tlmorg02
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2007
- Messages
- 3,347
- Reaction score
- 1,078
- Location
- Louisville, Ky
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
We don't disagree on China's likely response were Taiwan to assert independence. In terms of the South China Sea, the changed ingredient is China's rising regional power. In that context, China's actions are viewed more warily by its neighbors. Left unmanaged, the risk of a dangerous miscalculation and mutually disadvantageous consequences will increase.
This is exactly the kind of situation that calls for proactive diplomacy. To minimize acting in a fashion that China would find offensive or worse, the diplomacy needs to be conducted privately. The previous U.S. offer to help mediate the growing dispute in the South China Sea was made publicly and China reacted harshly. It viewed the offer as merely an attempt by outsiders to dictate a solution. Unless China's sensitivies are dealt with, even well-intended diplomatic initiatives could backfire.
Having said all that, the U.S. does need to clearly articulate its interests and reaffirm its commitments to China. The United States' reactive, ad hoc response to Mideast events may well have suggested that U.S. commitments are limited. After all, the U.S. actively turned on a long-time dependable ally in Egypt, appeared poised to sacrifice the friendly government in Bahrain even as Bahrain hosted the largest U.S. naval base in the region and those arrayed against it enjoyed at least the public support of Iran, and even squeezed Israel beyond what any previous Administration had done despite its being a highly visible strategic ally. The combination of China's growing power and signals of limits to U.S. commitments might well have created an incentive for China to "test" things in the South China Sea. Continuing U.S. ambiguity could lead to further tests and, over time, a growing risk of miscalculation.
As I have stated in the past, I do not believe the U.S.-China relationship needs to evolve into a confrontational one. The path it takes will depend on the decisions and choices made both in China and the U.S. in coming years and beyond. In that context, it is crucial that China fully understand U.S. interests and know that the U.S. will not abandon its commitments to its regional allies. The U.S. also has to fully understand China's interests and needs. Once the constraints are readily understood on both sides of the Pacific, the bilateral relationship could then focus on the broad common ground that could yield enormous benefits to the U.S., China, and China's neighbors. Regional stability has provided vast benefits to all the countries. Proactive diplomacy would be an investment in sustaining that beneficial stability.
Agreed, your assertion of "private" diplomatic resolution on the matter coincides with China's need to remain powerful in the eyes of it's people. Problems will arise though if such talks are leaked and the media portrays China as backing down or something of the sort over US pressure.