Robert Sutter » Converging Chinese and US ‘Gulliver Strategies’ in Asia: Implications for U.S. Policy

By Robert Sutter

U.S. election year politics and policy debate have paid little attention to Asia apart from trade and economic issues. The presidential candidates have largely ignored the obvious and serious implications of China’s rapidly rising power and influence for U.S. interests in Asian stability and leadership in Asian affairs. This could be short-sighted as China remains a dissatisfied power with steadily growing military capabilities that has a long record of using force and confrontational tactics to advance its interests.

Fortunately, a recent convergence of Chinese, U.S., and Asian “Gulliver strategies” has acted to raise the costs and reduce the likelihood of Chinese use of force or confrontation. But the effectiveness of those strategies remains subject to rapidly changing circumstances in the balance of power and influence in Asia. U.S. policymakers need to remain attentive to Asian changes that could upset prevailing stability and require remedial action by the United States.

Dissatisfied China

China has a long history as an aggrieved power – a country whose sovereignty has been violated by other powers. This sense of victimization remains strong today, with Taiwan, protected by the U.S., heading the list of perceived gross violations of Chinese sovereignty.

China also has a consistent tendency to see larger powers along its periphery as real or potential threats to China’s sovereignty and security. The PRC record in both the revolutionary Maoist period and the reform period since Mao’s death in 1976 shows Chinese leaders giving top priority in foreign affairs to dealing with real or potential dangers and pressures posed by the United States or the Soviet Union and their allies and associates in Asia.

In dealing with foreign pressure and for other reasons, China’s leaders have long given priority to developing China’s comprehensive national power. China seeks strong military power backed by economic power, political unity, and firm will in foreign affairs in order to protect its security and to advance its sovereign space, regional power, and international influence.

The record of Chinese foreign policy shows that China has adjusted its tactics and approaches to deal with perceived foreign dangers and pressures involving Chinese sovereignty and security. It has done so in light of changed circumstances that affect Chinese calculations of the costs and benefits of using various military and non-military measures. In the post-Cold War period, China sought to preserve and develop economic and other advantageous ties with the United States, but China was faced with strong U.S. pressure following the Tiananmen crackdown of 1989. Throughout the 1990s, China adopted a vocal and often confrontational posture in reaction to U.S. pressure. Its strong rhetoric and international activism against U.S. “hegemonism,” “power politics,” and “containment” were complemented by a Chinese military buildup that advanced following the Taiwan Strait crisis in 1995-1996 and focused on dealing with U.S. forces that were expected to intervene in a possible military conflict over Taiwan.

By the end of the decade, Chinese leaders came to see this publicly confrontational approach as counterproductive. Asian countries often disapproved of Chinese efforts to force them to choose between China and the U.S. The incoming George W. Bush administration also seemed more ready than the outgoing Clinton administration to push back against Chinese assertiveness in ways that would seriously damage Chinese interests. By mid 2001, before 9/11, China switched to the more accommodating public Chinese posture toward the United States that we see today. China has not moderated its strong military buildup focused on dealing with U.S. forces in a Taiwan contingency, but it has played down public resistance to U.S. hegemonism and containment.