I found John West’s recent remarks about David Daokui Li’s China’s World View: Demystifying China to Prevent Global Conflict at ASPI’s The Strategist very thought-provoking. Here’s a snippet:
So what is China’s world view?
According to Li, there would be four main aspects to the mainstream perspective of China’s world view.
First, China believes in mutual respect between countries for political and ideological diversity, meaning the West should not interfere in Chinese politics. There is no mention of Chinese interference in other countries using grey zone and other activities.
Second, economic collaboration should be the cornerstone of international cooperation, since politics can be divisive.
Third is historical conservatism, meaning that China does not seek to overturn history, such as Russia’s seizure of Chinese lands during the 19th century. But accepting history does not limit Chinese claims to Taiwan, the Senkaku Islands and the South China Sea.
Fourth, China does not seek to expand its territory (!).
Read the whole thing.
I will refrain from responding or reacting to that characterization. I’ll leave that to the experts. Take them for what they’re worth.
It would be fun to produce a corresponding list describing Russia’s worldview. Maybe in another post.
I want to focus on thinking about America’s worldview. The first part of these remarks will be my list of U. S. interests. Following that I’ll reflect on those a bit.
I think there are five main aspects to the American worldview.
First, the United States believes it is its duty to maintain freedom of navigation. That refers primarily to navigation of the seas but also extends to the air and space.
Second, the United States believes in promoting its social, political, and economic views in other countries.
Third, the Unites States believes in maintaining its military supremacy.
Fourth, the United States believes in free trade.
Fifth, the United States does not seek to expand its territory.
In beginning my reflection I hasten to point out that these are not my views. In fact, I think you’d be hard put to find many Americans who believe in all of those things. Some don’t believe in any of them. They are the views that I have observed the United States pursuing.
I suspect that the goals or objectives listed above emerge from the competing interests that Walter Russell Mead delineated in an article of his in The National Interest almost thirty years ago: Jacksonians (pessimistic realists), Hamiltonians (optimistic realists), Wilsonians (optimistic idealists), and Jeffersonians (pessimistic idealists). But I think it is pretty clear that the U. S. has been pursuing those goals for the last 80 years if not longer.
I also want to point out that many of President Trump’s executive orders, statements, and actions during the first four months of his second term of office are directly contradictory of those objectives. The most dramatic and controversial have been his remarks about Greenland and Canada. Have we had a president who was more openly expansionary since Teddy Roosevelt?
I don’t know what the eventual outcome of those EOs, statements, and actions will be. Maybe they will effect permanent changes in our national objectives. Maybe they will eventually be thought of as an eccentric divergence from our actual goals and objectives.
I look forward to responses in comments to change or withdraw some of those goals in the U. S. worldview or add others. You may notice, for example, that I did not list anything about international law in the list of goals and objectives that comprise the U. S. worldview. That’s because the U. S. has so frequently violated international law over the last 60 years it’s pretty hard to mention it without including an asterisk or parenthetical expression.
I don’t think the U.S. believes in free trade, at least in any coherent long-term form. Historically, the U.S. wanted foreign ports to be open to American trade, which was never a given, particularly in a world of mercantilist imperial powers. An era of more open trade began in 1934 on the basis of reciprocity as determined by the President. By the end of WWII and particularly in light of the economic competition at the heart of the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy saw benefits from trade that might only be seen as reciprocal when considering that rebuilding countries devastated by the WWII was in the U.S. interest in those future markets and the Soviet Union threatened to close trade to its satellites in a familiar imperialist manner. Today, the U.S. has free trade agreements with 20 countries, most of which are in the Americas.
https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements
I might say, the U.S. believes in open trade, as a means for benefitting Americans, but also in using trade policy to pursue other domestic and foreign policy objectives.
I agree with that. Note that free trade was one of the last items in my list of interests.
We’ve been off-again-on-again about territorial expansion which is why that was last.
Should spreading/protecting democracy be on the list? I think it’s a widely accepted belief that we do that though our actions arent really that consistent with the belief.
Steve
America is an aggressive, expansionist world empire. Our unelected, self-appointed Ruling Class is willing to risk nuclear war to preserve their dominion.
steve:
That’s included in the second “interest” which includes promoting our political ideas.