With U.S. President Barack Obama returning to the United States from a highly touted trip to the Asia-Pacific, almost as much is being made of what didn’t happen as what did. Specifically, analysts have noted China’s muted response to various U.S. criticisms and initiatives including over China’s currency, the announcement of a new basing agreement with Australia and questions over China’s growing assertiveness in the South China Sea.
In a week that saw the United States make significant headway in gaining traction for the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, namely getting a Japanese commitment to take part in talks, the United States has managed to underscore how serious it is about refocusing its attention on the region.
China, meanwhile, has remained uncharacteristically quiet. During the week leading up to the ASEAN and East Asia summits in Bali, China issued little in the way of a formal response as the United States moved to what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described as “pivot” to the Pacific. The U.S. commitment was underscored by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who said that any budget cuts will not affect America’s commitment to the region.
According to one commentator, China has engaged in a round of “turning the other cheek.” The question many are now asking is: why?
“I'm not sure it’s so much ‘turning the other cheek’ as an uncertainty about how to respond to being continuously on the back-foot in this setting, not only with the usual suspects of the Philippines and Vietnam bringing up the South China Sea, but now also with Australia allowing U.S. troops at Darwin and the Singapore deployment,” says Kelly Currie, a China expert at the Project 2049 Institute.“Their situation keeps eroding at the East Asia summit, and once again the United States has been skillful in picking up on it and positioning to take advantage of it. Unfortunately, the tendency in Beijing is to blame the U.S. for this state of affairs rather than examine how their own behavior is at work in causing it.”
“Since the last time this happened in summer 2009, the Chinese responded with a lot of anger and I think they’ve seen that this did not work well for them at a strategic level, even if it played well at home,” Currie says. “So, I think they are in a period of trying to figure out what strategy is going to work, and that is why their response has seemed muted.”
Regardless, some analysts have argued that China’s quiet response, and its apparent acceptance of the need to discuss the South China Sea dispute at the regional level – something it has previously strenuously resisted – marks a significant diplomatic victory for the United States. Others, including China specialist and University of Miami professor June Teufel Dreyer, aren’t so sure.
“That depends on some positive result coming from the discussion,” she says. “When I was on the USCC (United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission) bureaucrats were always saying ‘we have engaged them [Chinese authorities] in dialogue,’ as if they believed dialogue was a synonym for success. Which it is not. Sometimes it is a stalling technique, to play for time while one solidifies one’s position into a fait accompli.”
“It can also be a gesture intended to win over public opinion – ‘see how reasonable we are? We have agreed to talk.’ After which, it’s easy to make some plausible sounding condition that is nonetheless going to be unacceptable to the other side.”
It’s a view echoed by Tran Huu Dung, a Vietnam watcher and professor at Wright State University.
“I don't think the fear of Chinese aggressiveness can be easily tempered by a temporary softening of its voice,” he says. “Many believe that this is only a tactical retreat, and only in diplomatic posturing at that.”
Harry Kazianis is assistant edtor of The Diplomat.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
yang zi
the mere fact that China has agreed to talk about it in the East Asia Summit can be viewed as China’s retreat is telling.
China has nothing to lose to talk about anything. Besides, China has no control over what others do, if US want station troops in Australia, China has no power and no legal basis to interfere.
I like China’s muted response. China need to focus on the ball.
WorldAlliance
OK you China can muted for now!
What US and the remaining of the world do is none of your bussiness.
yang zi
I just read the link about the turning another cheek, it is comical. While US may see these things as victories or important, China is not. what has actually happened that hurts China? it only hurts if China want to be a hegemonic power. not only this, China can view America’s moves as reflexes from a declining power. Like I always said, China needs to manage US during its relative decline. China’s response is a good start at that.
While America spends money deploying this and that, China will gladly let America take the head job. if America want the satisfaction, China can even give America a solute.
ozivan
@Yang Zi. Here are 2 of Deng Xiao Peng’s many other famous quotes.
” The President of USA says one thing during the election, something else when he takes office, something else at midterm and something else when he leaves.”
” Keep a cool head, maintain a low profile….never take the lead, but aim to do something big ”
China’s muted is perhaps a good move.
ozivan
Errata. It should read : China’s muted response is perhaps a good move.
Huang
“A Cold Hot Pot” is resulted when the otherwise delicious feast has been disrupted by other un-related and counter-productive distractions. At the end of THAT DAY,a number of paricipants left the banquet confused,dumb-strucked,and above all not very satisfy. Therefore, the miracles or manifestations of this get-together will be “A delayed revelation” over a length of time. it remians to be seen.
The US’s plans or strategic approaches in the Asia-Pacific region can never be prevented nor dissuaded by China or any nation. Whether the US’s continued strategic path or traditions should be examined and studied closely and is purely the US’s decision to make. Obviously,the questions should be asked are: Does pressing China to raise the value of the RMB really benifit the US(jobs and fair competitions)? Is it REALLY true that China is more assertive as some dubious factions in the US hyper-vented in recents years ? Will it be likely that China will ultimately pose some threats to Australia ?
China’s consistant approaches in promoting trades and other interactions with ASEAN can never be easily fragmented or derailed by the US or any other powers. Whether the South China Sea disputes be the leading cause to losses for China and ASEAN will have to be discussed and meticuliously studied by both China and ASEAN. likewise,questions will have to asked and answered by both China and ASEAN.
Which Asian nation will be the next to be demanded by the US to re-value their currency ? What are the real reasons behind the recent disputes between China,Vietnam,and the Phillipines ? Do countries in Asia REALLY feel China is threatening them ? Have anyone in Asia ever ask themselves why the US is planning to add another military installation at striking distant from every ASEAN nations when bases in Japan,South Korea,and Guam are more than adequate in “containing China’s inevitable and peaceful rise”?
Realistically,all the gestures and postures by the US in Asia will gradually be absorbed by developnments of the region and would turn out to be just another entity among a mixture of factors shaping and re-shaping the Asia-Pacific region . Optimistically speaking,what ever actions or in-actions made by the US will not change the powerful natural forces moving forward into a completely new Asia like a fully loaded freight train moving at full speed. Stopping this train of positive developnemts in Asia would be fruitless and unwise.
Finally,China’s course should not confused by just because a few ASEAN menbers are temporarily confused for reasons that must be slosely looked at. Naturally,members of ASEAN and China will emerge from this meeting wiser and richer as a result.
webster0105
I think you misunderstand…there is a benefit for countries like Vietnam, Thailand, etc, to having certain engagements with the US as it gives them more leverage against Beijing (and also against the US). It’s all just strategic.
John Chan
There is nothing out of ordinary in a tango, sometimes forward and sometimes backward. Stronger muscle is the only way to stop the partner from keep on pushing forward. China must build up muscle in order to control the forward and backward movements at will and beautifully.
Reason
In a Tango – The one leads – one follows
Go figure who is who?
PapaJohn
In ballroom dancing, especially Tango, muscle flexing is definitely the nonsense. You don’t know how to tango in a skilled diplomacy, just thinking of intimidation as a magic wand.
Giao Chi
It is possible that China has come to realise that China towns around the Globe are NOT really China’s own towns; just like the naming convention of SCS and ECS, etc.
CCP just needs a quiet moment to digest and to reflect. The behaviour is normal and expected.
Valbonne
I believe China should be muted because America is talking like a frustrated nation because American’s economy is not doing very well.
At the same time, American have not been able to win the wars against the insurgents in both Iraq and Afghanistan outright. It is the loss of “Face”.
Well, America is the only Superpower, she can insult any country as she likes.
MostJustWantPeace
China just needs to bide her time and adopt a wait and see approach for upcoming year. Further projections are hard to make, so I’m not going to attempt it here.
Yang zi
What is ironic is China’s leaders always remind people China is a developing country, China never will be a hegemonic power, but people don’t listen. They first talk up China, then talking scared of China, making China as a big bad country, taking the leadership role from US. The America decline theory is also started from US, when other people started talk about it, US feels insecure.
So basically Obama and Hillary are fighting the shadows of its own. Impressive pounches I must say, but it is all shadow boxing. China can just sit on the sidelines and watch the show. If America want to be a power to any corner of the world, why should China stop it?
PapaJohn
Very often, what China said and what China did were totally opposite so it is normal for people to distrust China, especially for her neighbors. The fact is China is a developing country in most of the senses but she loves to talk tough and flexing muscles (just look at the war drum beatings in Global times, the mouthpiece of the CCP). Now she is losing face big time. Is she gonna adjust her behavior afterwards? Just bite her time and wait for the right moment to strike back, right?
Bobby
Didn’t you know that both the insurgents and their alQaeda affiliates had been defeated, killed, captured and or otherwise destroyed of their abilities to wage wars against the local Iraqis and their government? Iraq is essentially pacified and noe the U.S. is pulling the last troops out. Did you hear anymore fighting, or even IED attacks? Old rhetorics against America’s occupation of Iraq are getting old and tiresome.
As for Afghanistan, the Talibans are still being hunted like rodents in the mountains bordering Pakistan. They may manage to launch an attack here and there, but even the attacks have become less and less frequent. Thanks to the advance of drone technology, America now has a new way to hunt them.
Now that operations Iraq and Afghanistan are winding down, it’s time the U.S. refocuses on Asia. It’s inevitable and absolutely essential to the security of all surrounding nations to keep China from claiming all of the SCS.
JUSTSAYNO
“Didn’t you know that both the insurgents and their alQaeda affiliates had been defeated, killed, captured and or otherwise destroyed of their abilities to wage wars against the local Iraqis and their government?”
What a loaded if not obtuse sentence. Majority of the Iraqi insurgents including those from AQ ARE the local Iraqis, just from different religious factions. As for current fighting going on in Iraq, if you google Iraq news you would have found that Turkey have been bombing Iraq in the Kurdish region. Just how much Koolaid do you have to drink to think that Iraq is secure?
“It’s inevitable and absolutely essential to the security of all surrounding nations to keep China from claiming all of the SCS.”
That is true if you are from India, Vietnam, or Phillipines. It would certainly be in these Asian nations’ self interest to have the US to foot the military bills to advance an initiative that the US can benefit nothing from. The problem is that other than the defense industry getting rich off American citizens taxes, America itself has little to gain from all of this. The irony is that if America were to start a new cold war to contain China, it would need to borrow vast of money from China. This makes a lose/lose scenario for both the US and China.
ozivan
@Bobby. I agree with you to some great extent that the US have not lost the war in Iraq, except for different reasons from yours.
Firstly, I believe that the US was too hasty to invade Iraq based largely on suspicion of WMD, but was accentuated and driven much by US’s desire to seek and wreak revenge after the 9/11. US just had to swing at some muslim country and Iraq was unfortunate in US’s way because of Saddam Hussein’s past disobedience to US generally.
In terms of the widespread destruction in human life and infrastructure, unleashing well known sectarian feuds (something that would be long lingering which the US could easily and reasonably foreseen), bombing Iraq to stoneage, breaking the will of the Iraqis, and setting back Iraq’s development and progress by 3 to 4 decades, etc….the US had done extremely well.
The endgame is that Iraq will not be a threat to US & Western interest for at least 3 to 4 decades, which was really the ultimate objective. It was clothed in exalted language and noble ideals that regime change was for democracy, well being and human rights for the Iraqi’s people.
Such beautifully crafted propaganda rolled round the desire to seek revenge for 9/11 was brilliant psychological warfare
So, IMO, the US and the West had achieved victory in Iraq. This was the upside for the invasion.
The downside was the financial costs of the wars, failed attempt to do nation building and the unexpected degree of stubborness and resentment from muslims. I reckon this resentment will be long lingering too.
Iraq is temporarily pacified for the moment, but muslim fury against Judeo-Christians is hard to extinguish because of history.
For the moment, the US and the West have gained the upper hand again for many years to come as they have done in the past, for example, the Arab-Israeli wars neutralised the Arabs for 3-4 decades. The US and NATO have won in Iraq…Victorious indeed, that’s for sure.
The endgame is what we must see.
Ian Tse
It’s so amusing to see Chinese CCP on one hand kept talking about divided and conquer, and on on the other hand it wants all SCS claimants to talk with CCP bilaterally on the disputes. Somebody has to be very stupid here to buy CCP’s bilaterally suggestion.
By the way, the disputed sea is not even close to China’s EEZ or being proven that it’s ever owning the SCS in the first place. The Chinese from mainland thinking is so strange. I’m also a Chinese but from Singapore, but just couldn’t figure out CCP’s logic in this case. China is definitely not fit to control itself, let alone of talking about leading anybody else.
Long
Ian,
thanks for your comments. I wish there would be more Chinese with open minded like yours. My salute to you for speaking out the truth about the disputed sea and how you have the courage to give us your very straight opinons about the CCP. Thank you again
james_001
Why don’t you tell that to the British Malvinas island is 4000 mile from England yet it is british why?
No wonder because you are slavishly believe whatever Pap fed you
Yi
@James_001, lands grabbing which happened in hundreds of years ago, when the World was still living in lawlessness, but now, we are currently living in a very civilized society, stupid.
In the “once up on a time” history, the Brits did not just grabbed Malnivas island, but they were also conqured and migrated to Australia, North America, New Zealand and Falkland island, etc. However, this is 21st Century and the rules of laws around the World have been established. China CCP cannot just go and grabbing lands or other already occupied islands and say, the Brits did it, the French did it in a few centuries ago, now, China can do the same.
We cannot prevent what happened in hundreds of years ago, but definitely in the mordern civilized World, we can isolate the agressor and bring it down like a rotten old tree.
By the way, please remember China town in London (Soho), is NOT China’s. Alright?
james_001
What kind rule of law are you talking UNCLOS? China claim on south china sea predate the Unclos.
And although China did sign the unclos agreement it did so with note and reservation that said the signing does not invalidate China’s claim in anyway China is not the only one there are 14 other country that put their reservation in the agreement
Anyway Unclos is not agreement to solve border it is just guidance. Border including maritime border must be negotiated between affected states. China did resolve most of their border save India
ozivan
The US has enjoyed being the sole superpower…longest reigning hegemon in modern times, strongest military power and also an economic powerhouse since the collapse of the USSR.
It is not unexpected or surprising that the US must every now and then re-assert and remind the world of her status. APEC, EAS & ASEAN will not escape her desire for grandstanding.
When it comes to grandstanding, the US always comes out par excellence.
If China understands that, then there is no loss suffered.
PapaJohn
I am no fan of the uncle Sam here but given a choice for Asian countries around China, they would certainly go with uncle Sam, who might not have the territorial ambitions like China does.
james_001
And bite the hand that feed them. Those small countries will try to leverage china will for peaceful rise
But they cannot moves to Hawaii The fact is empire come and go but China will be there forever. If you live next door to 800Lb gorilla you better be on good term with the gorilla
Iensary
james_001, do you mean the 800 lbs panda, which loves eating bamboos? :
Why is the Chinese CCP sympathizers like you just love making threats to everyone, huh?
ozivan
@PapaJohn. Unfortunately, in realpolitik, there is no long term loyalty to each other. At the moment, when there is a dispute, Vietnam & Philippines are trying to play US against China. When events changed, they easily change sides like they change clothes.
That’s why they often quote : There are no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent interest.
Besides, at the moment other than Vietnam & Philippines, the other SCS claimants are more likely to remain independent, negotiate on their own or within ASEAN declared code of conduct with China over the SCS. They have historically with self confidence deal with China with quiet diplomacy. Philippines followed successfully the same quiet diplomacy before President Benigno Aquino’s watch.
ASEAN group had always felt that it wants to maintain her hold and initiative on matters relating to ASEAN to herself , but then US State Secretary Hillary Clinton and recently Obama took to grandstanding and tried to seize the initiative from ASEAN Group at the EAS meets.
As in the past, the rhetoric then dies down after the show. ASEAN is wary of such phenomenon.
BTW, Philippines complained about ASEAN’s attitude and inertia on the SCS when she tried to ram her confrontational views to ASEAN causing divisive rumblings. When she failed, Philippine took her case to US with some success though, to force it at the EAS Forum. Countries have elephant memories. There always exist such a thing as payback when the time comes.
In my opinion; Indonesia, Malaysia & Brunei have always been smarter in diplomacy usually taking a longer term perspective view.
nirvana
In my opinion, it was neither a victory for the US nor one for ASEAN. But it showed a deep failure of China’s diplomacy. The US, which is embroiled in a debt crisis, could have worried everybody with a new military base on foreign soil. China, which is economically well oriented, should have gained majority support from its neighbours. Yet, at this 10+8 summit in Bali, the vast majority of leaders opted to speak about the SCS issue, WITH Obama, AGAINST China’s wish to leave this topic out of the agenda. Only Cambodia and Myanmar adopted Wen’s muted approach.
Also, nobody intended to be impolite. None spoke to humiliate. The only one who got a slap was the Long Tao and Co of the China Energy Fund lobby. What is his next advise to Chinese leaders? Shut-up?
Willie Yao
Diplomacy is the extension of internal affairs. In other words, the strength of diplomatic maneuvering is in direct proportion to national solidality.
The egregiously corrupted govenmental officials in general and the jucicial depravity in particular have fragmented the society like sitting on a simmering volcano. The CCP knows that better than anyone else, otherwise how do you explain the political mantra ” maintain stability ” these days?
Anything other than ” mute ” is contradict to that mantra.