Translation Category: Foreign Policy
Zuo Xiying, one of China’s top experts on international security, examines evolving U.S. deterrence strategies in light of rising strategic competition with China. He argues that the gap in conventional deterrence capabilities between China and the U.S. is rapidly narrowing owing to China’s technological and military advances and what he sees as the decline of the U.S. industrial base. As a “stress reaction” to this perceived decline, Zuo argues U.S. policymakers have begun to discuss declining American conventional deterrence capabilities vis-a-vis China more frequently. Zuo warns that Beijing should approach shifts in relative capabilities cautiously, and recognize that the U.S. is expanding its “toolbox” of mechanisms that can be leveraged flexibly to deter China, particularly in the case of heightened tensions in the Taiwan Strait.
In an academic journal published by the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, a top think tank under the Ministry of State Security, scholars from Beijing Foreign Studies University analyze evolving debate on China in Germany, half a year into the federal German “traffic light” coalition. They argue that Germany sees China as both an economic competitor that “will surpass it” and a “world economic and political superpower” on which it is dependent economically. As a result of what they term this “extremely contradictory” assessment of China, there are still “some positive elements that should receive more attention” from Chinese policymakers seeking to further develop a practical, cooperative China-Germany relationship. The authors conclude by arguing that China should leverage “the internal rifts among the Western allies [that]…will be difficult to heal” to its advantage in creating a “new space for great power diplomacy with Chinese characteristics” and an “international environment conducive to China.”
In this roundtable, scholars from Fudan University and several invited guests debate the degree of convergence between U.S. and EU outlooks on China, the likely trajectory of EU trade and investment ties with China, and what type of role the EU should play in China’s international strategy going forward. Most of the scholars argue that Europe-China relations have deteriorated over the past years. However, many appear optimistic that there is considerable room for EU-China cooperation going forward, on matters from the green energy transition, to supporting developing countries weather shocks from COVID-19, to the Ukraine war. On the Russia-Ukraine war, one scholar suggests that a “substantial push by China to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict would help greatly to improve China-EU relations,” while others suggest that the degree to which the EU leads a resolution will be a “weathervane of its strategic autonomy” and determine whether the EU can avoid being marginalized in China’s foreign strategy.
A scholar from Tongji University argues that while Europe is increasingly emphasizing systemic rivalry with China, there is still “potential for deepening high-level cooperation” because many of China’s policy priorities (including ensuring food security, improving supply chain resilience and security, achieving self-reliance in science and technology, and boosting innovative capabilities) “share a common language” with those of the European Union. As a result, she argues that Europe should jettison what she refers to as its “Cold War mentality” and achieve “ideological independence,” so that China and the EU can work collectively to “inject more certainty, security, and development momentum into the world.”
On the 10th anniversary of the erstwhile 17+1 (now 14+1) cooperation mechanism between China and Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries, scholars at Fudan University and invited experts on Europe examine the state of the mechanism and prospects for the future. The scholars argue that the cooperation mechanism has served China’s strategic interests; for example, one scholar argues it has usefully promoted the “friendly attitude of Hungary and other countries towards China.” However, many of the experts assert that CEE countries have experienced a “gap between their expectations and reality” for the mechanism, and as a result, China should consider boosting investment and trade with these countries in order to improve the value proposition for them going forward.
Wang Wen, a distinguished scholar from Renmin University argues that while internal and particularly external risks to China’s development have undoubtedly grown, the “period of strategic opportunity” heralded formally by Jiang Zemin in 2002 endures. In Wang’s view, Chinese leadership must internalize this belief and proactively communicate it publicly, as “targeted encouragement for the future” that in turn maintains “medium-to-high growth in all fields of society.”
Emphasis added throughout text by editors.
Researchers at the PLA’s National University of Defense Technology examine the U.S. strategy of deterrence by denial against China since 2017, tracing developments across the Trump and Biden administrations and assessing likely impacts on China’s efforts to shape its regional security environment. The authors argue that while these strategies have “achieved some of the expected effects,” they will be constrained abroad by the security interests of regional U.S. partners and allies and domestically through disagreement among U.S. political parties and U.S. military branches about how to approach building denial capabilities.
Emphasis added throughout text by editors.
One of China’s most well-known scholars of American studies, Da Wei, argues that the United States and China need to reach a new strategic understanding about Taiwan in order to avoid a larger crisis. However, he suggests that this has become more difficult “because some of the long-term fundamentals underlying the Taiwan issue have changed,” including the deterioration in U.S.-China relations, the narrowing power gap between the United States and China, and the growing power gap across the Taiwan Strait.
A scholar of Taiwan and cross-Strait issues at Xiamen University lays out the “root causes” of the Taiwan Strait crises and argues that in the past 30 years, the PRC has improved its crisis management response. He advises Chinese leadership to pursue crisis management in the Taiwan Strait by continuing to cut Taiwan off from international institutions, arms sales, and diplomatic recognition and by using targeted escalation strategically to clarify China’s red lines to the international community.
A researcher at one of China’s top institutions studying South Asia explores the security dilemma between China and India that—while varying in nature and severity—has characterized the relationship for 70 years.