Defence ties between the US and China have improved dramatically in the past year. But have they hit their limits?
While China struggles to get along with its neighbours, policymakers there may at least be able to console themselves with this thought – military-to-military ties with the United States have improved dramatically in the past year.
The two sides now engage on a wide range of issues in several different forums, a shift that’s only likely to develop further in the near future. Yet despite the advances over the last 12 months, the reality is that nothing has happened to overcome the many perennial problems that bedevil the China-US defence relationship – a sustained, end of Cold War, transformation along the lines of the Soviet-American security relationship this certainly isn’t.
The apparent conflicting indicators were on display at this month’s Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Chinese Defence Minister Gen. Liang Guanglie both delivered speeches at the event, during which they expressed satisfaction with the resumption of high-level Sino-American military relations following China’s suspension of such contacts when the Barack Obama administration last year announced a massive arms sale to Taiwan.
Liang’s appearance marked the first time that a Chinese defence minister had attended the annual International Institute for Strategic Studies Asia Security Summit. The two defence ministers also convened a special bilateral session on the conference’s side-lines, where they continued a dialogue they had started this January when Gates visited Beijing.
Following Gates’ China trip, the US and Chinese governments initiated a Strategic Security Dialogue, the first session of which addressed cyber and maritime issues. Future sessions will discuss nuclear issues, missile defence, and outer space security.
Gen. Chen Bingde, chief of the People’s Liberation Army General Staff, also recently led a senior-level PLA delegation on a weeklong site visit to numerous military installations in the United States. During his keynote speech at the National Defence University in Washington, Chen emphasized that the PLA wasn’t a threat, since it lagged far behind the US armed forces.
These high-level engagements follow the decision of Presidents Obama and Hu Jintao to commit their governments to improving the ‘undeveloped’ defence relationship between these two great powers in Asia. Although economic and cultural ties between the United States and Chinese have expanded tremendously in recent years, their military relations have stagnated for more than a decade. Whenever the two defence establishments seem to be making progress, something happens to reverse the trajectory and move it downwards.
The recent change, then, makes sense in many ways for both sides, and it’s certainly sensible for them to seek to dampen Sino-American defence tensions, at least for a while. The Obama administration is eager to garner foreign policy successes to brandish before the US electorate at a time when the administration and Congress are seeking ways to restrain US military spending until the US economy recovers.
On the Chinese side, Beijing wants a calm international security environment during its upcoming leadership transition. Hu and his entourage are soon expected to be replaced by the next generation of Chinese leaders, and they might also hope to dangle incentives before the Obama administration and Congress in the hopes of delaying or diluting the next major arms sale to Taiwan.
Chen referred to this Hu-Obama presidential mandate to improve relations several times during his stay. But he also insisted that healthy China-US defence ties required ‘a new type of cooperative military relations featuring mutual respect and mutual benefit.’ This would occur ‘within the framework of a mutually beneficial partnership featuring mutual respect and win-win outcomes’ in which they ‘accommodate their respective core interests from a long-term perspective.’
Translated from general formulas into concrete deeds, this means that the United States must end military practices that the Chinese defence establishment finds objectionable.
But as Patrick Cronin pointed out last month in The Diplomat, while dialogue and engagement can help reduce tensions between countries when their conflicts result from misperceptions or misunderstandings, they can elevate tensions when the discussions only make clearer the underlying divergent interests of the two sides.
Cronin correctly cites one example of how his colleague, Christine Parthemore, is seeking to overcome the misperception that some of the disputed maritime zones around China are replete with energy resources. Instead of competing over these limited energy supplies, the Asia-Pacific countries could more profitably cooperate to preserve the health of their fisheries and other renewable resources from environmental and climate change. They also have a shared interest in collaborating to counter maritime piracy, transnational terrorism, and in managing the consequences of regional disasters.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Leonard R.
@Captainjohann
“Why China is not opposing F16sales to India but to Taiwan?”
***
Because it already has moles in the TW military who promptly relay
the technology over to their cousins on the Mainland.
America’s fixation with Taiwan is fruitless and stupid.
Visit Taipei airport. Count the planes going to China.
Count the flights to every other destination.
Geography is not necessarily destiny. But with Taiwan, you can add in
demography, language and money, to the geography.
It’s always been a fait accompli ever since 1949.
Leonard R.
Oops. My answer was not on-point. China opposes F-16 sales to Taiwan to put forward a pretense of not having moles in the TW military who relay the technology.
China also under-estimates how good Indian fighter pilots really are. It may have a rude wake-up call on that point.
denk
u still havent learned ur lesson ?
http://tinyurl.com/27fm9u
asians vs asians
while the anglos are laughing their butts off
aint indians supposed to be smart ?
applesauce
captainjohann,
The issue of selling the F-16 to taiwan is a much bigger concern than selling the F-16 to the indians because of the fact that the mainland has always considered taiwan to be a rebellious providence while india is considered a sovereign nation, its not so much that the F-16 scares them that much, its the political implications the sales of high end military machines has.
secondly the us may criticize but an actual attack(ie: airstrike) on the PRC because of some lack of religious(or any other) freedom in sovereign Chinese territory is beyond insane, the US leadership is not suicidal enough to want a nuclear war with china(which at minimum will ensure that even if america is not destroyed it will be irrelevant for the next 500 years) because some minorities are oppressed or something.
thirdly, there is absolutely no territorial dispute of any kind between the us and china which cannot be said for japan, india, vietnam or Philippines. that and the us is far stronger militarily which also cannot be said for the Asian countries compared with china. and before you go on about china having territory problems with its neighbors consider that this holds true for the likes of india and japan as well, it is not unique to one country it is just the state of being left over from the past eras(cold war, www2 and the colonial times).
lastly, china does pose a threat(militarily speaking) to the us mainland in the form of ICBMs and SLBMs that they currently have that can reach the us, though one would think that the use of those would come only at the most desperate of times due to MAD.bidding for time is also exactly what the chinese are doing. they know when it comes down to it they are no match for the USA if the us is committed, even if they are stronger than their neighbors the US is always around to meddle. this coupled with the fact that they know with each year the gap between china and the us is closing, in GDP and technology, its likely that china will not make any real “moves” soon, however this mid-century is going to be real interesting.
John Chan
May I add my 2 cents worth opinion.
1. Most Chinese people, in my personal view, do not want to see American troops leave Japan (as some punishment may be?) anytime soon because Japan and its people have yet to repent from their massive bloody atrocities and war crimes committed during WW2, as Germans so courageously did on theirs.
2. USA should not do their anti-terroist job in Afghanistan half hearted, last 5 minute before the victory is always the longest 5 minutes.
3. I think many in South China Sea area including China would want the US to stay committed in the area to safeguard the freedom of navigation right and safe passage right.
ASEAN
Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! Johnny Chan, when will you ever learn to stop open mouth, insert foot?
1) On the contrary, the Chinese really do want US troops to leave Japan because that is when they will start to advance their vengeful agenda against Japan for what they did in WWII. Also contrary to what you promoted, Japan and several of its successive prime ministers have apologized at one point or another for what they did during WWII. But no, it was never enough for the always-afraid-of-losing-face Chinese. For a while, China played the poor-me card with the world, kept on reciting the Nanking episode to let everyone know that they were “victims” of Japan’s aggression. The world, however, isn’t naive and didn’t forget what China did to other smaller countries.
2) China wants the US out of Afghanistan as soon as possible, so they can go in and sell their cheap wares, exploit natural resources, but above all feeling safe about their volatile backdoor. With US in Central Asia and India is increasingly more pro-US, China feels like its being trapped.
3) Au contraire to your statement, China wants the US out of Southeast Asian sea for good, or at least look the other way, not interfere with China’s systematic aggression.
Talk one way but act another way is typical of Chinese doctrine.
John Chan
@ASEAN:
The Diplomat is one of the few sites that let bloggers post their views regardless their political strips. Chinese bloggers present their views with reasons and logic in the hope they can persuade the world to view China objectively instead of thru a racist and cold war prejudice prism.
I am disappointed that Indian bloggers like you, can not do the same like Chinese bloggers with civility and integrity. It seems Indian bloggers are incapable to debate with reason and logic, all they can do like you is using smearing, name calling, fabricating facts and twisting history underhand tricks.
ASEAN, for goodness sake, you may not care of your own image, but at least you should try to project a better image for your nation by presenting argument elegantly. If you do not agree with my presentation, just put out your own professionally like me. Let other readers to judge.
Calling names, shouting insults, and distorting other blogger’s presentation are totally unnecessary and it is the wrong thing to do.
ozivan
@Asean. Hello…Hello Asean…ooh..you are here now tailing John Chan.
Are you really an Indian blogger as John said ? If yes, are you also an Indian who speaks… MALAYALAM…?…one of the 4 major Dravidians languages of Southern India.
If you spell MALAYALAM backwards…the spelling is the same.
You are blogging and commenting what John Chan says backwards or in reverse of what he comments.
You have done the same to me in my 2 encounters with you.
Can you be original ?
ASEAN
Johnny Chan,
What is your obsession with the Indians? Stop barking your nose where you truly have no knowledge about.
FYI. I am Vietnamese. So I DO know more about my people’s history than you.
ASEAN
What is wrong with my rebuttal to your weak assertion, Johnny Chan?
You’re the one, who once failed to come up with a proper rebuttal, would soon succumb to calling name and assinuate threats. Get with the program!
ASEAN
Wow… You two Johnny Chan and ozivan must live in the same flat, share same computer or something? It’s silly for you to assume someone is an Indian and ducking the obvious comments. Are you at the lost for words, so it is now necessary to attack the messenger?
John Chan
@ASEAN:
How unfortunate you are a Vietnamese, it seems years of colonization by the French and American have changed the Vietnamese to the worse if you are the representative of them, they pick up all the bad habits of their colonial masters, rude, unreasonable, and mouthful of bad language. Maybe it is the result that Vietnamese have lost touch to their ancestor’s cultural civility, because they cannot read their ancestor’s writings anymore.
Vietnamese do not know their history longer than 150 years, because they lost the capability to read their ancestor’s writing, they are using French imposed ugly curly scripts now. Vietnam modern history is written by creative revisionist historians; no wonder you have not idea the difference between truth and fabricated facts.
ASEAN, I merely expressed what Chinese might want, it is neither here nor there, why do you need to rebut my expression? Are you a Chinese? What are the bases for you as a non-Chinese to rebut Chinese bloggers point of view? Your hostility to a fellow blogger who happen to have views you do not agree is puzzling.
ASEAN
Amazing! You’re so predictable, Johnny Chan. You are so easy to fall for this kind of personal attack. You first assumed I was Indian because you were bickering with some other guys over India vs. China talk. Then, you have nothing to add or even a wee bit of intelligent rebuttal, so you had to jump on the idea that I am Vietnamese. It doesn’t really matter, John. We now know that you’re just another cheap product of Chinese-made propaganda machine: Almost good, but not good enough -just like most stuff that you’ve managed to copy, steal secrets, or forged from the USA and Russia.
ASEAN
Johnny Chan,
Your name and English connotation indicated that you’re from Hong Kong. That means you’re not a Han, perhaps even a Yueh. Did you know that all the land North and West of Hong Kong used to belong to the Hundred-Yueh tribes? Or is it too much a lesson of history to painfully remind you of your forgotten ancestors?
You’re a Yueh, so why you’re defending your Han masters?
John Chan
@AESAN:
You said you were a Vietnamese, do you mean you lied? I blog here on the basis that other bloggers are sincere about welfare of humanity, they are here to contribute their ideas due to their different background and life experience. Although not all the ideas are commendable, but I accept their comments at face value, and I trust them are honest, having integrity, and have no untold motives but for the good of mankind.
It is puzzling, why do you want to harm Vietnamese by stirring up their unsound hostility toward Chinese? What do you and your nation get out of it? Maybe you should let us know to enlighten the world that there is a nation with such citizen with such hideous motives.
ASEAN, since you are no longer claiming you are a Vietnamese, presumably you are returning to the role of Indian.
ASEAN, here is a quote on The Economist regarding Indian bloggers.
“watch out. this XXX is some smart cookie but with insidious motive.
he enjoys free smearing of chinese through shooting from the hip frequently at will by hiding in the safe haven of anonymity of his own national origin so he won’t be skinned or whacked in kind in return. his deceitful disparity is unworthy.”
ASEAN, are you ashamed to be an Indian blogger? Do you intend to change the bad image of Indian bloggers?
ASEAN
It hilarious how fixated you are with Indian bloggers, or should I say Indian men? I never said I was Indian.
Furthermore, neither my race nor my nationality is relevant to the discussion. But we all know the only way for you to weasel out of a failed rebuttal is to attack the messenger. You’re the one who made all the faulty assumptions based on your bias, racist view. You’re exhibiting the classic case of inferiority complex.
We all know how racist Han people are, but for God sakes, John, at least be kind to your ancestors, the Yueh.
bose
John Chen, you are a typical chinese who always misleading people with your reversed reflection argument. As a chinese tells East we should know that he would take West. if chinese told us North we should take South.
Chinese want US troops stay in Japan? Japanese atrocities in the WWII? ridiculous, what chinese have been inflicting to the neighboring countries like Vietnan, Philippines or Cambodia considered as atrocities. Who taught Khemer rough killing 2 million people in the 70’s? Who killed millions of vietnamese during those endless wars? are those atrocities or “peaceful rise” as chinese leaders tried to impress the world? I am unimpressed about the so calld “Nanjing massacre” events that chinese kept blaming Japanese. Up to now, there is no single book mentioned about that except some trashy, cheap shots from young chinese authors who was born 40 years after the WWII.
Chinese want the US to be in the south china sea to maintain peaceful navigation? Yeah, that is exactly the ASEAN asks chinese to do with the US help. Once the act does not go along with what you talk, nobody believes you. What did chinese do with the Impeccable two years ago? What did chinese do to Vietnamese fishermen and to the Phillipines currently in the south china sea? if chinese want a peaceful sealines why declare south china sea as “core of interest”?
mareo2
Always very informative reading mister Weitz neutral articles in The Diplomat. Thanks for your objective analysis.
captainjohann
Why China is not opposing F16sales to India but to Taiwan? It is another matter F16 were not brought by India but it did not feel the threat because it thinks Indians do not have the spunk to take on China now.But it realy worries about Vietnam, Japan and ofcourse Taiwan.
Chinese also know that US is obligated to them due to the holding of dollars it has.It also know that due to US pre occupation with Militant Islam which it considers as an ally(they never bother to attack Chinese Turkmenistan even though there is more lack of religious freedom than say in India or Thailand.)China was able to buy the world’s biggest copper mine in Afghanistan, get gas from Iran through Pakistan and may be even able to sell arms to Saudies.
China wants peace with USA but not with India,vietnam,Philipines,Japan and it is correct in saying it doesnot pose diect threat to US mainland but it wants time to achieve that very core strength from USA!!!
John Chan
China wants peace with USA as well as peace with Vietnam, Philippines, Japan and India. Wanting peace does not mean China has to give up the right to protect its sovereignty. On the other hand, USA, Vietnam, Philippines, Japan and India are the nations do not want peace, they are showing bellicose posture towards China non-stop. UN must denounce those nations’ bad behaviour for the sake of world peace.
mike flynn
hot war with china? they, of course, are gambling that USA blinks first. then they win at zero cost.
John Chan
Nobody is at war with the US; USA is at war with everybody else. China does not want anybody interfere her internal affairs. USA will change a regime at a wink, sufficient deterrence is the only way to safeguard one’s independence.
mareo2
“Nobody is at war with the US;”
I think that Al qaida can strongly disagree with your opinion.
“USA is at war with everybody else.”
I am not sure what you are trying to say, can you please elaborate more your seemingly contradictory statments? How no one can be at war with the USA but the USA can be at war with anyone? In your opinion is possible a one sided world war for no reason? Do you imply that Switzerland and the Vatican may need to bost their military against an inminent USA attack?
“China does not want anybody interfere her internal affairs.”
Sorry but again I am not sure about what do you mean. “Internal affairs”? Since when a PRC’s potential military conflict with the sovereign nation of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam is an internal affair of China? Do you consider that Vietnam is a “rebel” province of China like Taiwan?
“USA will change a regime at a wink,”
Do you mean by invading and building a democracy from scratch? It seems that many americans today think that is a not great idea. Hence they voted Obama in place of John McCain.
“Sufficient deterrence is the only way to safeguard one’s independence.”
Vietnam seems to agree, they anounced buying russian submarines, fighters and for first time in 32 years clarify to their people what vietnamese are exempted from a military draft in case of a military conflict.
Perhaps Taiwan, South Korea and Japan have to follow your advice of “peace trough strength” and build nukes like North Korea.
John Chan
@mareo2:
1. Nobody including China has any intention to provoke USA.
2. Yet USA is bombing and killing everywhere in the world, and seeking to destroy anybody that US regards as a potential threat. China is the biggest US bond buyer and trading partner, but USA is doing whatever it can to harm China with containment, cold war assaults, etc.
3. Taiwan and those disputed areas in South China Sea China considers its territorial matters, therefore they are Chinese internal affairs. If you think otherwise, China is happy to make your national territory an international issue.
4. Obama is a disappointment; he talks good but acts just like American hawks. His ‘change’ is to the worst.
5. It took China 150 years to lean the art of “peace trough strength,” but China will never do what the West is good at “order trough brutality.”
6. Every nation has the right to protect itself, and take whatever the means it sees fit. Without the US stirring up acrimony in Asia, nobody will be that hostile to each other in Asia.
7. Japan has the most advanced and powerful weaponry in Asia; one wonders why a nation claims to have a pacifist constitution needs to arm itself to the teeth and hide its overstocking weapon grade nuclear material.