The Guardian UK
Where China leads, the US follows
written by Simon Tisdall
Tuesday 6 October 2009 18.05 BST
Reaching the parts other countries cannot reach, China did the Obama administration a noteworthy favour this week, persuading North Korea's eccentric godfather, Kim Jong-il, to cool it after months of name-calling, missile firings and a nuclear test. The price of the Dear Leader's compliance? The chance to talk directly to the Americans. "Hostile relations [with] the US should be converted into peaceful ties through bilateral talks without fail," Kim said.
The agreement represented a diplomatic coup for China after Pyongyang walked away from negotiations on its atomic weapons. It also advanced Barack Obama's global non-proliferation campaign. But perhaps its greatest significance was that in this case, as elsewhere, Beijing, not Washington, took the lead. By taking on the role of facilitator, China in effect took control.
The US is having to get used to these manifestations of China's growing reach. Whether addressing climate change, achieving a "balanced" global economy and "realistic" exchange rates, or pursuing fair trade based on World Trade Organisation rules, Washington is increasingly beholden to Beijing's point of view. China is, after all, its largest creditor. And when it comes to geo-strategic issues such as Iran, Burma, Somali piracy or North Korean nukes, it is increasingly dependent on China's goodwill or, at least, its co-operation.
Obama set the tone this year, stressing the desirability of pursuing a pragmatic global partnership. Speaking in February, secretary of state Hillary Clinton spelled out what that meant. Concerns about China's lamentable human rights record, for example, could not be allowed to "interfere with [joint efforts to tackle] the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crisis".
But confirmation today that Obama has put off meeting the Dalai Lama until after his visit to China next month has reawakened fears that Washington is going too far in accommodating Beijing's interests, that its new policy of "strategic reassurance" comes at the cost of abandoning both friends and principles, and that in the end, the US will be the loser.
The Tibetans have put on a brave face. But it's the first time in nearly two decades that the exiled Tibetan leader has been refused an audience, however informal, with the US president. And the snub undoubtedly creates a precedent other countries may follow.
Critics of Obama's policy argue that when China's interests diverge from those of the US, it is much less obliging. Thus does its growing stake in Iran's oil and gas fields lead Beijing to oppose tougher UN sanctions on Tehran over its suspect nuclear programme. China has ignored western pleas to halt its construction of energy pipelines through Burma, cease arming Sri Lanka's repressive government, and stop investing in Sudan. Despite improved cross-straits relations, China's deployment of missiles aimed at Taiwan continues apace.
Please click HERE to read the entire article...
Where China leads, the US follows
written by Simon Tisdall
Tuesday 6 October 2009 18.05 BST
Reaching the parts other countries cannot reach, China did the Obama administration a noteworthy favour this week, persuading North Korea's eccentric godfather, Kim Jong-il, to cool it after months of name-calling, missile firings and a nuclear test. The price of the Dear Leader's compliance? The chance to talk directly to the Americans. "Hostile relations [with] the US should be converted into peaceful ties through bilateral talks without fail," Kim said.
The agreement represented a diplomatic coup for China after Pyongyang walked away from negotiations on its atomic weapons. It also advanced Barack Obama's global non-proliferation campaign. But perhaps its greatest significance was that in this case, as elsewhere, Beijing, not Washington, took the lead. By taking on the role of facilitator, China in effect took control.
The US is having to get used to these manifestations of China's growing reach. Whether addressing climate change, achieving a "balanced" global economy and "realistic" exchange rates, or pursuing fair trade based on World Trade Organisation rules, Washington is increasingly beholden to Beijing's point of view. China is, after all, its largest creditor. And when it comes to geo-strategic issues such as Iran, Burma, Somali piracy or North Korean nukes, it is increasingly dependent on China's goodwill or, at least, its co-operation.
Obama set the tone this year, stressing the desirability of pursuing a pragmatic global partnership. Speaking in February, secretary of state Hillary Clinton spelled out what that meant. Concerns about China's lamentable human rights record, for example, could not be allowed to "interfere with [joint efforts to tackle] the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crisis".
But confirmation today that Obama has put off meeting the Dalai Lama until after his visit to China next month has reawakened fears that Washington is going too far in accommodating Beijing's interests, that its new policy of "strategic reassurance" comes at the cost of abandoning both friends and principles, and that in the end, the US will be the loser.
The Tibetans have put on a brave face. But it's the first time in nearly two decades that the exiled Tibetan leader has been refused an audience, however informal, with the US president. And the snub undoubtedly creates a precedent other countries may follow.
Critics of Obama's policy argue that when China's interests diverge from those of the US, it is much less obliging. Thus does its growing stake in Iran's oil and gas fields lead Beijing to oppose tougher UN sanctions on Tehran over its suspect nuclear programme. China has ignored western pleas to halt its construction of energy pipelines through Burma, cease arming Sri Lanka's repressive government, and stop investing in Sudan. Despite improved cross-straits relations, China's deployment of missiles aimed at Taiwan continues apace.
Please click HERE to read the entire article...
No comments:
Post a Comment