Thread by @Dalzell60

Read the speech closely. Another senior USG official is trying to assuage critics of the zero-sum US stance toward CN by saying the US wants a productive and successful China. Here’s my view on this approach and it’s flaws thus far, at least.... reuters.com/article/us-usa…

US strategy is:

1. Raise the alarm about the extent and severity of the China threat to the global order and Western values to increase support among the US public n US friends for tough, likely disruptive policies, as part of a sharp, largely zero-sum, confrontational policy...

2. BUT convey the impression that Washington is not out to weaken and undermine Chinese society and the Chinese people. (This is the new element in the message.) Yet the impact on the CCP is another matter....

3. Place maximum pressure on Beijing where possible, especially in economics/trade/technology, in order to get them to accept the US definition of the global order and free trade, and hopefully build support within China for opposition to the CCP as a regime...

.... that is damaging to the Chinese people. It is the CCP that is disruptive and threatening, not the USG. It is the CCP that undermines the global economic system and the global order, not the US. In other words, this is a “strategy” designed to build support all round for..

...policies that will in fact disrupt Chinese society and (more importantly) undermine the CCP. It is intended to disarm critics in Asia and Europe of the US policy as being two extreme and zero-sum while building support for efforts to destroy or radically alter the stance...

of the CCP. Note that the messaging does not focus on Xi Jinping’s excessive policies. The problem is the CCP.

What’s wrong with this approach? It does not spell out how the US intends to pull the neat hat trick of undermining or ending the objectionable parts of Chinese...

economic/trade/technology policies without in practice undermining Chinese society. Where will it draw the line in ways that nonetheless still show clear support for a stable and productive Chinese society and polity? It is attacking the CCP, not Xi’s policies.

Because of this lack of clarity, it is highly possible that most Chinese will assume the worst and conclude that US assurances about wanting a stable and productive China are mere words and that the real purpose of US policy is to contain and undermine Chinese development and...

sow chaos in China. In other words, the US policy actually leaves no room for a moderate Chinese argument critical of XJP’s policies and supportive of a lighter touch by the CCP. This will strengthen the hand of XJP within China. And it is possible that many in Asia...

and Europe will draw similar conclusions, unless they see clear signs of a willingness, in terms of concrete negotiating proposals and moderated FBI behavior, to produce positive-sum outcomes in trade, etc., greater fairness toward Asians/Chinese, and a more multilateral, etc....

US approach. This skeptical stance will be reinforced further if the USG continues to trash or ignore multilateral fora and confront US allies on trade, etc.

What seems to underlie the US approach is a belief that others will eventually accept the idea that the CCP controls...

...all Chinese behavior down to the individual level and that XJP’s views are uniformly supported across the CCP. The Chinese have reinforced this view due to Xi’s words and things like the national security law, etc. But reality is of course more complex and contingent.

All this said, I do believe that there are some in the USG who genuinely want to find a positive-sum middle ground with the Chinese. This might actually include SecDef Esper, despite his harsh words in public. But it might not. Most of these people are lower down.

And whether President Trump is even aware of any of this is of course unclear, to me at least.