Pages

1 May 2014

Sino-American ties: Avoiding the Thucydides trap

As President Obama winged his way through Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and the Philippines, countries enjoying cordial relations with the US but indifferent relations with China, he sought to reassure them of American support vis-a-vis China 
P.R. Chari

WHAT is the Thucydides trap? And, how can it be avoided? This expression was coined by Graham Allison, the highly regarded Harvard academic, to describe the situation where a rising power causes fear in an established power, which escalates towards war. Thucydides had written: “What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused in Sparta.” An element of determinism imbues this logic leading to beliefs that a rising China will inevitably clash with the established United States while contending for the leadership of the international system.
US President Barack Obama receives a Combined Forces Command briefing at Yongsan Garrison in Seoul, South Korea. Reuters

Can this confrontation be avoided? The same conclusion has been reached by another noted Harvard academic, Henry Kissinger, in his magisterial book, On China. He opines, “The appropriate label for the Sino-American relationship is less partnership than ‘co-evolution’. It means that both countries pursue their domestic imperative, cooperating where possible, and adjust their relations to minimise conflict.”

These theoretical propositions gained applicability as President Obama winged his way through Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and the Philippines, countries enjoying cordial relations with the US but indifferent relations with China. Obama sought to reassure them of American support vis-a-vis China. And, dispel growing beliefs that Washington's “pivot” towards Asia has weakened due to its continuing financial crisis, war-weariness, lack of bipartisan support on the Hill, precipitate retreat from the Middle East and faltering over the crises in Syria and Ukraine.

Washington's regional allies are concerned that Crimea could be a precursor to similar American inaction should China attempt a similar territorial grab in the South and East China Sea. China, naturally, is convinced that the US “pivot” towards Asia is designed to contain China and impede its expansion into the West Pacific and Indian Oceans.

A pointer to the American strategy is the relocation of its naval and air assets from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean, increasing Marine deployments in Australia, and efforts to establish the 12-nation Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) that stretches from Asia to Latin America.

Little wonder that Xinhua criticised Obama's four-nation tour at its very start as “myopic” and intended to “cage” China through an “anachronistic hegemonic alliance system.” For his part, the Japanese Premier, Shinzo Abe, was anxious to ascertain the extent of Obama's commitment to Japan in its rivalry with China.

In Seoul, Obama re-confirmed Washington's commitment to South Korea's security, which noted President Park's insistence that North Korea conducts no more nuclear tests. Seoul wishes to maintain the Korean peninsula as a denuclearised zone. China, however, has assisted Pyongyang's nuclear quest while casting itself in the role of a mediator. China hopes thereby to weaken the existing entente between the United States, Japan and South Korea in East Asia.

In Kuala Lumpur, President Obama reaffirmed the American commitment to Southeast Asia while extolling the virtues of Malaysia's democracy. Obama's visit strengthened beliefs that the US sees Malaysia as a key Southeast Asian power in a region where US allies are disconcerted by China's fractious claims to preferential use of the South China Sea and sovereignty over its disputed islands.

Placing US policy beyond doubts, Obama advocated greater security cooperation with Malaysia to ensure “freedom of navigation in critical waterways” and to ensure that nations “play by the same rules.” China could not have failed to get the message.

A new defence agreement was signed before Obama's arrival in Manila, which would enable troop presence, besides US fighter aircraft and ships to be positioned in Filipino bases. Obama declared the US treaty-bound to defend the Philippines and supported its policy to seek international arbitration to resolve disputes, a process rejected by China.

Clearly, this US presence in the Philippines will enable Manila to deal more confidently with China in its territorial disputes over the Scarborough islands. Xinhua, however, has declared that “the Aquino administration has made its intention clear: to confront China with U.S. backing.”

Is a clash between China and the United States inevitable? Their present asymmetries resemble those between Germany and the UK in the last century. The US, like the UK, is a status quo maritime power, whereas China, like Germany, is a rising continental power. Germany consolidated itself in the late 19th century by unifying some 38 small states and principalities: China emerged in the first half of the twentieth century as a Communist state after two hundred years of foreign dominance.

However, the US lives in relative peace with its partners in the Western Alliance. But, China has embroiled itself in Asia's territorial disputes and nascent tensions and instabilities. China nurtures land border disputes with India, Vietnam and Mongolia, and maritime contentions with the littoral nations of the East and South China Seas, inspiring them to solicit the countervailing power of the United States.

The conclusion is irresistible, consequently, that “co-evolution” between China and the United States is a myth. What the international system might witness, on the contrary, is another practical demonstration of the Thucydides trap.

Conflict spot

* Sino-Japanese relations have been embittered over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea.

* They were bought by Japan from private owners but China claimed them on the basis of historical records.

* Obama affirmed that this dispute fell within the ambit of the US-Japan treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security.

* The US supported Tokyo’s claim by using the Japanese name, Senkaku, for these islands, instead of Diaoyu, as called by China.

No comments:

Post a Comment