 17Th Communist Party Congress, 2007: Leadership And
Order Code RS22767 December 5, 2007 China’s 17th Communist Party Congress, 2007: Leadership and Policy Implications Kerry Dumbaugh Specialist in Asian Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Summary The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) 17th Congress, held from October 15 - 21, 2007, demonstrated the Party’s efforts to try to adapt and redefine itself in the face of emerging economic and social challenges while still trying to maintain its authoritarian one-Party rule. The Congress validated and re-emphasized the priority on continued economic development; expanded that concept to include more balanced and sustainable development; announced that the Party would seek to broaden political participation by expanding intra-Party democracy; and selected two potential rival candidates, Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang, with differing philosophies (rather than one designated successor-in- waiting) as possibilities to succeed to the top Party position in five years. More will be known about the Party’s future prospects and the relative influence of its two potential successors once the National People’s Congress meets in early 2008 to select key government ministers. This report will not be updated. Periodically (approximately every five years) the Chinese Communist Party holds a Congress, attended by some 2,000 senior Party members, to authorize important policy and leadership decisions within the Party for the coming five years. In addition to authorizing substantive policies, the Party at its Congress selects a new Central Committee, comprised of the most important figures in the Party, government, and military.1 The Central Committee in turn technically selects a new Politburo and a new Politburo Standing Committee, comprised of China’s most powerful and important leaders.