US-China at crossroads or circumstantial cooperation?

President Bush was quite busy the past weekend with the leaders of Asia Pacific. On Friday he received the Chinese leader Jiang Zemin at his ranch in Crawford for a barbecue summit. Due to the climatic state of US-led war on terrorism, the sacred talks on Taiwan and human rights were derogated in favor of consultations about Iraq and North Korea. However, the two leaders are also expected to finalize an agreement on US technical assistance in customs inspections and set a date for future talks on human rights talks.

Not surprisingly (coincidentally), the summit concluded with Attorney General John Ashcroft's announcement of a FBI liaison opening in Beijing. The Attorney General also appraised Chinese efforts to combat terrorism.

The summit, one may conclude, was successful for both the Americans and Chinese. In his third meeting with the Chinese leader, President Bush took the chance to cement the new US-Sino relationship born of the war on terror, while Jiang Zemin received the crowning ceremony from United States prior to his expected retirement this fall.

The summit was also symbiotic. China and the US had their own little meeting and put on a show of unity prior to APEC summit. These are diplomatic woos that bolster Chinese confidence about their position in global affairs. China on the other hand sets the example to (and encourages) other ASEAN members to cooperate with US on counterterrorism war.

The meeting at APEC summit in Cancun also gave time for an avowal of budding partnership. During the previous weekend, the leaders of the 21 member Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation met at Locos Cabos, Mexico to conclude their new WTO pacts by 2005. The leaders endorsed the elimination of agricultural export subsidies which pressure on the European Union in WTO talks to be held in Cancun on September 2003.

The agenda, however, was not strictly economics and trade. President Megawati opened her and ended her speech on terrorism. Meanwhile President Bush accompanied by Jiang Zemin took the opportunity to add Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan and South Korea's president, Kim Dae Jung, to their discussions about North Korea and his nuclear weapons program.

In the post-Sept, 11 atmosphere, the new rhetoric of the Bush Administration seems to suggest constructive partnership with China for deeper and more stable relations. Perhaps the US-Pacific Asia relations, particularly US-Sino bilateral ties, are at crossroads where they break from the past. Once a Red threat, China now appears to be counterterrorism ally.

Yet not so long ago, following the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown, China was the pariah, and had weathered a string of US bilateral crises including the 1996 standoff over Taiwan, the 1999 bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, and last year's collision between EP-3E and Chinese jet fighter. In fact, at the time of his election, Mr. Bush's defense advisers described China as a potential adversary, to be "contained."

However, a turn of events ensued: the US did not obstruct the Chinese bid for Olympics 2008 and held meetings with Chinese President which advanced China's WTO membership. In addition, continuous business deals covering telecommunications to beer highlight closer commercial ties. So it seems in the post Sept. 11 atmosphere the more traditional pro-business, pro-engagement view of China seems to have prevailed in the US.

Similarly, since last October, China has sought to present itself as a partner in the US-led war on terrorism and seems more determined than ever to pursue friendly ties. Recently, the Chinese government issued new regulations governing exports of value in missile programs and for use in biological or chemical weapons.

Furthermore, China has increasingly released high profile prisoners. According to an activist from San Francisco, Johan Kamm, nearly 30 prisoners have been released from the list of 74 prisoners presented by American diplomats to Beijing. Lastly and noteworthy is China's supportive effort against terrorism.

I am not an expert on US-China relations, but as an observer I am skeptical about the foundations of this newly developed affair. Does this summit symbolize a fundamental and enduring change in US-Sino relations from the past, or is this a circumstantial cooperation based on differing perceptions? Does the superficial unity of terrorism veil the deeper differences and challenges ahead of the two nations? Recently during a lecture to participants of TILIP program, Professor Walker expressed his uncertainty about the cooperative affair. He also pointed at how the two states view each other "through different prisms" which is demonstrated by the varying weight and coverage of the press in respective states. I share this view with Professor Walker and would further add that it would be premature to conclude that China is a US ally.

First, a closer look needs to be taken at the foundation of the alliance and cooperation. What are the primary interests in bilateral and regional ties? Are the Americans interested in a long-term change of strategy?

Second, the domestic issues that determine foreign policy should be considered. China will have the 16th Plenary Congress meeting and should "serious leadership rifts develop over domestic issues, policy toward the United States could also become part of the political battle."

Third, there are still bilateral security issues overshadowed by war on terrorism. Many officials in the Chinese military are already highly suspicious of America's adoption of pre-emption as a core strategic doctrine. Meanwhile the US has repeatedly accused China of helping both North Korea and Iran's nuclear weapons program.

Lastly, there are potential issues which emerge as the different attitudes governing the relations create asymmetries. Trade frictions and technology competition can well become the future challenges as the glued unity on terror dissipates with bin Laden's death. In fact, analysts also claim that he next few years may well be marked by anti-dumping suits and cries of protectionism. What happens when Beijing's ambition to develop its technological capacity materializes, and China starts to compete directly against the US? The conflict is obvious, and if or when bin Laden is dead, perhaps Americans will hear and read more about China.

On a positive note, however, the circumstances are fertile for planting new seeds of cooperation and change of rhetoric. Perhaps the question of Taiwan, human rights and nuclear proliferation can be discussed when Bush visits the next Chinese leader for a tea ceremony in Beijing. The issues are intertwined and, although both sides value security and stability, they will remain central to America's relations with China long after bin Laden is dead. China is huge trading partner of America, and set aside war on terrorism, the current circumstances may serve as greatest incentive for a better diplomatic and strategic cooperation.



Sara Mohammadi is a senior majoring in economics and international relations.