I am struggling to articulate a coherent response to this direction in American diplomacy, which is at once unsurprising and a continuation of recent trends, yet terribly consequential nonetheless. wsj.com/articles/secre…
First, there are indeed compelling reasons for intense concern about the actions, intentions, and objectives of the Chinese Communist Party, especially considering the trajectory on which the Party has taken China under the leadership of Xi Jinping.
I can recount the issues in play and at stake, but we're all familiar with the core concerns at this point.
From a strategic perspective, the Chinese government has directed the theft of IP and illicit transfer of technology at a scope and scale that is terribly damaging—and such efforts occurred with impunity and flagrant disregard for the law for far too long.
Chinese military modernization has directly targeted and developed capabilities that are designed to counter the U.S. military, which is seen as a powerful adversary, since the 1990s.
The appalling situation—and evidence of genocide—in Xinjiang creates a moral imperative to take action through all feasible instruments of U.S. policy, if we believe that "never again" has any meaning or substance.
The current administration is correct to point to the Chinese Communist Party, by virtue of its centrality and predominance within Chinese governance, as responsible, indeed, culpable, for these decisions and long-term strategic directions.
From an analytic perspective, and in the interest of clarity, the distinction between the Chinese Communist Party, relative to the Chinese people and society, also possesses substantive importance that justifies its inclusion as consistent element of U.S. government messaging.
(So too, we see our allies, partners, and competitors recognize the difference and at times difference among U.S. presidents, the U.S. government, and U.S. political parties, relative to the American people and society.)
While competition between the U.S. and China is often (mis)characterized as a "new era"—or even viewed as epiphenomenal to this administration—arguably, this competition has been ongoing and consistent, whether openly recognized or relatively submerged.
The transition in American strategy to a more open orientation towards competition—and where necessary confrontation—with China is essentially overdetermined, perhaps all but inevitable in some respects, and defensible on the basis of U.S. values, interests, and core concerns.
However, to approach this competition in a manner that centers upon confrontation and undermines critical opportunities for collaboration with China, while eroding the foundations of U.S. national strength, along with our values and institutions, is fundamentally pathological.
There is more pathology than strategy in this current trajectory of U.S. policy towards China, in a moment of national emergency when the future of our society—and our democracy—hangs in the balance on so many levels.
And of course, it's impossible to overlook the perverse political incentives in play, such that the blaming of a foreign other and promulgation of xenophobia gain more traction than critical efforts to resolve urgent problems at home.
To state the obvious, America cannot compete with China with any prospects of "victory" while our leaders are imposing more self-inflicted wounds on the fabric of our society, economy, and institutions than any foreign adversary could dream of creating.
These delusions of grand strategy are empty and hollow, particularly at a time when American credibility is so terribly damaged by the degradation of our values and founding principles.
If one agrees with Secretary Pompeo that this is an ideological competition—and, I'd add, a contest of systems and rivalry of models—then we must also recognize that our policy on China cannot be divorced from or disregard domestic dysfunction.
There is a tragic irony in that the current administration is claiming to compete with the Chinese Communist Party even as certain American leaders seem to envy and indulge in terribly autocratic tendencies in ways that create eerie parallels between the two.
