Since President Nixon visited China in 1972, the ice has broken in China-U.S. relations. In 1979, the two countries normalized bilateral relations by establishing diplomatic relations. Over the past three decades, bilateral relations have experienced complicated and convoluted change. Today, China-U.S. relations are entering a new historical period, signified by the construction of a“new type of big power relations”, reflecting new descriptions and new requirements by the Chinese leadership in bilateral ties in the new period. Though different in their explanations of the new type of big power relations, the two countries share a common goal in warding off the historic destiny of seeking hegemony between big powers and constructing a new type of stable, balanced and win-win bilateral relationship. This is a lofty goal. In this respect, the construction of a new of big power relationship requires a process of“renormalization”of bilateral ties. During the process, the management of various concrete issues in the bilateral relationship is a key component.
Compared with the construction of politicalization, managing Sino-U.S. relations may appear to be boring and tedious. However, it involves more complicated issues and requires more conscientious and careful effort. The following aspects must receive due attention:
First, crisis management. This requires distinguishing between strategic and non-strategic issues and treating them differently. Because of the strength and clout of the two countries, Sino-U.S. relations are bound to be strategic. Meanwhile, because of historic traditions and big power statuses, leaders and scholars in both countries are inclined to treat and consider relations between the two countries from a strategic perspective.
This is above reproach. Nevertheless, if we treat all the issues in bilateral relations from a strategic perspective, this will impair our judgment over major and minor issues, and even magnify some negative effects in the bilateral ties. For instance, not all the corporate behaviors of some Chinese companies investing and merging in the United States are strategic issues of the going-abroad strategy. Overly emphasizing the strategic element might provide excuses for the conspiracy theory of a China threat.
Second, social management. This refers to giving full play to the social role in Sino-U.S. relations. The government does its job and society does its own. Professor Wang Jisi from the Peking University once said that the“Sino-U.S. relationship is one between a government and a society”. In such a relationship, China is naturally in a disadvantageous position. To change the current situation, China should attach importance to the role of non-governmental institutions. On the one hand, it can provide a more solid foundation for the steady growth of Sino-U.S. relations. On the other, it can alleviate the pressure on the government. In recent years, public diplomacy has been implemented between China and the U.S., including human exchanges on high-level consultation mechanisms. This is a new measure that merits praise.
Third, media management. Nowadays, with the emergence of various forms of new media, the general public is paying increasing attention to foreign relations and foreign policy. The influence of foreign policy is also on the increase, and this is especially reflected in Sino-U.S. relations. However, this is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it is helpful to expand the foundation for Sino-U.S. relations. On the other, the space for decision-makers and the diplomatic service to make decisions is actually compressed because of the media focus. In this sense, intense focus on a particular issue by the media does not always bring positive outcomes. In other words, given that this is a turning point in Sino-U.S. relations, it is very important for the two countries to avoid media publicity stunts in Sino-U.S. relations. The media should attach importance to public opinion and keep a due distance from it as well. It is necessary for academic circles to remain rational and academically independent. The diplomatic departments should dilute as much as possible some complex and sensitive issues by working more and talking less. When it comes to issues that are thorny and time consuming, the diplomatic department would do well to shelve these for resolution at a later date. As a matter of fact, as time passes, some problems will resolve themselves naturally and cease to longer exist. If we cling onto all issues present, this doesn’t help to resolve them. Instead, these problems may trigger new issues.
Fourth, crisis management and risk management. Against the backdrop of China’s rapid rise, Sino-U.S. relations are entering a period of high risk. Structural contradictions and competition in bilateral relations are on the rise, coupled with growing uncertainty about the future. The possibility cannot be ruled out that a partial crisis will occur. Consequently, in future Sino-U.S. relations, the importance of crisis management is accentuated. Soon after the Cuba missile crisis in 1962, the then U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Strange McNamara once said that“there is no longer such a thing as strategy; there is only crisis management”. Though different from the U.S.-USSR relationship during the Cold War, Sino-U.S. relations are more complicated. More wisdom is needed to cope with thepossible crises between the two countries. This requires a more sound mechanism and unblocked channels of communication, especially at the highest levels of communication. The other side of crisis management is damage control. If a crisis appears, it will cause some damage. In that case we should keep the damage to the minimum and prevent it from spreading. Historical lessons tell us that major problems derive from minor ones. Therefore, we should remain alert and prevent partial problems or non-major problems from deteriorating or even spiraling out of control.
Fifth, issue management. Of all the bilateral ties, the China-U.S. relationship is the most important and complicated, due to the number of issues that must be dealt with. Good management of these issues will ensure a steady and smooth growth in bilateral relations. Of all the crowded decision agendas, the importance of an issue is actually the priority of the issue. Consequently, we should guarantee that the most important issue is of top priority and is not sidelined by other minor or side issues. More importantly, we should avoid having the agenda of bilateral relations occupied by sensitive and distracting issues, and in particular prevent it from being usurped by people with ulterior motives.
Sixth, cognitive management. In a sense, the most dangerous and real problem between the two countries lies not in ideology, nor in any conflict of interest, but in the cognitive gap, because ideologies and conflicts of interest are obvious to one and all but the cognitive gap is often overlooked. For instance, in some respects China’s foreign policy is often regarded by the U.S. as offensive and tough, while many Chinese regard it as overly soft. This cognitive gap has the potential to influence the selection of space for diplomatic policies and to result in misunderstanding and misjudgment by the two sides as well. In this, China and the U.S. must maintain sharp vigilance.
Seventh, mentality management. A healthy attitude is also required in the smooth development of Sino-U.S. relations. China should guard against impetuosity and overconfidence. It should address the various issues apparent during its rise in a deliberately unhurried manner. The United States should guard against anxiety in its process of relative decline. It should be magnanimous in embracing the emerging countries and the reality of the transformed world configuration, so as to join hands in building a new order in international relations. Another part of mentality management is the management of desired expectations in bilateral relations. We should not be overly optimistic, or overly pessimistic. Keeping a healthy and peaceful attitude is a prerequisite.
In sum, the so-called“renormalization”is a process for reverting to normalization and standardization, a process centered on management of concrete and specific issues. This may not be exciting, but it is beneficial to the long-term stability and healthy development of Sino-U.S. relations.
No comments:
Post a Comment