The editors of the Wall Street Journal are grimly amused by the dialogue between Chinese State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry:
Foreign Minister Wang Yi made this leverage explicit in a Wednesday lecture to U.S. climate envoy John Kerry, who is back in China pleading with its leaders to reduce the country’s carbon consumption. “The U.S. side wants the climate change cooperation to be an ‘oasis’ of China-U.S. relations,†Mr. Yi said, according to a Foreign Ministry readout of the meeting. But he insisted that “China-U.S. cooperation on climate change cannot be divorced from the overall situation of China-U.S. relations.â€
In other words, Beijing wants to extract concessions from Washington before it further indulges Mr. Kerry’s climate show. Mr. Yi told Mr. Kerry, according to the document, that “the United States has made a major strategic miscalculation about China.†America should “attach importance to and actively respond to the ‘two lists’ and ‘three bottom lines’ put forward by China,†he instructed.
The “List of U.S. Wrongdoings that Must Stop†includes sanctions on Communist Party figures (the State Department has restricted travel to the U.S. by some officials, including those connected to China’s violation of its treaty obligations on Hong Kong). The list also complains of American efforts to shut down potential Chinese espionage operations in the U.S.
The most significant of the “three bottom lines,†meanwhile, is that the U.S. back off its defense of Taiwan—the island democracy that Beijing wants to absorb, potentially by force. If the U.S. backs away from its Pacific alliances, the pitch seems to go, perhaps China will sign up for more putative cuts to CO2 emissions in the future.
For the Communist Party, climate change is secondary to China’s immediate strategic interests. Yet it hopes the U.S. is woolly-headed enough to trade away its security priorities for unenforceable climate promises.
That mirrors the way China has been treating American businesses for 40 years, holding out promises of access to the enormous Chinese market and getting them to, very nearly literally, trade the store. My contention has long been that their leaders are smarter and tougher than ours and that our political leadership has practically no notion of how to negotiate with the Chinese leadership. Their assumptions, based in a career in American politics, are invariably wrong.
We are the fading legacy hegemon, and they are either number one right now or will be by the end of the decade. We are used to telling other countries what to do. Now it is our turn to take instructions. Our Masters are too stupid to understand what has happened to them. Let’s hope they don’t flip out and do something really stupid, like WW III.
I am especially interested to see how China handles the Afghanistan problem. So far Taliban 2.0 is talking the talk, and that makes the situation promising for Chinese investment and completion of OBOR. But one has to believe that there is great deal of scorpion still left in the Taliban, and they might screw everything up for everyone.
Afghanistan is an opportunity for Iran, too. Reports have it that some American equipment has already been transferred to Iran. But there is the whole Shia/Sunni conflict that would have to be overcome.
Russia appears to be wary. Indian is freaked out. And even Pakistan has some concerns regarding their own Pashtuns, whose territory abuts Afghanistan.
Then there is the simmering Balochi insurrection in both Iran and Pakistan.
Muy fun.
To the extent Beijing sees climate change as a crisis, they’re not going to let a good crisis go to waste.
I’m afraid the Biden administration’s leaders are true believers, and would trade the store for green gains.
Biden is their man, dream come true, they’ll take full advantage.
They may, or may not, be smarter and tougher. (The current president excepted; that’s obvious.). But they certainly play the long game and not the politically expedient or political climber quick fix.
Seriously doubt tougher and smarter, though clearly smarter than last POTUS who was easily played. I think Drew is correct that playing long makes a huge difference. They dont have to worry about elections. They also do a lot more to control their media and population in general. However, in the longer run since they run so much of what they do as a centralized economy I think they have trouble keeping up with us.
Steve