Neighbourhood diplomacy is becoming a foreign policy priority for official Beijing, and demonstrates that China is willing to undertake the role of mediator in Afghanistan and accelerate regional efforts to bring all relevant parties to the negotiating table.
As the focus of the West was fixed in Greece and Iran, the 7th BRICS Summit began a massive shift from a dialogue to an economic partnership – one whose full impact will be witnessed in the coming years.
East Asia has avoided major military conflicts since the 1970’s. It is owing to the maturity and good sense of most of the states of the region, their emphasis on economic growth over settling scores, and the American alliances and security presence that have deterred military action and provided comfort to most peoples and states. But above all else, it is due to the reconciliation of the Asia-Pacific’s major powers, the United States and China.
The US should show the same respect for China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity as China has always shown respect for US sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is the basic condition for the smooth and healthy development of the Sino-US relations.
China hopes to build a new model of big power relations with the US featuring non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutually beneficial cooperation, and mutual accommodation of each other’s core interests. The aim is to gradually make the uncomfortable interdependent relations more comfortable.
The media and public opinion have become the new focuses of major-power competition, as the US struggles to maintain a supreme position in the current world order.
Japan’s Abe government is appealing to the nationalistic Japan Restoration Party to revise the constitution to permit the assembly of an army. Lyle J. Goldstein’s book, Meeting China Halfway—How to Defuse the Emerging U.S.-China Rivalry has important suggestions for avoiding a Japan-China military conflict.
Despite its serious concern about information security, the US displayed more impressive diplomatic courtesy than in previous sessions, helping the two sides to build trust, reduce suspicion, and restore collaboration. That contributes to a constructive atmosphere for the upcoming summit meeting of the two countries’ leaders.
The desire for peace, mutual respect, and economic cooperation is already winning the hearts and minds of everyday people on both sides of the Pacific. Their voices may seldom make the headlines, but they are a critical foundation of this important relationship.
As permanent members of the UN Security Council, Chinese and U.S. leaders should look beyond the recent deadlocked Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and use their next U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue to make further progress in promoting nuclear disarmament, nuclear non-proliferation, and supporting the safe and secure peaceful use of nuclear energy.
This election cycle will likely bring out U.S. politicians from both sides of the aisle to blame China for U.S. economic woes. However, as China greatly increases its outbound investment, it would be a missed opportunity to not engage economically.
“Issue-specific partnership, instead of alliance” may become an outstanding feature of the three countries relations in the future, but their varying relationships challenge their ability to work together to meet global problems and coordinate global governance.
With the support of Russian resources, China is emerging as a much stronger player in Central Asia. States in the region may exploit this Sino-Russian rapprochement in order to advance their own goals, receiving security and funding from Moscow and Beijing, while not being required to change political regimes.
Just as U.S. President Bill Clinton expressed to Chinese President Jiang Zemin in 1996, both countries need to rely on the common interests of combating climate change and strengthening mutual security. This can happen with improved and people-to-people interaction.
In its eagerness to reassert its supremacy in the Asia Pacific, Washington risks losing its balance amid competing strategic goals, by forcing a position that is neither fair nor legally supportable in a region far from its shores.