By Lee Seong-hyon
For the U.S., from a strategic point of view, the most important event that occurred since World War II was the rise of China as a nuclear power. Nevertheless, the U.S. feels it failed to make the appropriate policy investments at that time to deal with this emerging challenge. During the Cold War, the United States was in a rivalry against the Soviet Union, which ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. At that time, China was just a large rural country.
The U.S. administration under Bill Clinton used economic incentives to encourage China to open its doors wider, and supported China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. On China, Clinton said the growing trade between the U.S. and China would lead to greater openness and the loosening of the Communist Party's control of China's economy, slowly democratizing Chinese society, and the Communist Party's weakening control of Chinese society would also improve China's human rights.
"Like many people, we had an assumption that as China got rich, it would get more liberal," recalls former CIA acting director Michael Morrell. "That so far has turned out to be not quite right."
David Dollar, who has served as the World Bank's China representative, observes: "It's common in Washington now to argue that it was a mistake to let China in to the WTO."
Charlene Barshefsky, former U.S. Trade Representative at the time of the Clinton administration, said that after Washington backed China's entry into the WTO, "The United States has missed many opportunities to enforce the WTO agreement against China."
In 2001, when China joined the organization, the 9.11 terrorist incident happened. It led to the Iraq War (2003-2011). American interests remained in the Middle East for a long time. During this period, China was able to grow at a fast pace without U.S. containment. It is now called the "lost decade" because the U.S. missed the chance to cope with China's emergence in a timely manner.
The irony is that the United States is sickeningly embarrassed and frustrated today by the fact that the main "sponsor" that helped China's rise was none other than the U.S. itself. This strengthens the position of Washington hard-liners that believe China should not be left out anymore with its continuing rise. It is the perception that China's behavior can no longer be overlooked and needs adjustment. This has almost become a "collective consciousness" of the American thought leaders. The sentiment has been further justified due to Chinese leader Xi Jinping's robust expansion of authoritarian rule and assertive foreign policy.
At no time since World War II has there been such a wide consensus to "check China" by America's Congress, the military, the President, the State Department, and the American people as a whole, said an American observer with a Washington think tank.
It should be also noted that the recent mainstream discourse that the US-China conflict, triggered by the trade war, is not simply caused by the "eccentric" American leader Donald Trump and the Chinese "Strongman" Xi Jinping. In other words, it would have been the case regardless of who was the U.S. leader, given the increasingly 'structural' aspect of the conflict. Its view is also shared by Ryan Hass, former director of the National Security Council (NSC) that deals with China.
The United States at least feels fortunate to have cultivated a friendly relationship with India during this period. Today, Washington wishes to use India to check China 's rise in Asia. This line of thinking has been embodied as the "Indo-Pacific Strategy".
Overall, there is uncertainty about the future of the U.S.-China relationship, but nonetheless, the notion that the U.S. cannot maintain its pre-existing relationship with China is dominant. In that case, a new era of 'bipolarity', in which the world is divided into the US and China, is likely to emerge and continue for a long period before U.S.-China relations are settled in the future.
With U.S. national power superior to that of China, it seems more likely to become an "asymmetric bipolar" world in which the U.S. still prevails, rather than two equal superpowers standing on an equal footing. For South Korea, it will face an uncommon time in history. It needs an uncommon wisdom to deal with it.
Lee Seong-hyon (sunnybbsfs@gmail.com), Ph.D., is director of the Center for Chinese Studies at the Sejong Institute.
 |
The U.S. administration under Bill Clinton used economic incentives to encourage China to open its doors wider, and supported China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. On China, Clinton said the growing trade between the U.S. and China would lead to greater openness and the loosening of the Communist Party's control of China's economy, slowly democratizing Chinese society, and the Communist Party's weakening control of Chinese society would also improve China's human rights.
"Like many people, we had an assumption that as China got rich, it would get more liberal," recalls former CIA acting director Michael Morrell. "That so far has turned out to be not quite right."
David Dollar, who has served as the World Bank's China representative, observes: "It's common in Washington now to argue that it was a mistake to let China in to the WTO."
Charlene Barshefsky, former U.S. Trade Representative at the time of the Clinton administration, said that after Washington backed China's entry into the WTO, "The United States has missed many opportunities to enforce the WTO agreement against China."
In 2001, when China joined the organization, the 9.11 terrorist incident happened. It led to the Iraq War (2003-2011). American interests remained in the Middle East for a long time. During this period, China was able to grow at a fast pace without U.S. containment. It is now called the "lost decade" because the U.S. missed the chance to cope with China's emergence in a timely manner.
The irony is that the United States is sickeningly embarrassed and frustrated today by the fact that the main "sponsor" that helped China's rise was none other than the U.S. itself. This strengthens the position of Washington hard-liners that believe China should not be left out anymore with its continuing rise. It is the perception that China's behavior can no longer be overlooked and needs adjustment. This has almost become a "collective consciousness" of the American thought leaders. The sentiment has been further justified due to Chinese leader Xi Jinping's robust expansion of authoritarian rule and assertive foreign policy.
At no time since World War II has there been such a wide consensus to "check China" by America's Congress, the military, the President, the State Department, and the American people as a whole, said an American observer with a Washington think tank.
It should be also noted that the recent mainstream discourse that the US-China conflict, triggered by the trade war, is not simply caused by the "eccentric" American leader Donald Trump and the Chinese "Strongman" Xi Jinping. In other words, it would have been the case regardless of who was the U.S. leader, given the increasingly 'structural' aspect of the conflict. Its view is also shared by Ryan Hass, former director of the National Security Council (NSC) that deals with China.
The United States at least feels fortunate to have cultivated a friendly relationship with India during this period. Today, Washington wishes to use India to check China 's rise in Asia. This line of thinking has been embodied as the "Indo-Pacific Strategy".
Overall, there is uncertainty about the future of the U.S.-China relationship, but nonetheless, the notion that the U.S. cannot maintain its pre-existing relationship with China is dominant. In that case, a new era of 'bipolarity', in which the world is divided into the US and China, is likely to emerge and continue for a long period before U.S.-China relations are settled in the future.
With U.S. national power superior to that of China, it seems more likely to become an "asymmetric bipolar" world in which the U.S. still prevails, rather than two equal superpowers standing on an equal footing. For South Korea, it will face an uncommon time in history. It needs an uncommon wisdom to deal with it.
Lee Seong-hyon (sunnybbsfs@gmail.com), Ph.D., is director of the Center for Chinese Studies at the Sejong Institute.
![[ANALYSIS] Pandemic awakens demand for data-driven automation](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/2b05d621a193420abef7ee24b95eab3d.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
