
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 2, n.º 1 (Spring 2011), pp. 1-13
Positive Equilibrium in USA - China Relations: Durable or not?
Robert Sutter
9
and media once again appeared to be trying to intimidate the Americans by warning
against the meeting and its consequences for US-China relations.21
China’s Tougher Posture—Competing Views
Coming after the sometimes acrimonious Sino-American interaction at the international
climate change meeting in Copenhagen and following limited US success in eliciting
greater Chinese support for key US international objectives regarding climate change,
Iran’s nuclear program, and international currency and trade issues, the tougher public
posture of China prompted a range of speculation by media observers and international
affairs specialists in the United States, China, other parts of Asia and the West. While
there were often widely varying views and perspectives, the debate focused on two
general groups.
The more prominent group warned of a potential or actual turning point in China-US
relations.22 The specialists and media commentators in this group tended to see rising
China as having reached a point of greater power and influence in world affairs, and
this rise was now prompting China to press the United States for concessions on key
issues of longstanding dispute like Taiwan and Tibet. China’s greater “confidence” and
“assertiveness” also were prompting Beijing to take tough stances in disputes with the
United States on currency and trade issues, human rights practices, and cyber attacks,
and to do less in support of US-backed international efforts regarding Iran, North
Korea, and climate change. Some saw China taking the lead and setting the agenda in
US-China relations, with the United States placed in a weaker and reactive position.23 It
was common among these commentators for the Americans and others in Asia and the
West among them to argue for a tougher US stance against China, a so-called
American “push-back” against perceived Chinese assertiveness.24 However, some
specialists in this group judged that the Obama government, with its many
preoccupations, was not up to the task of managing the newly assertive China; they
saw a shift in international power in Asian and world affairs away from US leadership
and toward China developing greater momentum.25
The specific points made by these commentators and specialists included the following:
- China emerged from the global economic crisis of 2008-2009 stronger than other
major powers, including the United States, which remained stuck in a slow recovery
with large unemployment. Commentators in China and abroad commonly saw
economics as the prime cause for the power shift away from US leadership and
toward China that they perceived was well underway in Asian and world affairs.
Indeed, it was judged by some that the international economic system was
undergoing a significant change, away from Western-led norms and institutions and
21 “China warns against Obama-Dalai Lama meeting,” Reuters February 3, 2010 www.reuters.com
(accessed February 23, 2010).
22 Shambaugh, David (2010). “The Chinese tiger shows its claws,” Financial Times February 17, 2010
www.ft.com (accessed February 23, 2010).
23 Hoagland, James (2010). “As Obama bets on Asia, regional players hedge,” Washington Post February
11, 2010 www.washingtonpost.com (accessed February 23, 2010).
24 Marr, Kendra (2010). “W.H. takes tougher tone with China, “ Politico February 16, 2010
www.politico.com (accessed February 23, 2010).
25 Jacques, Martin (2010). “Crouching dragon, weakened eagle,” International Herald Tribune February 16,
2010, www.iht.com (accessed February 23, 2010).