A Collection of Views on US–China Relations
During my time at Yale, whoever was talking, the conversation always seemed to come back to US–China relations. Some of the views were well-worn; others gave me real food for thought. As I organized my notes, I've laid out the views of a former US Secretary of State, a Yale economics professor, a Yale law professor and others.
Because politics is a sensitive subject, and my paraphrasing may not be correct or precise, I'll state this up front: this piece follows the Chatham House Rule — participants are free to use the information received during a meeting, but may not reveal the identity of the speakers or the institutions they're affiliated with.
This piece is simply a collection of views I heard secondhand. It does not represent any position or opinion of my own, and where the views contradict or conflict with one another, I present them as they were.
Here goes:
America has never faced such a broad-ranging competitor. America's competition with China is very different from its competition with the former Soviet Union. The Soviet Union didn't have China's technological capabilities, America had no comparable investment in the Soviet Union, and back then there was no competition beyond military weapons. The competition between China and America is far broader, and keeping such competition under control is far harder. Americans know very little about China.
Partly because of the media, the American public now has a great many misconceptions about China. Americans don't understand China's 5,000 years of cultural background, so much of what is happening in China today is baffling to them. The Chinese and American political systems have always been different. Twenty or thirty years ago, many people believed that once China joined the WTO, US–China relations would keep improving and China would become more democratic — but China won't change; it is still China. After Deng Xiaoping's Southern Tour, he invited many world leaders, including Americans, and said something along these lines: I read your news, I know what you're thinking — yes, of all the changes I'm making now, the biggest is that I can open China up: American students can come to China, Chinese students can study abroad, and China will develop and prosper. But don't make the mistake of thinking that because we use your economic skills and experience, China's political system will change — those are two different things. When you talk to your media, they assume that a change in China's economy will change its political system. Deng was very clear: we have our system, a system that has endured for centuries, with a much longer history than yours. Don't expect us to change.
Economic issues are also political and national security issues. The line between economic policy and national security policy is getting blurrier and blurrier. It's increasingly evident in Washington: the nation's economic policy and international economic policy can't be separated from foreign policy and national security. The two are tightly bound together. In the past, at meetings, economics was economics and diplomacy was diplomacy; now officials from every department need to be involved. The two are closely intertwined.
American isolationism. America has had isolationism in its history, and it's growing now, much like the mood during the Korean War. There was strong isolationism in Roosevelt's time; he worked very hard to prepare the country to fight World War II, but he wasn't sure he'd have the public's support, and he used many policies to win it. Had it not been for Pearl Harbor, America might not have entered World War II; America was forced into the war, and at that point it hadn't even declared war on Germany. America has negotiated a great many free trade agreements, but the people around Trump are deeply hostile to free trade, and didn't want to renew NAFTA either. Democrats, or those on the far left, don't want America to play an international role either — let alone the Republicans who support Trump. These people have influence at home; they focus more on domestic issues and distance themselves from international influence. When the country wants to play a bigger international role, it doesn't get support at home. It isn't complete isolationism, nor complete decoupling, but it is a tendency, a shift, a change.
What do people want? Do they want the country to play a more important international role? When the economy recovers, people become more willing to let the government play an international role.
US–China decoupling will hurt students and scholarship. At Johns Hopkins, every doctor will tell you that to solve problems, we need the smartest people in the room. With US–China decoupling — the medical field used to have many Chinese people in research; 15 years ago the best papers were co-authored by Chinese and American authors, two or three Americans and two or three Chinese. Their papers were published in the world's top academic journals. But because of the loss of trust, each country feels the other will exploit its knowledge. Trust is scarce and precious. Who will suffer? All of humanity — everyone will suffer.
Sullivan's view: "small yard, high fence." I once talked with Sullivan. I said: the yard keeps getting bigger, expanding every year, as more and more products have potential military uses. If you're going to use this metaphor, you also need to clearly define what counts as "military-related" technology. Every technology related to quantum, AI, rare earths, 5G and 6G is both commercial and military — that's true for both China and America. Trade is complicated. It isn't only about the economy and jobs, or domestic worries about job losses and people needing training for new work. Trade now brings people in Washington together in meetings: trade meetings used to have no military representatives, but now they do, because they're highly vigilant and very worried that some trade deals could affect the military. For companies, if you want to sell high-tech products, a major challenge is that your product may be deemed to have military implications. Because technology is changing by the day and people today don't understand its impact, many products and industries end up being placed under controls.
🙏 May we all have the wisdom to make the world a little better.