Asia Society’s Post

Read on for a sneak peek of this week's 'China 5' newsletter, bringing you the 5 big things you need to know about China each Friday from our experts at the Center for China Analysis ⬇ 1️⃣ If everything goes according to Xi’s Third Plenum plan, by 2029, China will have economically decoupled from all actors who do not align with its policies and will have allied with those that do — Lobsang Tsering, Senior Research Associate 2️⃣ At the Third Plenum, Chinese officials conceded that the country’s economic recovery is “not strong enough” and called for more “proactive” measures to achieve the 5% GDP growth target.  Beijing’s strategy focuses on breaking institutional barriers rather than relying on Western-style expansionary policies — Lizzi C. Lee, Fellow on Chinese Economy 3️⃣ The phrase “garbage time of history,” internet slang used to describe a period where a country’s economic or political situation has severely deteriorated to the point of irreversible failure, has recently gained popularity in China. Ironically, government efforts to denounce the term ended up popularizing it, expanding its reach from a niche circle of dissidents into the mainstream — Shengyu Wang, Research Assistant 4️⃣ Aligning with the policy set forth at March's Two Sessions, the National Development and Reform Commission action plan aims to save energy equivalent to 2.5 million tons of standard coal and to curb carbon dioxide emissions by a total of 6.5 million tons in the aluminum sector over the next two years — Taylah Bland, Fellow on Climate and the Environment 5️⃣ China and the Philippines appeared to reach a temporary agreement on mutual restraint and de-escalation in the ongoing dispute at Second Thomas Shoal in the South China Sea. China’s statement might have undermined the Philippine position, but it reflects Beijing’s long-standing diplomatic approach of balancing a desire to de-escalate disputes while maintaining its reputation domestically — Lyle Morris, Senior Fellow for Foreign Policy and National Security To never miss an update, subscribe to China 5: https://lnkd.in/eteSxi32

I am glad to share my recent article on “Preserving Europe’s Interests Amid U.S-China Strategic Rivalry”, published by ISDP, Sweden, among the influential think tanks in Europe. I have argued that in the era of Cold War 2.0, the EU should maintain ‘strategic neutrality’ and focus on securing its economic interests. And, further, perhaps to attempt a mediation between the U.S and China to establish a secure, peaceful and rules-based world order. Link - https://lnkd.in/gACsW7aW

Indeed, consider a new world trade strategy is essential now; a summary from Patrick Lawrence: " We ought not miss the significance of what Putin and Xi had to say this week to one another and to the rest of humanity. The world just turned once again. An important public reaffirmation of their shared commitment to that “fairer and more democratic multi-polar world” , and as Xi elaborated: " We have been coordinating our positions within multilateral platforms such as ... APEC [the Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation forum] and the G20 [the Group of 20 advanced and middle-income nations] to promote the emergence of a multi-polar world and economic globalization based on genuine multi-lateralism." Important points to consider in weaving our next world trade strategy......read more @ https://lnkd.in/gCypYhTv

Interesting read by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS): "To counter this narrative, the United States should become bolder in explaining the logic of its actions to preserve peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. U.S. officials should publicly rebut suggestions that the United States views Taiwan as a tool for use in competition with China, or that the United States has designs on Taiwan’s ultimate status in relation to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). It should frame its goals around preserving peace and keeping open space for leaders in Beijing and Taipei to ultimately arrive at a peaceful resolution of their differences. This should reflect the will of the people of Taiwan, who have democratic agency to express their preferences. Such an eventual goal may seem remote or even impossible, given the political trajectory in China under Xi Jinping, but in keeping open the prospect for some form of peaceful reconciliation, U.S. officials can puncture Chinese efforts to paint the United States as the destabilizing actor in the Taiwan Strait. Washington needs to present itself as not seeking a fight with China over Taiwan, but rather as being credible, principled, and firm in its defense of Taiwan’s security, prosperity, and democratic way of life." https://lnkd.in/eMfsqCUZ

In German, we have the "inbetween days" - those days between the years and just at the beginning of the new year, that allow for one to clear one's thinking, and look back to look forward. A great time to catch up on reading you may have missed last year - let me recommend a few from the Bertelsmann Stiftung to help grapple with the challenging months ahead: - Foreign Affairs Magazine's Andy Moravcsik thought our 2023 study on geoeconomics and the European neighborhood was among the best reads of the year. As enlargement becomes a strategic objective, being clear-eyed about challenges and - and possible opportunities - will be vital to set the right incentives and motivate change, especially as the Souther neighborhood distabilizes further: https://lnkd.in/eu9V9_3q - On December 14, the EU opened formal accession negotiations with #Ukraine - which, as Miriam Kosmehl and fellow experts conclude in their newest study, is better prepared for long-term economic success (all things being equal) than the 2004 expansion member states: https://lnkd.in/e6ArZjyN - Speaking of preparedness: In a Euractiv Op-Ed, my colleagues Etienne Hoera & Brandon Bohrn warned - just as the hours ticked down to the new year - that a simple extension on the steel/aluminum "truce" on Sect. 232 trade sanctions wouldn't do - instead, they warned, Europeans had to "steel" themselves for more aggressive trade action under a Trump administration, though the Heritage Foundation's "Manifest for Leadership" highlights debates between the MAGA faction and Reaganite Republicans - but, as they note, ignorance and hope are not elements of strategy. Europe must get moving: https://lnkd.in/ee4FiGSv

The illusion that greater trade and wealth produce peace. For decades German foreign policy has followed the principle of “change through trade.” Berlin thought trading with Russia, China and other bad actors would ease their hostility and turn them into reliable partners. The U.S. thought trade with China would gradually alter Beijing’s incentives by creating a peace-loving middle class and deeper diplomatic ties. The Western bet that expanding trade would overcome ideological differences and political rivalries is wrong. States engage in trade to become wealthy and competitive, not peaceful. Often they want to be wealthy so they can attack their enemies and dominate others. As Russia has done with Europe since Peter the Great, China now is pursuing more trade with the U.S. to gain an advantage over its commercial partner.

Indeed, the situation is dire not only for RP and China but all states in the region and perhaps even outside the Asia-Pacific if and when the brewing conflict escalates. And the conflicting interests are escalating. In international relations, the states that are involved are not only those directly impacted but also the powers that support them. There are dire reasons why states do what they must. Power or small states, reasons include closing windows of opportunity to do what one must, long-term lack of resources or diminishing access to them, the relative power of involved states, real or potential, and historical psychology affecting nations.

In this Foreign Affairs essay, Hanna Notte and I connect two separate dots: great-power competition, issuing in war (Ukraine) and possible war (Taiwan); and great-power distraction, issuing in an inability to manage or dispel regional crises (in the South Caucasus, Africa and the Middle East). The overlap of these two trends defines international order at the present moment.

As often, this is a great read by Stephen Walt, the famous Harvard professor of International Relations, on "what the United States can learn from China" https://lnkd.in/dwvgc4dV So what are the 3 things that the US can learn from China according to Walt? 1) No "world policeman" approach The first, and most obvious point, is that "China has avoided the costly quagmires that have repeatedly ensnared the United States. Even as its power has grown, Beijing has been leery of taking on potentially costly commitments abroad." Walt points out that "the United States, by contrast, seems to have an unerring instinct for foreign-policy quicksand... Remarkably, U.S. leaders still think it is some sort of foreign-policy achievement whenever they take on the job of protecting yet another country, even when that country is of limited strategic value or cannot do much to help advance U.S. interests. The United States is now formally committed to defending more countries than at any time in its history" (I actually didn't know that, it sounds insane). 2) Relations with everyone, and diplomacy instead of "brute force" Secondly Walt says that "unlike the United States, China maintains businesslike diplomatic relations with nearly everyone. It has more diplomatic missions than any other country, its ambassadorial posts are rarely unfilled, and its diplomats are increasingly well-trained professionals (instead of amateurs whose main qualification is their ability to raise funds for successful presidential candidates). China’s leaders recognize that diplomatic relations are not a reward to others for good behavior; they are an essential tool for acquiring information, communicating China’s views to others, and advancing their interests via persuasion rather than brute force." Actual diplomacy, imagine that! Walt writes that "by contrast, the United States is still prone to withholding diplomatic recognition from states with whom we are at odds, thereby making it more difficult to understand their interests and motivations and making it much harder to communicate our own." In the Middle East for instance "the United States has a 'special relationship' with Israel (and, to some extent, Egypt and Saudi Arabia), meaning that it supports Israel no matter what it does. Meanwhile, it has no regular contacts with Iran or Syria or with the Houthis in Yemen, who control much of that country." By contrast, Walt notes that "the United States sees itself as the principal promoter of a set of universal liberal values and believes that spreading democracy is part of its global mission." Furthermore "making matters worse is America’s propensity for moral posturing, which leaves it vulnerable to charges of hypocrisy whenever it fails to live up to its own standards." Which is almost always 😅 The USA only spreads terror, how can they "spread democracy", it's like, do as I say, don't do as I do... by Arnaud Bertrand