Tuesday, June 20, 2017

What Are the Odds of a U.S.-China War? - Wall street Journal


SHANGHAI—Two fiery nationalists— Xi Jinping and Donald Trump —now occupy the seats of power in Beijing and Washington.

In their mission to make their countries great again, one pursues the “China Dream”, one “America First.” Both see the other as the chief obstacle to their ambition; they’re locked into a zero-sum competition.

Halting efforts to cooperate on North Korea have papered over deep tensions on a range of issues including the South China Sea.

Are the U.S. and China headed for war? That has been the recent hot question in China circles, spurred by a deluge of books that handicap the chances.

Graham Allison, the Harvard professor who popularized the term “Thucydides Trap” to describe the risk of conflict when a rising power challenges the incumbent, isn’t optimistic.

Thucydides, the Athenian historian and general, summarized the causes of the Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.) in a single line of a monumental history: It was the rise of Athens and the fear that this inspired in Sparta, he wrote, that made conflict inevitable.

War has resulted in 12 out of 16 similar setups over the past 500 years, Mr. Allison asserts, including Germany’s challenge to Britain that led to World War I.

China Drifts Into a U.S. Vacuum in Asia
China is building its influence in Asia more by default than design, making the region’s power brokers nervous as the U.S. retreats.
CLICK TO READ STORY
China Sees a Manufacturing Future—in America
A shoe manufacturer in China’s factory belt is scouting for a location in the U.S. for its newest machinery as manufacturing trends shift in America’s favor. One problem: a lack of skilled U.S. workers.
CLICK TO READ STORY
To China, America Finally Looks Vulnerable
China’s all-out effort against a U.S. antimissile battery in South Korea is ultimately about weakening a U.S. alliance network it sees as a hostile chain of containment.
CLICK TO READ STORY
Are U.S., China Headed for ‘Hot War’ on Trade?
Between the antitrade forces gathering in the White House and Chinese mercantilism, the stage is set for a titanic tug-of-war that risks splintering the U.S.-led global trading system.

China Gloats as Trump Squanders U.S. Soft Power
As the ideological shift in Washington threatens to undermine U.S. influence in a region it transformed, Beijing sees Donald Trump as a godsend.

South Korea’s Impossible Bargain: China Trade or U.S. Protection
China’s subtle economic retribution in the wake of plans for a U.S. antimissile system presents Seoul with a stark choice none of America’s partners in the region want to make: protection or prosperity.

For China, a Rethink on Donald Trump
Chinese policy makers respect—even admire—a tough negotiator. That’s how they first thought about the challenge of Donald Trump. By now, it must be dawning on them how badly they may have misread him.

A U.S.-China Role Switch: Who’s the Globalist Now?
As Donald Trump attempts to stir the masses with stridently nationalistic language, Xi Jinping positions himself as a leader of globalization.

A Trade War With China Could Lead to Shooting
Provocations by President-elect Trump over trade and territory could escalate into armed conflict between Washington and Beijing.

CHINA'S WORLD
In a new book that bears the ominous title “Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?” he lays out how conflicts over trade, the South China Sea or cyberspace could all spin out of control.

It is “frighteningly easy to develop scenarios in which American and Chinese soldiers are killing each other,” he writes

Nonsense, responds the noted Sinologist Arthur Waldron, a history professor at the University of Pennsylvania. War is by no means ordained.


In a caustic review of Mr. Allison’s book, he declares that the Thucydides Trap is a fallacy. Dig deeper into Thucydides’s text, he argues, and it becomes clear that Sparta, though warlike, tried to head off confrontation with Athens, at one point suggesting a simple compromise.

There’s much more here than an academic dispute over classical history.

Fundamentally, the two professors disagree in their estimates of China’s rise, and thus the severity of the challenge it represents to the U.S.-led order that has kept the peace since World War II.

Mr. Allison focuses on data showing China’s wealth and power soaring ever up.

Mr. Waldron dwells on figures that indicate China’s crippling vulnerabilities. He mentions chronic water shortages and energy wastage. Others point to an alarming surge in corporate debt and an aging population that could stall, or even reverse, growth.

Those who live in China, rather than observe it from afar, juggle both perspectives daily.

Inhale the toxic air in almost any city and its clear why wealthy Chinese are fleeing.

Yet, testifying to China’s creative energy are the fleets of emerald, blue and fluorescent orange bicycles that have overrun the same cities in a matter of months as multiple startups have jumped into a bike-sharing business powered by smartphone apps.

China is choking to death; China is vibrant. Both are true. Washington’s challenge is to make sense of these contradictions, and steer a policy course that avoids the extremes of capitulation and reckless belligerence.

The Obama administration was timid; Beijing seized the opportunity to start turning the South China Sea into a Chinese lake.

To the extent that the Trump administration has a China policy, it’s on hold due to North Korea.

Mr. Trump has suspended the verbal hostilities he unleashed on the campaign trail in hopes that his Chinese counterpart will use his influence to halt Pyongyang’s nuclear program. If, as seems likely, Mr. Xi can’t, or won’t, deliver a solution this truce could quickly crumble.

Influential voices are urging a hard line. Ely Ratner, a senior fellow at the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, recommended last week the U.S. should consider basing troops on disputed South China Sea islands. Whether the White House takes that inflammatory suggestion, once its disillusion with Beijing’s North Korea efforts sets in, expect renewed bellicosity on issues from trade to Taiwan.

There’s little doubt about Chinese intentions. As the journalist Howard French points out in his erudite book “Everything Under the Heavens: How the Past Helps Shape China’s Push for Global Power,” China aspires to restore its position at the pinnacle of East Asia.

The coming decades, he writes, will involve “a certain amount of yielding to China.”

How much will depend on a fine understanding of Chinese capabilities. While China has made giant leaps in military technology—enough to strike U.S. aircraft carriers—it will become progressively harder and more expensive to advance further.

In a speech two years ago, Mr. Xi insisted that “there is no such thing as the so-called Thucydides trap.” But he went on to warn against strategic miscalculations by unnamed “major countries” that “might create such traps.”

The next few years will be perilous: The risks of conflict can’t simply be dismissed. Mr. Waldron, though, is confident that Chinese leaders would quickly smother any unintended conflict rather than escalate and risk their country’s ruin.

“They are, after all, not idiots,” he writes.

Write to Andrew Browne at andrew.browne@wsj.com

Brexit: UK caves in to EU’s demand to settle divorce terms before future trade deals on first day of talks - Independent

Brexit: UK caves in to EU’s demand to settle divorce terms before future trade deals on first day of talks
David Davis told the 'weakness of your negotiating position' has been exposed - within hours of the talks opening
Britain caved in to the EU on the opening day of the Brexit talks, when it agreed to settle its “divorce” before trying to negotiate a future trade deal.
In a major defeat, Brexit Secretary David Davis was forced to drop his central demand for the two strands of the negotiations to be staged in parallel, within hours of arriving in Brussels.
Last month, Mr Davis vowed to wage the “row of the summer” to secure immediate talks on a free trade agreement – predicting an early collapse if the EU refused to give way.
But both sides have now agreed to set up working groups on EU citizens’ rights, the size of Britain’s “divorce bill” and borders – but not, crucially, future trade.
At a press conference, Mr Davis was forced to concede that the talks would only move on to trade when the EU decided “enough progress” had been made on its three priorities. Asked if the “weakness of your negotiating position” had been exposed, Mr Davis put on a brave face, claiming: “It’s not when it starts but how it finishes that matters.”
Ahead of the opening day, the UK had also promised to unveil a “generous offer” to end the row over the future rights of three million EU citizens in the UK and 1.2 million British ex-pats in the EU.
However, Mr Davis said the offer would not be published until next Monday, after Theresa May briefs EU leaders on her intentions at a summit at the end of this week. Further rows are expected over the cut-off date for granting rights and whether EU citizens can bring in relatives in perpetuity, including from third countries.
Significantly, Mr Davis said he would tell Labour and other parties about the Government’s plans in advance – reflecting its weak position, with no Commons majority.
Speaking in Brussels, Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, made clear where the power lay in the talks when he said Britain had bowed to the EU’s demands for two phases.
“We have to commit ourselves now mutually to guarantee rights to citizens on either side of the Channel so they can continue their lives as in the past,” Mr Barnier said.

“We have to clear the accounts and we have to honour our mutual financial commitments. We also have to find solutions to maintaining all the commitments of the Good Friday Agreement. “It is by lifting uncertainties around these issues that we will lay the foundation and create the climate of trust which will enable us to build a new partnership.”