The US Attempt At Seducing China ...

The first of a set of US-China bilateral meetings are taking place in Washington as we write. From a US perspective, they are part of a programme to get Chinese buy-in to collaboration with the US in policing the world’s troubled economic and strategic order.

The logic of this is global co-dominion as Chinese power increases. The primary focus, of course, is currently economic. Past US assertions about Chinese currency manipulation have been largely forgotten. The US now needs China to help it climb out of its financial crisis.

Some observers suggest that the Chinese are now locked into an economic  ‘death embrace’ with the US and must co-operate in order not to be harmed - much to their own frustration. There may be some truth in this. The other main agenda items are:

• the creation of a sufficiently shared position on climate change in advance of the Copenhagen Summit
• US encouragement for China to make the structural changes that would increase domestic consumption more quickly
• collaboration in bringing North Korea into line
• encouraging China to trust that the White House can control Congress in avoiding increased protectionism
• getting back some mutual trust in the investment by the corporations of each in the other.

The US is also offering to assist more vigorously in getting China greater representation at international organizations such as the IMF.

The Chinese are more cautious about all this than the US where Obama’s bouncy enthusiasm for deeper ties must be seen for what it is – an attempt to take advantage of a high point of mutual dependency to suck Beijing into a role as East Asian regional ally.

The idea is that just as India is recognised as Indian Ocean regional hegemon and partner in promoting free markets, so will China be in East Asia. A deal also offers security stability for the more politically liberal pro-Western economies that line China’s Eastern maritime border.

The US see this mutual dependency becoming ever stronger so that China becomes locked into its hegemonic system. The alternative is that China consciously takes a more nationalist and independent route.

A neo-nationalist stance, despite frustrations over the conduct of Western economic policy, seems unlikely under China's current leaders but nationalist feeling is growing in the younger generation.

Interdependency may imply greater partnership now and co-dominion later but it also implies an acceptance of China’s junior status for some time to come and the loss of an opportunity to compete aggressively on equal terms now.

Obama is flattering China by saying that the 21st century will be shaped by the US-Chinese relationship. Under this model, India, Russia, the EU – and perhaps later Brazil, Indonesia, the Gulf and some supposed African Union – act as out-riders within the US hegemonic system or just outside it.

China is implicitly being offered the choice of its inclusion within the tribe or an implicit isolation outside it, although (at least) Russia, the Gulf, the African Union and perhaps other ‘blocs’ may not always choose the American way.

Under current conditions, with acceptance that the Western system will not collapse over night and following the US-Indian rapprochement and a probable US-Russian entente, the Chinese leadership may consider this is a good deal which draws maximum benefit from America's temporary weakness.

However, we must suppose that China will not be seduced by Obama's charm - it will continue to invest in its strategic naval capability, be cautious of excessive interdependence, be sensitive about Western attempts to tell it how to run its empire and continue its economic incursions overseas.

www.tppr.co.uk

www.pendrywhite.com

If you want to follow TPPR events and commentary, try http://twitter.com/TPPRNews

If you want to follow Pendry White events and commentary, try http://twitter.com/PendryWhite