In her second lecture as IPS’ 7th S R Nathan Fellow for the Study of Singapore, Professor Chan Heng Chee traced the relationship between the United States (US) and China over the years, before answering the tough question — is war between the two powers inevitable or avoidable?
The lecture was moderated by Professor Joseph Liow, Dean of the College of Humanities, Arts, & Social Sciences at Nanyang Technological University. It was streamed live on IPS’ Facebook platform and will be broadcast on CNA938 radio at a later date.
Why did the relationship between the US and China come apart?
Professor Chan started by providing a historical overview of the relationship between the two countries.
During the Cold War, the US regarded Communist China as an adversary. That changed in 1972 when both countries issued the Shanghai Communique, agreeing to conduct their relationship on the basis of “non-aggression, non-interference, equality and mutual respect”.
However, the relationship between the two countries deteriorated as China gained economic, military and technological ‘mass’ to pose a structural challenge to US dominance. Furthermore, the US believes China is promoting an alternative model, posing a challenge to American values and norms. The Chinese do not think they are on the same level of power as the US, said Professor Chan, citing Chinese Defense Minister General Wei Fenghe who said “China does not have the intention nor the capacity to vie for the No.1 position with the US in the world”.
She also said that the US is far ahead of China in military terms and its GDP of US$20.54 trillion (S$28.65 trillion) far exceeds China’s GDP of US$13.61 trillion in 2018. But many Americans believe that China is catching up fast. In 2019, Admiral Philip Davidson, the Commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said China could overtake the US in the next five years.
The US has retaliated to this challenge by taking a much tougher position with China.
How far will the relationship slide?
The US and China have radically different political, cultural and ideological systems. And in the long term these shape the bilateral relationship between the two countries, which has been under strain over trade, investment and technology.
The US strenuously objects to China’s “Made in China 2025’’ policy and ambition to be the world’s No.1 in Artificial Intelligence (AI) innovation by 2030.
For example, the Trump Administration has targeted Huawei, the Chinese technology icon and step by step moved to cut them off from access to US companies and technologies and selling their products in the US. It is reviewing the supply chains of the US Defense Department to weed out China-based information and communications technology resource pipelines, making it difficult for Chinese tech companies to do business in the US. Chinese companies are forced to delist from the US stock exchange unless they comply with American law, effectively shutting Chinese companies out from US capital markets.
However, American businesses have pushed back against its administration’s attempt to cut China off, as they fear it might end up hurting American companies more. They argue that shutting them out from the Chinese market would deny them access to revenues that would spur R&D. Some American companies are investing in research centers in other countries out of control of US government.
In response, Chinese companies are limiting American components in their supply chain, and pushing for self-sufficiency. But China remains attractive as a site of investment to foreign investors due to its trained labour, good infrastructure and dense ecosystem of supplier networks.
Will we see an inevitable war or an avoidable war?
Professor Chan pointed to three areas which could be sensitive and prone to conflict for US and China
The first is over the territorial disputes in the South China Sea. But after examining the situation and looking at the the Freedom of Navigation operations (FONOPs) conducted by the US in the South China Sea and Chinese response over their claims, she concluded the encounters were short of provoking conflict but could result in an accidental conflict.
The second is over Taiwan. China has always pushed for the reunification of Taiwan with the mainland. It is a core interest for them. The Trump Administration, on the other hand, has demonstrated its commitment to help Taiwan move towards independence. The Taiwanese President has dropped the reference to the 1992 consensus and “one country two systems” as the approach to resolve the issue. Recently China dropped “peaceful” before reunification which is the standard reference to Taiwan. So Taiwan bears watching.
The third is over Hong Kong, where the US and China are on opposing ends of the issue. The US government has taken the side of the protestors and condemned China’s actions in Hong Kong. More recently, it has also threatened to revoke certain policy exemptions that Hong Kong now enjoys, upon China’s announcement of the National Security Law.
Ultimately, Professor Chan feels that both the US and China do not want war even as they push their positions to the farthest limits. Are we in a Cold War? The Cold War had a certain military and economic structure which Prof Chan does not see currently. However, a technological Cold War has already begun.
Middle-sized and smaller countries could be pressured to take sides in this contestation.
Q & A session
Some in the online audience asked questions about the possibility of a new world order, where China takes the lead in global affairs.
Professor Chan said that for now, China does not feel it is in a position to challenge the US. China also may not be interested in a leadership position because it does not want to take on the role of global “gendarme” dealing with global conflicts and disasters. She noted that China has not taken up the call by then-US Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick in 2005 for the country to become a “responsible stakeholder’’, but added that China might want to lead when it is ready and in its own manner.
She said China has no interest to impose its values onto other countries. She does not believe China wants to sell the Chinese model to the world because it is not a messianic country. The US, on the other hand, is a country that is messianic in its view that every country should embrace the same democratic values and human rights.
When it comes to the US, Professor Chan said that it would be difficult for a country that has been in a predominant position for so long to let another take over. She observed that the US gets “a bit touchy” even when its own allies, like Europe or Japan, take the lead.
Professor Chan was asked if it was possible for the US and China to reduce their areas of contention and increase areas of cooperation.
Her response was, the rivalry between the two countries will probably continue as the US does not want to be number 2 to China. However, this does not necessarily have to lead to war as the two countries do have congruent interests. She noted that every US administration prior to the current one has tried to work with China. There will be cooperation and competition.
Furthermore, America’s strength lies in its ability to change and renew itself every now and again. When the pendulum swings too far it self-corrects. She wondered if neo-conservatism was running out its course, not immediately but in the next few years in the US, with the anti-racism protests and the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that the Civil Rights Act upholds gay, lesbian and transgender rights.
Professor Chan also does not foresee an economic “decoupling” of the two countries. If that were to happen, it could result in “split regions”. Countries like Australia and Japan, which are aligned with the US on security issues and with China on economic issues, could be forced to take sides, although they would much rather prefer to maintain the status quo. Countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations might face similar decisions as the regional grouping does not have a common foreign policy.
Lastly, Professor Chan acknowledged the rise of techno-nationalism in both the US and China but wondered what the countries plan to do with the technologies they have built. If the aim is to export these technologies, especially AI, then there needs to be a global discussion around a common standard of application and regulation. It would not be possible to run the world on split standards, she added.