David Shambaugh of George Washington University, is one of America's most level-headed China experts. He is perhaps most famous for emphasizing that if we wish to make the Chinese into our enemy, they will become one.
Like it or not, he notes, the new power balance in Asia has been shifting from Tokyo toward Beijing — and away from Washington. This shift is not complete and it needn't become total or alarming. America still has a huge and vital role to play in Asia unless it misplays its cards, creates an enemy out of China and in the process alienates much of the rest of Asia.
The key for us in the United States is to begin the process of serious and sustained public debate over what is an optimal Chinese-American relationship. Rather than seeking to enlist Asians in a China-hedging coalition, our national government needs to enlist the American people in a huge and historic national effort to understand how to maximize the harmony and minimize the friction.
Public diplomacy — for the all-important China question — best begins at home, not abroad. We have to convince ourselves of what our vision is before we can convince anyone else of what their vision ought to be.
All our fault you see. Plate thinks that how China proceeds depends on what we do. That's the problem with so many experts. They see their subject of expertise as simply a reactive vessel to be shaped by either our soothing words and giving policies or our harsh words and defensive preparations.
Let's ignore that we were quite giving under the Clinton administration yet this did not stop China from continuing to occupy and oppress Tibet; support and prop up North Korea; whip up xenophobia against Japan; aid Pakistan's quest for nuclear missiles; provide aid to Iraq by building their communications network; make deals with and offer support to rogue regimes from Iran to Sudan to Zimbabwe to Venezuela; erode Hong Kong freedoms; bully nations with competing claims in the South China Sea; steal American nuclear and scientific secrets; points more and more missiles at Taiwan; builds up power designed to deter us from fighting on Taiwan's side; and let's not forget knocking down an EP-3 of ours near Hainan Island as part of aggressive patrolling of international waters to discourage our lawful flights.
People seriously overestimate the impact of foreign actions on the foreign policy of any given nation. Iran is a clear threat to us yet opponents of action prefer to look to their own domestic political concerns first. And if our so-called experts think that the Chinese leadership wakes up each morning wondering whether we will make nice to them as the basis for their policies, they are sadly mistaken.
And even if these experts are right and that actions determine foreign decisions, don't the actions of China give us the right to react a little bit defensively and worry just a little? Why are we expected to just stay calm in the face of foreign actions but other countries are perfectly justivied in reacting with alarm to our actions?
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Some experts rise to a magical echelon above reality where they think their knowledge of the subject nation is so deep that they can actually say what they are thinking. That they can predict actions. Actually, all they are doing is bolstering political preferences with their knowledge--not using their knowledge to form their opinions. As Doctor Plate says:
This column, for a decade now, has advocated the maximum degree of engagement with China.
China has done nothing since 1996 (and 5 of those years were the magical years of "strategic partner" don't forget) to change Professor Plate's opinion about the wisdom of engaging China?
That's friggin' amazing. I guess he learned everything he needs to know about China in kindergarten.
