A FOXTROT ON TWO SUPERPOWERS

Recent announcements by the USA President Donald Trump on China is a clear indication that competition between the USA and China is likely to hone in the post-pandemic world. On 29th May 2020, the Trump Administration announced that the USA will revoke Hong Kong’s special trade status under its laws. It also passed an order prohibiting the entry of Chinese journalists, students, and researchers who may have an association with the People’s Liberation Army. Trump has also ordered financial regulators to closely examine Chinese firms listed in the USA stock markets, there has been a possibility of delisting the Chinese firms in the Stock Market. It’s uncertain whether the Trump administration has the political will to trigger such disruption and effectively cut USA investors off from one of the world’s leading markets at a time when the global economy is in shreds.

However, the ties between the two superpowers have been waning well before the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2017, the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy declared China as “a revisionist power”. As the word suggests ‘Revisionism’ was a term used during the Marxist movement, which was used as a label by communists for those who deviated from established Marxist views. For example, Yugoslav Communists' independent ideas and policies were attacked as ‘modern revisionism’ by Soviet critics, who were accused of revisionism by Chinese Communists. However, China has labelled itself as “status quo”, as opposed to USA’s allegations. The Chinese Government has backed its support for the status quo by the formulation of President Xi Jinping’s new model of international relations and interstate democracy. However, since 2019, Beijing has been trying to resolve the potential security challenges as claimed by the USA Government. In September 2019, in response to USA Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Ford’s comment, the Foreign Ministry of Chinese government stated: 'We urge relevant officials in the United States to abandon the Cold-War mentality and zero-sum game mindset…'

Although there are ideological conflicts between the two states. But it’s not that kind of proxy conflict between China and the USA, which one saw during the Cold War between the USA and Soviets. Ever since the early 1900s, Americans have had a strange fascination with China. When the Chinese communists seized power, the Americans hoped to cohabit with Mao Zedong in a world under American supremacy. The Chinese allowed them to believe this. In 1972, USA President Richard Nixon gave China the international acceptability for being admitted to Mao’s presence. In 1978, USA President Jimmy Carter terminated diplomatic relations with Taiwan in order to normalize the situation with China. In 1989, USA President HW Bush denied the Tiananmen Square incident for a short-lived political gain. However, Bill Clinton, the succeeding presidential candidate had criticized Bush for cooperating with the Chinese. The irony comes here when he escorted the Chinese Delegation into the World Trade Organization (WTO) at the expense of American Business. Are all the American administration's responsible stakeholders for China’s rise?

February 21, 1972: Richard Nixon's visit to China. (Source - Google Images)

But what has caused this escalation in diplomatic relations between both the nations? One word – Trust. Chinese have been hard-nosed and impassive about the Americans. During the Cold war, the Chinese have spoken words that were anti-Soviet rhetoric. Since 1958, it has been known every Chinese leader from Chairman Mao to President Xi Jinping has been alerted that the USA represents an alarming threat to the continued supremacy of the communist regime. The collapse of the Soviet Union has strengthened China’s own parallel universe. China is currently building an alternate trading system – Belt & Road Initiative, a multilateral banking system under its control – New Development Bank, world-class digital network – Huawei 5G, and a modern military force. An indifferent incongruity to the western superpower’s view of global dominance!

Post Cold War era, aids suddenly became an act of any superpower commitment towards development assistance ( rhetorically !). This concept of aids started in 1942, when the USA Government initiated the “Marshall Plan” to provide assistance to West Europe post World War II. Since then, the USA has been a traditional donor. In 2017, it has been estimated the net total volume of aids provided by the USA is approximately USD 35.26 billion (OECD,2018). Post-Soviet era, China became an emerging donor, it had started providing an increasing amount of foreign aid. With this unique feature of aid, China simply prejudiced the traditional aid regime. The USA has been the most vocal critic of Chinese Aid. In 2011, Then USA Secretary of State Hillary Clinton argued that the Chinese aid raised serious concerns. She also warned developing countries against cooperating with emerging donors like China. The American government at that time believed that the Chinese were more interested in exploiting natural resources than promoting real development.

March 2011: Hillary Clinton testimony behind USA Senate foreign relations committee

(Source- Google Images)

Since China’s rise, the USA has taken several measures to counterweight China’s growing influence. This is notable in this incident. In March 2011, in her testimony on foreign aid before the USA Senate foreign relations committee, Hillary Clinton clearly stated that ‘we are in competition for influence with China’ (Pennington,2011). The USA government has proved its motives via diplomatic activities occurring in the Pacific Island countries. In 2012, Hillary Clinton, the first USA secretary of state to attend the Pacific Islands forum post-forum dialogue in the Cook Islands. She declared that ‘the 21st Century will be America’s Pacific century, with an emphasis on the Pacific’ noting that ‘the Pacific is big enough for all of us’. She pledged an aid package of USD 32 million to the region from America’s annual aid of USD 330 million which includes military aid to the region ( Larsen,2012 ). Since 2018, the Trump administration has vowed to implement its Indo-Pacific strategy to compete with China's funder infrastructure projects in the region. This game of aids has created a bit of rivalry, trust issues & complications between two superpowers in the Pacific region.

But what about Hong Kong? Will it sustain in this post-COVID-19 era OR be the epicentre of the current international fiasco? All the unrest has unravelled in this island since the Chinese government has enacted the new security law for Hong Kong in 2019. This act has been condemned in accord by the Western allies as an infringement of human rights in Hong Kong. Despite the socialist ideology of the Chinese government, they claim many of the region’s disputed islands that date back centuries. With the USA- China entering into an ideological conflict, Hong Kong is an epicentre of this battle. There are reports about Chinese interference in the internal affairs of democracies in the West. However, countries in the West have tackled this problem, without endangering their trade with China. Will this Hong Kong issue be a change?

2019-ongoing: Current Hong Kong Protest. (Source - Google Images)

A comprehensive range of debate on China is ongoing in the USA right now, along with COVID- 19 pandemic & Civil Rights Issue (#BlackLivesMatter). This has created disequilibrium in political status in the USA. Even the former White House Chief of Staff Steve Bannon has declared the USA is already at war with China. Not only him, but several diplomats have also warned a new Cold War would be a grave mistake in this time of the pandemic. If the Trump Administration wishes to separate China’s supply chain, collateral damages will be caused. It is a well-known fact that the current globe is a global economy where everything is tied together from the farms to corporate. This collateral damage would be so evident because of the current setup, Chinese yuan isn’t free from the US Dollar and the American economy is dependent on supply chains in China due to past administrative decisions. The lines are beginning to establish with Americans on one side and China on the other side. Will this ideological difference between two major superpowers lead to the birth of a new Cold War?

By Siddharth Arora