16
AprSince the end of 2017, the U.S. has successively published a series of strategic documents such as the National Security Strategy and the National Defense Strategy Summary. Their themes are very clear: the international community has entered a competitive era, and the U.S. will launch a strategic competition with China and Russia. competition. Subsequently, the U.S. took a series of actions to actively strengthen its military deployment and operations in the South China Sea, trying to push the trade war against China. It also passed the Taiwan Travel Act to exert pressure on China. A storm is brewing in a very short period of time. The U.S. appears to be making a strategic showdown to China. Some media and scholars exclaim that China and the U.S. will return to the Cold War. Although these remarks are exaggerated, the downward trend of Sino-U.S. relations is obvious and may face greater pressure in the future.
Principles and strategies to deal with Sino-U.S. competition
Behind the behaviors of the U.S. to define China as a strategic competitor and try carrying out a strategic competition is the major change in America’s assessment of external threats. In fact, some decision-makers in the U.S. have been deeply worried about the rapid rise of China and propose to contain China so that the dominance of the U.S. is not challenged. However, due to a long-term involvement in the war on terror, the U.S. had not completed its grand strategy adjustment before Trump took office. At present, the U.S. is trying to carry out a strategic competition with China, which is an adjustment to its grand strategy for more than a decade in the past. In a sense, the U.S. putting forward the strategic competition reflects its deep concern about the gradual erosion of its strategic advantages and dominance. Seen from this perspective, the strategic intention of the U.S. is to win, aiming to maintain its dominant position and strategic advantages.
Regarding the Trump administration’s foreign policy, it is necessary for us to listen to what it says and, more importantly, watch what it does. In this regard, China should have a strategic orientation and should not be overly alarmed. Even if the U.S. really dives into a strategic competition with China, China can still respond calmly. If competition is unavoidable, how should China respond?
There are three important principles: First, deal with strategic priorities. If the U.S. continues to compete with China, this competition will be long-term. A long-term strategic competition needs a good handling of internal affairs and the maintenance of domestic economic prosperity. Therefore, economic, political and military priorities should be clarified and economic development should always be placed in a high position. Second, face the differences in political systems between China and the U.S. and make good use of the strengths and weaknesses of the two countries. China and the U.S. are respectively a socialist country and a capitalist country. Both political systems have their own strengths. Making good use of one’s own strengths is fundamental to gain the upper hand in a competition. Third, China is relatively weak compared to the U.S.. However, the expected guiding principle is to fight the strong with the weak. Therefore, controlling the cost of strategic competition is crucial.
In terms of strategic design, there are three aspects beyond China-U.S. relations that can make a difference: First, set a good example for other countries through self-building and self-restraint. Under the situation of the Sino-U.S. strategic competition, setting an example rather than exporting models may be the best choice for China today. At the ongoing “two sessions,” when answering questions from Chinese and foreign reporters, Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Yesui pointed out that China does not export models but is willing to share the experience of China’s development with other countries. For China, in the sentence pattern used in the National Security Council Report 68 (NSC-68): only by showing the superiority of a country’s construction can one demonstrate its advantages. Second, unite external forces to the greatest extent and commit to the building of national reputation. China needs to well handle four groups of diplomatic relations: to strengthen the strategic partnership with Russia; to firmly protect reliable friends and important strategic partners; to improve relations with America’s Asia-Pacific allies; and to unite with other countries. Improving these four groups of relations will not only help increase China’s external support and enhance the country’s reputation, but also reduce external resistance. Third, support the development of the backward areas in the world. However, China needs to reduce its exposure to some areas of continuous unrest to avoid overly heavy costs.
Shaping and advising to change the behavioral preference of the U.S.
The adjustment of America’s grand strategy is an inevitable result of the growth of China’s strength and the change of China’s behavior. Despite great progress, China is still in a weak position, and controlling the boundary has become an important and difficult choice. Therefore, the strategic competition between China and the U.S. should be a limited one, and economic and sci-tech competition should be the main areas. To this end, China should prevent the two countries from slipping into a full-on strategic competition, and in particular, avoid entering the ideological battle. At present, the U.S. is keen to discuss China’s so-called “sharp power.” This may demonstrate that some of China’s foreign publicity activities have caused the U.S. to overreact, which deserves vigilance and needs to be adjusted appropriately. For China, the strategic competition between China and the U.S. should also be limited between the two countries and should not be extended to the regional level or even the global level.
The essence of the abovementioned principles and measures lies in self-building, and at the same time depends on self-discipline. Only in this way can the U.S. be changed in the competitive situation. China can change America’s behavioral preference through two approaches: first, shaping. It is more about changing the behavioral pattern of the U.S. by inflicting costs and offering rewards. Its internal logic is to change the calculation of costs and benefits by the U.S.. Second, advising. It is mainly about advising the U.S. to change its behavior through self-discipline and based on Sino-U.S. interaction rules. In particular, China should pay attention to self-restraint in terms of its behaviors.
At present, both the American government and the American society are holding increasingly serious negative sentiments toward China, hindering the healthy development of Sino-U.S. relations. Should China be as negative as the U.S.? The answer is obviously negative. What will the world be like in the future? It is hard to predict. However, we should respond bravely and do our utmost to create a better world rather than a worse one.
(The author is a Research Fellow at the National Academy of Development and Strategy, RUC and an Associate Professor at the School of International Studies, RUC)
Opinions