http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080901faessay87504/henry-m-paulson-jr/a-strategic-economic-engagement.html
Discussion Question:
What path should the United States take in establishing a economic foreign policy in regards to the emerging and growing economic power of Communist China so as to peacefullyco-exist in this ever changing global economy?
Include your thoughts on what you believe the U.S. foreign policy should be towards China as it grows into a Communist economic super-power
23 comments:
In establishing an economic foreign policy, so as to peacefully coexist with China, I believe that the United States must coninue the U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue and work with China one-on-one. The United States' and China's philosophies are very different, but we have the same goals for our economics and for our foreign relations. With S.E.D. the United States can continue to understand what China wants. When we know the specifics of what China wants we can motivate them and guide them towards the best solution for their needs, but in a way that can also benefit the U.S. and the international economy.
An important part of our goal in our relations with China is to help them "open up." In order to be successful in the international economy, China must be willing to trust the other world powers, like the United States, and not only trade with these countries, but also invest in them. China has begun to do this by providing for Africa and Latin America and negotiating a bilateral investment treaty with the U.S.. China has a long way to go, though, because they have adopted policies that restrict foreign access to China's markets, which is worrying international businesses that China is not open to foreign products.
The United States economic foreign policy with China must create a "win-win" for each side. The U.S. and China must recieve something from one another, and we must trust one another, not philisophically, but economically. S.E.D. provides an even ground in which Chinese officials and U.S. officials can communicate what each nation's needs and wants are. Once we know this, we will be able to move together in international commerce. Our economies are too dependent on one another to not have a diplomatic relationship with China and S.E.D provides this relationship.
In the case of Chinese and U.S. economic foreign policy it is a step in the right direction to continue conversations. The Strategic Economic Dialogue (SED) is an important link between the two super powers. Through communication we can hope that an equal balance of power is achieved. However, I fear, that the SED is not enough for such a complex situation. Economics is not only effected by trade and oil prices, it is also affected by world politics. If the United states cannot overcome this obstacle the Chinese-U.S. relationship will become strained and distant which is the last thing the U.S. wants. The United States needs to help the Chinese economy grow but it is a necessity that the U.S. understand a possibility that China will have the number one economy in the world. With that title, China gains immense power and influence on the rest of the world.
The U.S. is walking a very thin line within a very precarious situation. A balance between influence and freedom needs to be established. Through this balance trust can be formed, and I agree with elena that without trust a strong international economy cannot and will not be established. The SED is a key to promoting trust, and an open chinese economy. This fact can only help the U.S. in it's own economy. Maybe, just maybe our political opposites might just become our greatest economical ally.
While I agree with Elena that the economies of the U.S. and China are too dependent on each other not to have a diplomatic relationship, I think this may send out a warning that maybe we should separate ourselves from that very close economic relationship. Although we should certainly engage with China and the SED is a very effective way of doing so, why is it so important to ensure the prosperity of China in the global economy? I think it could also be asked whether or not it is a good idea to put so much money, and therefore power, into a strong and very large communist nation?
While I agreed with the article that the best idea is for the U.S. to befriend top decision-makers in China, which it is currently doing with the SED, I disagree with David that the U.S. needs to help the Chinese economy grow. First of all, it seems that much of China's money from its growing economy is more in the hands of the government than in the hands of the people. And since China's economy is growing so quickly, this brings up a topic we discussed in class: a nation that grows too big too quickly is not likely to succeed. This is why I think we should try to strengthen our own economy first before worrying about China's. Although the article states that we should partner our economy with China's, it also points out that serious troubles in China's economy could threaten the stability of the U.S. and global economies. Perhaps then, we should not rely so heavily on the Chinese economy, and bring back some businesses to the U.S., therefore providing more jobs to the American people, while still retaining strong diplomatic relations with China.
I think the most important negotiations should be in regards to energy consumption and the resulting pollution and environmental damage. Although the United States and China have already begun to make somewhat successful agreements in this aspect, China needs to take responsibility and not expect other countries to do so for it. And in general, as an increasingly growing nation, China must also take increasing responsibility for global problems, otherwise it could damage its reputation which is still being determined by the global community.
While I agree with Elena and David that we should continue to strengthen our relationship with China, I think we could still do this without relying on their economy too much. Although it would be ideal to work with common interests, this is is not really guaranteed, especially with China being a communist nation, and since our relationship is still developing, we could not exactly predict what their top leaders will do. Therefore, I think we should become more independent from China in regards to our economy, until we can establish a very strong diplomatic relationship.
As history dictates, an isolationist policy is ineffective, if not damaging, for the U.S. And today is no exception.
I agree with Elena and David in that it is crucial to maintain and continue diplomatic relations with China, especially in such a delicate international community. The SED is the first step to such a relationship. However, I disagree with Elena in that the U.S. should guide China forward. Such an interventionist policy is sure to create tension down the road, especially since one is working with a Communist nation, implying that it will not openly discuss their national policies - leaving barely any room for help and guidance. Jenna discusses a similar point in her blog - it is not the responsibility of the U.S. to guide and direct China.
I agree with Jenna in that we should not invest nor rely too heavily on China in strengthening our economy. Though I do not think the U.S. should limit communications with China, I do not think it wise, nor safe, to rely so much on China, or any nation for that matter. So much reliance on a nation is sure to create some road-blocks later on. If one is so dependent on another nation, what is to happen when that nation is experiencing tension, or more specifically so, when the economy weakens? That will also leave the U.S. vulnerable.
The U.S. should certainly continue diplomatic relations with China. China has proven to be a reliable ally in the past(Cold War), and seeing as to how the U.S. and China share similar economic and global interests (lower energy consumption, for example), one can only hope that that alliance will continue on. By no means, however, should the U.S. move forward in such a manner that would dictate too much reliance on China.
It is known that China is a growing global power. But it is also a communist super power, and the question arises should the US see China as a threat that must be contained or an ally which must be engaged? Containment is an outdated foreign policy. Since the world is becoming a smaller place, there is no way to avoid contact with such a large country like China and the US has made the correct decision to embrace China’s new economy. I agree with Elena that the US must continue communication through the SED, but that may not be enough. I disagree with David, like Yasmeen, that the US should be guiding China. China has a communist run economy, so there would be too much tension. Tension is seen with the US investing in China’s markets. The Chinese closed their markets more to make it more restrictive, but if the US opened their markets more it would ensure confidence in the US economy to stir up more growth and productivity which the US needs right now.
In order for China and US to co-exist they must recognize their overlapping interests and avoid their differences. Differences will stand in the way of progress and nothing will be accomplished. History has shown that the US-China relationship is strengthened when there is a common interest. Chinese officials know that their country needs economic growth, and the US needs it as well. Like Elena said, we must help them “open up” by promoting competition and innovation which is essential in robust economic growth for the long term. China is in search of stability and balance, especially after disastrous economic reforms such as the Great Leap Forward or the Cultural Revolution. China wants to encourage growth along with improving the population’s quality of life, which are some of the most important things when developing a political identity in a country.
China also needs economic security. The quote from the article, “Ironically, it is precisely the growth model that spurred China’s recent takeoff that may become an obstacle to the country’s sustained economic growth and social stability in the future”. This means that China’s wealth is widespread and uneven and is creating economic inequalities, especially in the coastal areas versus the interior. The US must help create flexible prices and a flexible exchange rate which will ensure stable growth. Also, the US will help develop financial services to boost personal household consumption. China and the US also recognize the importance of finding alternative energy resources and pollution. I think the SED should continue to focus on this issue. Both super powers find these issues very important and if they work together, finding a co-solution may yield faster and more efficient results. The US has also encouraged China to join other corporations to help other countries and become a global power.
I strongly agree with Jenna is becoming more independent from China. I don’t believe the US is that dependent on China, and I disagree with the author statement, “On every major economic, political, and security issue, the path that China chooses will affect the United States’ ability to achieve its goals”. If it ever gets to that point, we should immediately create space between the countries. The US should never rely in such a way on another country, and I don’t believe we are. The US is making the correct choice involving themselves in the growing China power because it will positively help the US economy grow, and if the US remains allies with the Chinese, beneficial reforms will help both countries and the rest of the world.
Jenna and Yasmeen raise valid points, but I still think Elena and David have the right idea. The Strategic Economic Dialogue seems to be working just fine with its policy of bilateral cooperation. If we were to change our approach, it would most likely create even more U.S.-Chinese tensions than there already are. After all, China is currently seeking balance and stability. Any change would probably not be well-received by its leaders.
The SED has succesfully built up a trusting relationship between the U.S. and China so far. The two countries have accomodated each other's differences while also striving toward common goals. As they are two of the world's economic super powers, this is very important. To quote the article, "Serious troubles in China's economy could threaten the stability of the U.S. and global economies." So why change what is already working?
The fact that China is a communist super power has not seemed to matter thus far. The U.S. and China have still communicated well despite differing ideologies. I agree with Mandy that it is impossible not to come into contact with China since the world is becoming a smaller place.
Hopefully the SED can continue to strengthen the alliance that is starting to be made between the U.S. and China. This, I believe, is better than becoming independent and leaving China to fend for itself. But like David said, the SED may not be enough. Other measures will have to be taken to include other countries. Overall, I do not think now is the best time to drastically change our economic foreign policy if we would like to peacefully coexist in the future.
In order for the upcoming presidential administration to truly succeed, I think an immediate focus on the economic situation between the US and China is necessary. It is obvious, from the aritcle, that China is growing at such a fast pace on the global level and for the US to ignore the increasing economic development would be naive. Therefore, full and active engagement in the Chinese economy is pertinent. And the method to do this is direct verbal interactions. Therefore, I agree with David that communication is key for the US and China to both benefit. It was very intersting to read that the US provided China with the idea that liberation in their domestic market is undenialby one of the most important factors towards success, by simply discussing the idea in a face to face meeting.
"U.S. officials are more effective when they understand the Chinese people's perspective." explains Paulson, " Establishing relationships at the top of the Chinese government has been key to the U.S. government's success with the SED." There is no substitute for personal interactions and this idea must be a priority.
I disagree with Jenna that we should first build up our economy before helping China. I say this because at this point in history, our economies are so closely linked, that in order to help our economy thrive, China's markets must too find success. Therefore, we cannot avoid any and all of their problems, for they will eventually affect our country. This does not mean diving headfirst into their markets. As Mandy explained, they are a communist country. They do have different goals in their political system that could cause tension between our two governments. Therefore, a cautionary but robust integration of our two economies in the near future is inevitable if we both want to find a "win-win" solution. The next presidential candidate will also have to focus on the environmental effects of China and the US. Both are responsible for excessive amounts of carbon emmision, and a plan to limit its danger to the environment should undeniably be included in future treaties for the economy between the two countries. Paulson explained that joint-research has begun, but actual physical evidence of any environmentally friendly progress seems minimal.
The US and China are both growing as economic superpowers. Therefore, to decrease any conflicts between the two, foreign policy for both governments must remain at the top of the "list of things to do".
Based on this article, George Bush and his administration have done a much better job dealing with China, specifically economically, then dealing with other issues we have discusssed. As everyone else has mentioned, the SED is a strong, positive first step toward creating an open, ongoing economic dialogue between the US and China. Now, it is important that we keep this relationship, if not build on it.
After reading the article, my opinion was similar to Emma's, that China's communist government was not particularly relevant in our economic relationship with them. However, after reading Jenna, Mandy, and Laura's blogs, I began to rethink that. It will be important for the US to be cautious as this economic relationship grows and keep in mind that China's goals may not be the same as ours. As the article mentioned, China's economy is growing fast and lacks stability- now is not the time to rely so heavily on such a country for more of our imports than is necessary.
As environmental concerns continue to become more important in the minds of all of the worlds' citizens, the global powers of US and China have the perfect oppurtunity to make a difference in the rising fuel crisis. America already has the fuel-efficient technology that China is lacking, and needs to share with them in order to reduce China's unneccessarily high fuel consumption. China could return the favor by using their growing economic resources to fund research or help distribute this technology to other places in the world. China has taken steps towards helping other places in the world, such as Africa, and this type of humanitarianism would make the country as a whole look better on the world scene, despite its communist economy.
I agree with the article in that we could not hope to ignore China even though it represents a threat to the democratic ideals of the US. Although the administration’s engagement of the Chinese and the Chinese economy is a positive, I am concerned with the extent to which our economy now relies on the Chinese. I think the goal of our government should be to keep communication and trade relations with the Chinese friendly while not becoming too reliant on the Chinese economy. The only other time in history that a communist nation has attained such power was when the USSR did so. Unfortunately, the US will not be able to ‘defeat’ China so easily. Although removing this communist nation from prominence would be ideal, it is unrealistic. Because China has somewhat of a free market system, the US cannot hope to ‘outspend’ China as we did the USSR. The only way that I believe we can make China less of a threat is to maintain good relations with them and push our policies their way. The establishment of the SED was a very good start, and I agree with Elena in that it can be used as a tool in the future for guiding the Chinese economy. The reform movement that the Chinese culture has gone, and is still going through, makes for a great opportunity in introducing new ideals to the Chinese. If China is intent on becoming a legitimate superpower, they will understand that in order to further the success of the country, they must change their global image.
One part of this article that I found particularly interesting was the idea that the US is dependant on the success of China. The US economy has become so reliant on the Chinese economy that if the Chinese economy were to fail, the US would also suffer. I personally found it interesting that we are encouraging the success of a communist system so that our democratic system remains intact. As the world’s foremost powers, the US and China must set an example for the rest of the world. By working together on environmental policies, primarily the controlling of carbon emissions, the US and China are paving the way for other countries to do the same.
As China continues to rapidly grow into a global super power politically and economically, the nation can no longer be ignored and a peaceful foreign policy must be established between the U.S and China. However, several issues must be addressed before there can be a peaceful-co-existence between the two. Foremost, both countries are looking to advance in all aspects and establish stronger nations, and therefore, the U.S must no longer see China as a threat, but a benefit to have in the global economy. I strongly agree with David in that China can have the number one economy in the world, and that’s okay. Secondly, I also agree with Elena that SED is very effective in easing relations with China and the U.S, but it will probably take more than this in the long run because the world is continually changing quickly. Not only must we befriend the policy makers in China which SED is doing, but also store some trust in the people of China in that we aren’t necessarily allies, but also definitely no longer enemies. I also disagree with her in that we shouldn’t guide China, they already have the ability to stand on their own two powerful legs, and we mustn’t make the same mistake that we made in Iraq. We shouldn’t help every country and turn them into what we think is the best. (Democracy) Thirdly, the biggest problem facing the two countries in the short run is the energy crisis. Energy consumption must be controlled, especially in the rising middle class of China. Alternate energy sources must be used and the pollution affecting humans and animals must be stopped. In conclusion, both China and the U.S must have solid relations in order for them to both prosperous, and neither one should be seen as an enemy because they both have similar goals in mind. As for the long run, in my opinion, China will have good economic relations globally, but as we discussed in class, China has the largest population and will not be able to sustain their power.
Economic foreign policy between the United States and China is one of the most important issues between these two powers. China is largely invested in it's economy which is based on a world which it does not completely understand. The United States does not really understand China either, therefore it is imperative that the United States befriend China in an attempt to understand how they can mutually benefit each other's economy.
The Strategic Economic Dialogue between these two countries is the solution to this relationship. Both China and the United States do have common interests, and I think that this organization has allowed for this to be exposed. I agree with Elena, in that it is important for china to "open up" if they want to be competitive in the global economy. The United States has given them a few pointers on how to do that. In doing so, it has been beneficial for China, the United States, and the global economy. China is now not only investing in the United States, but in regions of Latin America and Africa. This is imperative to have a modernized economy.
The unique situation that has taken place in China, where China has grown so quickly, has its negative consequences that China is struggling to deal with. For example, efficiency in China is not very good, and with increased oil prices, China cannot provide everyone in their country a steady supply of oil. It has taken a bit of advice from the United States and stopped trying to regulate the prices of oil so much and making it so that it floated. This both benefited China and the United States.
Economic talks may only be a start, David, but at least it's something. We can learn more about the people of China and what is important to them. It's a way to become a more socially acceptable player in the world today.
In future years, the United States’ relationship with China will be ever more important, and as we elect the next president, we must also take their position on foreign policy involving China into consideration. China’s great and growing economic power, has increased its authority, as well as responsibilities in the world. The U.S. must base its foreign policy on this fact and decide whether it will view China as an opportunity and invest in the country, or as a threat and decrease relations with China. In my opinion, the United States should build up its involvement with China and together help the world with economic and political problems, yet at the same time decrease its dependency and investment in communist China.
The United States can not ignore China’s growing influence and control of global markets, and therefore should continue to have close diplomatic relationships with China. As the article stated, “serious troubles in China’s economy could threaten the stability of the U.S. and global economics.” The United States can not risk potential economic disaster by ignoring China’s economic impact on the global economy. The establishment of the SED has strengthened US-China relations and in my opinion is the first step in enhancing the United States’ and China’s communication and partnership. Through this institution the two countries have accomplished much, including agreements on energy consumption and environmental damage. Like David, Elena, Emma, and many others, I think the United States should continue its actions through the SED. The SED has created a foundation of trust between the two countries and provides hope that they may continue to work together. Kaz made an extremely good point, saying that by developing relations with China we could potentially use this to our advantage and push our policies on them. This is an excellent idea, in my opinion. By gaining China’s trust and working with them, we could use our influence to promote policies beneficial to the United States and lead China onto a path, that we want the world to take. Though manipulation may be risky, I find it to be an interesting and clever idea.
Although, I think it would be extremely unintelligent to remove ourselves from Chinese relations, I believe that we must also act with much caution. As Mandy and Jenna pointed out, China is a Communist country and does not have the same political and economic goals, and moral beliefs, as a democratic nation. By finding a common interest, as Mandy pointed out, China and the United States could work together, but the U.S. and China must overcome differences in policies and beliefs to accomplish this, which may pose a problem. I also believe that we are much too dependent on China, economically. In future years, I think we should begin to lessen our economic dependence on China and develop more industries of our own, in the United States. By continually investing in the Chinese economy, we are adding fuel to a Communist fire. With ever-increasing growth, China could one day hold power over us and rival our control in global affairs.
The future of Chinese - US Economics will decide the way international economics will develop over the next several years. The relationship between China and the United States, the two most important economies in the world, will effect every nation in some way, because trade between these two nations accounts for a huge percentage of all international trade. In order to ensure that this future will be a good one, China and the United States will have to develop an even better relationship.
A key part of developing this relationship will be the openness of the relationship between China and the United States. China is a nation that remained isolated from the world for a long time, and so now that it is emerging as an important trade partner, it doesn't know how to deal with international economics or with other countries. China has been slow to invest in other nations because it does not know how it will be received, and has mainly allowed other countries to invest in it.
China will also need to learn how to cultivate its image on the world scene. China has largely been an opportunist nation; investing where it can benefit itself, without regard to its image. China has only recently begun to consider how its economic activity affects the way it appears in the world's eyes. Its image will largely affect how other countries deal with it, particularly the United States.
Another key component of developing the relationship between the United States and China will be the reduction of both countries’ dependence on oil and foreign energy. The two nations are the world’s largest consumers of foreign oil, the United States accounting for the most, but China isn’t far behind. Economically, this dependence is costing both governments millions of dollars a year, and environmentally it is making these two countries the biggest polluters in the world.
Although China is a Communist nation, a few points in the article made me think that maybe they are drifting more towards a democracy, or at least encorporating some apsects of it into their government. "Officially, the most important decisions are made by president Hu and premier Wen Jiabao, but unofficially, decisions are increasingly being made through a consensus-oriented process involving powerful government ministries." Therefore it appears that the Chinese government's decisions are being made more and more by a group vote. Sounds rather familiar.
I agree with Elena when she says that we should work together with China, but, like jenna, I disagree with David that we should help the Chinese economy grow much larger because, "It is precisely the growth model that spurred China's recent takeoff that may become an obstacle to the country's sustained economic growth and social stability in the future." Since China and the U.S. have many of the same problems in their countries such as unequal distribution of wealth on a large scale, pollution, and large oil consumption, we should work with each other to solve these problems. This could lead to economic benefits for both countries if ways to use less fuel are developed, and a closer relation because of the mutual interest.
In order to peacefully co-exist with China, the US needs to remain in close contact with China. SED is a great start, but I agree with David: to achieve a fully effective foreign policy concerning the economies of both China and the States, involvement between these two countries needs to be as much as possible. We face similar problems as China, economically speaking, with our current oil-induced crisis, especially.
The fact that China wants to keep its economy in a limited-international-involvement position, though, should cause concern for us all. Before reading this article I did not realize how intertwined our economies are, nor how similar our situations are. We rely heavily on many of their imports that we use in our day-to-day lives. Therefore I would have to disagree with Yasmeen and Emma because truthfully, China and the U.S. will do a lot better with each other than without.
And I must say that I don't think the focus on the fact that China is a communist nation should be our main concern right now, as it seems to be for some of my classmates. Though our eventual goals may differ slightly, that does not mean that we cannot establish a good relationship with China, politically and economically. Being in the company of such a large and influential nation, who is truly making sincere efforts in Africa and opening itself up to Latin America, would help improve both China and the U.S.'s reputations on the world political scene.
Well, first off I would like to point out that if I were living in China right now, I would not be able to discuss this topic or even blog for that matter. It is important to take note of the fact that isolationism, or even the scaled back foreign policy on the part of the U.S, Great Britain, and France allowed Great Britain and Italy to rise to power in the 1930's. Perhaps an even better example can be found at the end of the 1980s, when Gorbachev introduced Glasnost and Perestroika, that it was he who did more to destroy the Soviet Union than 40+ years of containment. The fact is that trying to contain China is impossible and threatens our own economic policy of openness. Closing off our foreign market to China would be little more than an inconvenience to them, as their economy is largely involved in exporting(not importing) goods to a great many countries. They would not suffer from a lack of U.S goods entering the country, because China took the initiative to barr foreign exports. However, it is interesting to note that since Nixon created a better relationship with China, the condition of Chinese citizens have improved. Our opposition is with the government, as opposed to the citizens, and encouraging Western ideas(open economics, rights, etc) is much more attractive to the people if they can see it first-hand, as we did with the Soviets.
The fear that China is going to surpass the U.S in terms of economic wealth is overstated in many ways. Before delving too deeply into this, Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" demonstrates that a nation has much more to gain in terms of commerce if it conducts trade with a rich neighbor. Though both countries benefit from relations, it is more advantageous for the weaker nation.
At least once a year in this country, there is a growing fear that Social Security will cease to work effectively as the Baby Boomer generation begin to leave the workforce. In 2006, this country contained less than 50 million people that were over the age of 60. At this time in China, there are more than 150 million people over the age of 60, many of which will be retiring soon. With the infamous "One-Child" Rule, we will see in the near future that a growing percentage of the Chinese people will be aged, and there will be fewer people to bear the burden of supporting them and at the same time, working on the cornerstone of Chinese economics: exportation.
As it stands, there are more than 135 million people in China aged at 30-35, which at the time they were born, began the "One Child Policy." In thirty years, they will be at retirement age, which shows that the economic success in the years of 1979-2008 may be very different than 2009-2039.
The path the U.S. should take is by continuing relations with China through S.E.D. I agree this is a successful root to take in getting messages across between the countries through top leaders who will then pass their views down into lower level leaders. I was very impressed with what I have heard about the organization. The price to fly to China will soon enough be cheaper! This organization helps us understand Chinas personal interests, as the U.S. also narrows real differences between nations. I also feel we may need to be careful with these relations.
China had always been isolated, and it now knows it is desperately depended on in the economic world more than ever. This created an image to the world that China believed greatness was thrust upon them and they cannot break this image. You can see this through how they ran the Olympics. They lie to the world to keep this clean cut image by hiding the volley ball coach’s parent’s death, etc. This makes Americans hesitant to support this communist nation, which I understand…
In the long run, if you can’t beat them, join them! I think it’s important to keep in mind the argument Kaz made. We are not dealing with the USSR communists this time. This is a nation that we need to thrive so we can feed off of it economically. With our countries economy in a slump we cannot second guess that we are feeding into a communist trap when supporting China. We need to do as Mandy had mentioned and coexist through acceptance to a certain extent. How much, it is too early to determine. Like the article clash of civilizations we must understand that culturally we have different standards of living and behavior. We need to respect this to move forward with our relations with China. This is also not Iraq where just because we do not agree with certain behaviors we can go in and take control. We must remember the last article we read in that we must gain understanding of religion and culture especially. Trying to "Americanize" china would be like trying to potty train your dog. Their communist civilization and our home of the free would just clash!
Through our foreign policy with the S.E.D. I see a bright future. We are already starting a 10 year energy and environment cooperation framework to help increase energy efficiency. If we keep going down the path we are heading working together we can keep the civilization clash out of reach. Americans will more and more understand that our economies together can only expand when we gain knowledge of each other’s culture and demands through the peaceful approach of the S.E.D.
The lack of communication or miscommunication between China and the United States is the worst possible scenario (politically and economically) that can occur at this particular time. Tension between two of the world's major economic and global powers is a prelude to a less ideologically version of the "cold war" where each nation scavengers for economic personal gain and cooperation is at a minimal. If the U.S were to receed back into quai-isolationist mind set, our economy and the economies of China and other nations are automatically put in jeapordy. And despite the fact that such close relations may concern some politicians and americans, there is essentially no way to avoid the simple fact that economically, China is borderline impossible to ignore. It's economic influence is too wide spread as is, and our reliance on the chinese market has grown exponentially over the past few years. The most logical resort, would be to continue our proactive involvement in SED ( the Strategic Economic Dialogue) and guide China into channeling their rapid industrialization in fixing it's own problems and global dilemmas which inturn improves its own image as well as ours.
We as a country, heavily rely on China for many of our products, for more cost effective labor and their economic investment in us. As the author mentioned numerous tiems throughout the article, it is crucial that we grow to understand their needs and aspirations so that we can negotiate for our interests as well. By finding similar interests between the U.S. and China stems cooperation, and through cooperation flowers increased trust and involvement. And involvement is the key term. If we as a nation are able to become trusted by the Chinese government and high ranking officials, then our interests and opinions carry more weight in their policy making process. Not only to protect our interests, but to protect our status if in a turn of events China becomes "# 1". If anything our relationship with China should be strong so that in times of need, we wouldn't have the world's economic super power against us for one reason or other. As Jenna had mentioned in her piece, i think that it would be best that the U.S. approach China with caution to prevent becoming overly dependent on China and become codependent economically and in the global politics realm.
However, since the U.S. and China do share a number of shared interests and goals such as the environmental crisis at hand, incorporating new energy alternatives into the production process, expanding foreign business, improving China's quality and trustworthiness of goods (not sure if thats a word). By openly encouraging dialogue between the U.S. government and China, the U.S. will also be able to have access to crucial information concerning new Chinese economic policies and in turn can act upon it in a timely fashion as opposed to having to wait until it leaks into the press and attempt to counteract it without any negotiations with China. Also, by seating itself nearer to chinese officials, the United States will have the oppurtunity to "guide" the chinese economically. As Yasmeen and Elena mentioned, guiding does not necessarily to correct their mistakes or economy, but to assist them in channeling their wealth back into the global market or to invest into other countries which will in turn benefit that country as well as China. By working shoulder to shoulder with China, the U.S. is instantly given the oppurtinity to interfere and express concerns that much quicker and, if necessary, guide China away from policies that may negatively effect us or the global economy.
There most definatly is a fine line between peaceful collaboration and forming a iron linked alliance, however considering that our own well-being and economic stability is at risk, it is safer to take a friendlier approach when dealing with a world power like China. And especially since we have experianced some success through mutual communication and dialogue, i see no problem in continuing to interact with China on a more personal level. And despite the difference in ideologies and economic system, collaboration for a greater good is key. By interacting with the Chinese government, not only are we ensuring our own economic stability, but we are also saving the global economy from any major crashes if China slips.
oh btw sorry i didnt realize mine was that long.. sorry mr. pratt
"Keep your friends close and your enemies closer" is the ideal cliché for the relationship between the Chinese and the United States. The two are odds but have consciously chosen to look past these differences for the common good of the global economy and environment, and nonetheless, to protect their own self-interests and make their voices heard and understood among their biggest possible threats.
In order to maintain their place as an economic superpower, the U.S. was faced with a difficult decision: either work together with an adversary toward a common good or attempt to rival the Chinese and block their growth, a daunting and nearly impossible task.
The only real possible path for the United States is to remain in close contact and alliance with the Chinese. They cannot be ignored due to their dominance of international markets and competing interests. However, I agree with Christopher John Kazanovicz in that we should be wary in our trust and support of the Chinese. The American reliance on Chinese imports and the exportation of jobs to the Chinese is stunning. In a society where unemployment is rising and inflation skyrockets, the focus of the government should be first to keep the relationship cordial and not put too much trust in our communist rivals. However, I do not think that we should revive imperialism, in a sense, as Chris suggested, and push our democratic ideals to a nation which is prospering immensely in their current political system and would see no need for change. Hundreds have been lifted out of poverty and are grateful for the economic prosperity.
Two dominant economic superpowers that have completely opposing political structures can take this opportunity to learn from each other. This may sound too optimistic, but neither nation has taken aggressive action or mobilization toward the other. The SED has worked very well to prevent such tensions and aggressions from happening by providing a bilateral center for communication and explanation of policies and problems facing both nations. This has also served as a forum for the friendships between top Chinese officials and American representatives, preventing hostilities. It has led to an increase in understanding, and is helping downplay the misperceptions and miscommunications by each side.
Not only can the American economy prosper, grow, and change from these positive interactions, but the global environment is being successfully aided. Decisions, policies, and programs created by SED are being implemented that will have lasting effects for generations.
SED has also helped the Chinese realize the error of their ways, and caused change to the exchange-rate, which in turn has brought new opportunities for Chinese institutions to invest abroad, helping U.S. interests in a symbiotic, cyclic relationship. We can help them and help ourselves in this way. However, I disagree with David that we should help enlarge their already vast and dominating economy as this would pose even more of a hazard to the United States. Nearly all of the effects of the establishment of SED have been positive for the United States, both domestically, and abroad. Therefore, the lines of communication should be maintained and perhaps other nations will follow suit, creating a global center for reform and information.
In the upcoming years, the U.S. foreign policy in China will become extremely important. The path that the U.S. is taking with S.E.D. is a good start in strengthening the relationship between the two countries, but more is needed, and i believe more will be done in order for the U.S. and China to be successful allies. I agree with Haley, that the foreign policy in China, is a topic that we must strongly consider when electing the next president.
The main concern of China is to keep their nation's internal economy steadily growing into one of the strongest in the world. The potential of the Chinese economy is very great, but I think that the influence and assistance from the United States will continue to encourage China to expand their economy, allowing more investments from the U.S. and other countries in their economy, while investing more in the U.S.. I think that the U.S. must push their policies on China, while encouraging China's economy to continue its growth. There are many cultural differences between the two countries, that the U.S. must overcome in order for China to accept their advice. The U.S. must highlight their similarities, because history shows that ties between the two countries are most successful when they share a common interest. China also faces other problems; environmental, distribution of wealth, lack of fuel efficiency, etc. If the U.S. can help China overcome these obstacles, China's economy will prosper. A prospering economy will make China more apt to accept the U.S. policy of globalization. If China continues to globalize their economy, it will drive other countries to do the same, and it will in turn better the global economy.
I agree with Kaz when he says that the U.S. is becoming too reliant on the Chinese, and I think that if the U.S. can continue to influence China, this will no longer be an issue, because they will hopefully build a trust and a "win-win" for each side, like elena said.
Everyone has made interesting and excellent points. However, I still stand by my original thoughts on the article and that is I agree with it. I agree that a strong and direct relationship is the only way to go when it comes to China. The country is fast rising and is becoming a new world power. This new relationship could help our country rise as well.
Some of the blogs have brought forth concerns that we don't want to become to dependent on China. However, Are we not dependent on them already? When searching through my room I found only four items that were made in the USA. Every electrical device from my phone to my remote control was made in CHINA. If we are depending on this country for a majority of the items that we use everyday why not have an open and friendly relationship with them. What would happen if for some reason the Chinese are angry with us and they stop trading with us? At least with this new relationship formed by the SED we would have a chance to work whatever problem there was out with China before it escalates. Without this relationship our chances would be slim to none.
The SED is a perfect starting off point for an open relationship between the U.S. and China. It allows both of the countries to gain a healthy form of trust between one another. The SED is also giving China and the U.S. the incentive that each country needs to take the steps necessary a better environment. However, the members of the SED must be ready to adjust at any given time. The SED is just like a government if one of the countries involved expands or rises to fast it will fall through. They must remember "Adopt, Adapt, Improve". They have already adopted the concept of an open relationship. They are in the process of adapting it to fit each of the countries needs and now they must be ready to improve it when the U.S.-Chinese relationship grows.
my first blog was never actually posted so if another blog shows up from me i'm sorry...and if it does i like the new one that i posted similar but better
Sorry
Post a Comment