Biden | | RG21

Is Cooperation With China Still Possible?

David Parmer / Tokyo

Times have changed, and the US has switched from the engagement model of diplomacy promoted by Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to a competition model rolled out by the administration of President Joe Biden.

Before becoming president, Biden made it clear that his first priority would be to mend alliances with traditional US allies, and then get all the allies on the same page regarding China. Biden has pretty much done this, and the Europeans and NATO are behind his move, as are the Japanese. The saying goes that there is strength in numbers and Biden has the numbers. (Trump’s “America First!” and “going it alone” went out the window on day #1 of Biden’s presidency when the US immediately re-joined the 2015 Paris Climate Accord.)

So the US and its allies face off against China in a competition that is political, strategic, and military. Some areas of competition and disagreement like trade and human rights are important and ongoing, but some like the South China Sea and Taiwan have the potential to heat up and boil over, turning into deadly conflict.

If Dr. Kissinger’s policy of engaging China is fading, does this mean that there are no areas where China and the West can meet and interact? Fortunately it doesn’t. There are several areas where the US, China, EU, NATO, and countries around the globe can cooperate.

Some of these are:

Terrorism: All countries around the world face the threat of terrorism from true believers and bad actors of all stripes and colors. No one is immune from the threat of terrorism. Cooperation and intelligence sharing across countries boosts the security of all countries involved. Information shared can save lives and prevent deadly incidents from happening. China and the US are no more immune to the threat of terrorism than any other country and cooperation makes good sense and saves lives.

Climate: Global warming affects everyone on the planet, and in addition to it not being denied, it must be dealt with by all countries in a cooperative manner. The 2021 Glasgow meeting, COP26 will bring together 97 countries in addition to the US, UK and EU. These countries, including China, have pledged to go carbon neutral by mid century. In addition to prevention and preservation countries must work together to assist countries and victims impacted by climate-related disasters.

Trade: Global trade has been valued at around $20 trillion. With the COVID pandemic in full swing trade was expected to decline sharply, but this did not occur. Trade remained robust during the pandemic. Keeping this system intact and running smoothly is in everyone’s interest, and tariffs and sanctions rendered on a tit-for-tat basis do nothing to promote the common good. Fair trade and a level playing field are essential for the smooth flow of goods worldwide. China, with its vast manufacturing capacity can engage the world and benefit all parties concerned.

Health: After 2020 and the COVID pandemic it is impossible to deny that human health is a planetary issue affecting every living person. Sharing scientific and medical information and technology are vital to keeping the world safe and healthy. No country or region can withhold information or horde supplies of materials or medicines from less affluent countries because the purely arbitrary geographical borders cannot halt the spread of disease and pandemics.

From just these examples we can see that while nations might compete strategically or ideologically, in the long run it is also vitally important that they cooperate with other nations in the areas mentioned here for the good of humanity and for the good of the planet.

Photo: World Ecconomic Forum via flickr

Taiwan And The Outcome Nobody Really Wants.

The good news: nobody wants a war over Taiwan. Yet the Taiwan question sits at the head of a list of international situations that threaten the world order in the first quarter of the 21st century. These situations include the Iran nuclear question, Russian intentions in Ukraine, the ongoing war in Syria, and the widespread insurgency in the part of the world that is the vast African Sahel region.

There was not much hope of a radically different approach to US-China relations when the stormy transition from the Trump to the Biden administration was complete. And except for tone there has not been much change. Certainly the tone has changed, the insults, racial prejudice, and right-wing rhetoric are gone, but what the US sees as its fundamental interests in the East China Sea and South China Sea and in the Indo-Pacific has not changed.

President Biden’s approach is to get all of the US allies on the same page and working toward common goals, especially towards China. The recent summit meeting between Japanese Prime Minister Suga and President Biden underline this policy. Social media posts from Biden and Secretary of State Blinken remind followers that the US is “back.”

If you examine US policy now and in the recent past, not much has changed regarding Taiwan. The US sells arms to Taiwan and intends to continue to do so. The US states that it has an “interest” in a free Taiwan, but has no mutual defense treaties, and has not committed to coming to Taiwan’s defense should an invasion from the mainland take place.

For the foreseeable future the US will do what it has done in looking after its interests in the Pacific for half a century: keep its military presence strong and ready and its alliances intact.

As for China, it will continue to move forward following Xi Jinping’s China Dream. Socialism with Chinese characteristics will continue to be the economic system, China’s military power will continue to expand and become even more sophisticated, and the Belt and Road initiative will continue to expand China’s economic and soft power around the world.

This brings us back to the initial assertion: nobody wants a war over Taiwan. But could one “happen”? One answer might be to look back at the US-Soviet cold war that lasted for several decades without a major incident. Yet for China, border wars have occurred with other large states and have not led to wider wars.

In 1962, China and India had a short border war which saw India be soundly defeated by China which after a short time withdrew its troops. China and Russia had a “shooting” war in 1969 along the Ussuri River that lasted some seven months and resulted in the loss of life on both sides before it was resolved. Ten years later, in 1979, the PRC invaded neighboring Viet Nam for a short but bloody conflict before retreating. Here we see three instances where China was not averse to using military force along its borders to achieve its long-range aims.

China has had short, violent conflicts where it thought it could “win” by taking decisive, aggressive action. The question remains: Is such reliance on short violent conflict “baked in” to Chinese military thinking and strategy? And could China “assume” that it was getting into a short, violent conflict (say the invasion of Taiwan) when in fact the United States was prepared for a long, protracted multi-front confrontation?

In conclusion, there seem to be only two courses of action available right now:

1) The status quo. A new “cold war” where China and the US face off for decades but do not engage in a shooting war.

2) An incident that convinces China that its national interests are being violated (say by Taiwan Independence) that it is forced to take military action and invade.

For the present and the immediate future there seem to be no real solutions to the Taiwan question. Nobody wants a war, but is war inevitable?

Let us know what you think about this important issue.

Photo: ROC (Taipei) Government via flickr

US Election Interference 2020 – It was Russia.

A declassified report by the US National Intelligence Council released on 10 March 2021 clearly points the finger at Russia for election meddling in 2020. The report concludes that Russia with the knowledge and probably direction by President Vladimir Putin sought to again influence the US 2020 election and undermine faith in the US election process.

The report also states that there was no evidence at all to support any claims that China was trying to interfere in the US 2020 election despite repeated assertions by Donald Trump himself, Attorney General William Barr and National Security advisor O’Brien.

Russian efforts in the 2020 US presidential election included efforts to:

Denigrate Biden’s candidacy
Denigrate the Democratic Party
Support Trump
Undermine the electoral process
Heighten sociopolitical division in the US

According to the report, Russia deployed its intelligence services, state media and troll farms to influence and damage the US election, and to influence its outcome. The Russian narrative was embraced by the Trump campaign during and after the election, and by Donald Trump himself with his repeated and baseless claims of election fraud by the Democrats.

Also mentioned in the report are attempts at election influence in 2020 by Iran, Cuba, and Hizballah (In favor of Biden). There is a link to the report below. It is a short 5-10 minute read and provides a summary of the key points in the report. Please let us know your thoughts on this matter.

US DNI Declassifed reprot on 2020 election meddling

Photo: Stuart Rankin via flickr.

Person of Interest: National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan

by David Parmer / Tokyo

New faces in Washington are no surprise, but with the Biden administration we get a collection of new faces that have been seen before in the nation’s capitol. Many of the Biden folks have been at the top tier before but just not in the spotlight. General Lloyd Austin was around before, as was Anthony Blinken and even Avril Haines. Now, these first tier players have moved from assistant this and deputy that to Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State and Director of National Intelligence. And then there is Jake Sullivan.

Jake Sullivan, Joe Biden’s National Security Advisor has been around in the thin oxygen of national politics and policy for “a while” and gotten his ticket punched. Mr. Sullivan graduated from Yale University, did an MA at Oxford, and cycled back to Yale for his law degree. He practiced law in Minnesota where he worked for Senator Amy Klobuchar.

He then worked for both Hillary Clinton and then Barack Obama and worked as Clinton’s Director of Policy Planning. He worked for Obama as Deputy Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor to then Vice President Joe Biden. In 2013 he worked on the JCPOA or Iran Nuclear Deal. In 2016 Mr. Sullivan was again working for Clinton, this time during her presidential campaign. After a stint back in the private sector, in 2020, Sullivan was selected by President-Elect Biden to be his National Security Advisor.

The Biden administration quickly undid a lot of Trump-era policy and infrastructure, but remains fairly consistent on China policy. Mr. Sullivan signaled no big changes in China policy during his confirmation hearing and even went on to support some of the views of former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, including the question of the violation of human rights of the Uighur minority.

In Biden’s Washington it looks like the band is back together. Biden’s team is deep with experience and peopled with appointees that the president knows and trusts. Former President Donald Trump might call Biden’s team a return of the “deep state.” Around Washington (and around the world) many people are happy about this, and happy to see new-old faces like Jake Sullivan hard at work.

Photo: The White House via flickr.

RG21’s Predictions for 2021

by David Parmer / Tokyo

Here are a few “predictions” from RG-21 for 2021. None of them are really new, but rather the ways that existing situations might develop in the New Year.

China-VS-US: We took a look at this topic before here at RG-21, and our conclusions have not changed much. The new Biden administration will not fundamentally change its relationship with the People’s Republic of China. Certainly the bellicose tone favored by President Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will be toned down. Diplomacy will be back in fashion and this includes relations with the PRC. The constant attacks on the CPC (Communist Party of China) will cease from the US government, but not from right-wing elements within the US.

As former Secretary of Defense James Mattis saw it, China is a “strategic competitor” but not an enemy. This may very well be the approach that the Biden administration takes. Also, the Trump administration has left the Biden people with several cards to play vis-a-vis China. While some sanctions may be lifted as a “good will” gesture, the others will be bargaining chips which the US will happily remove in return for concessions from the PRC.

As for the South China Sea issue, neither China nor the US will budge much if at all. As for the Indo-Pacific, the US will continue to do what it has been doing to form a coalition around the area to maintain a “free and open Indo-Pacific.” From the Chinese side this may very well be seen as an effort to contain or encircle China.

The US will continue to evaluate Huawei’s role in building and re-building infrastructure worldwide. The case of Meng Wanzhou might be re-evaluated and dropped or settled out of court as a “good will” gesture to the PRC.

President Biden will get US allies on board with whatever China policy the US decides to adopt. This may be easier than might be imagined since, for now, China and Europe are not on the best of terms.

Finally, with better US-China dialogue, consular facilities that were closed on a tit-for-tat basis may be quickly re-opened.

Iran-VS-US: Relations between the US and the Islamic Republic are at such a low point that almost anything done in a positive manner would be seen as significant. After China, Iran is next on the list threats to the US as seen by the Trump administration.

To this end President Trump pulled the US out of the JCPOA or “Iran Deal” despite Iran’s independently verified full compliance with the terms of the agreement. As we have written previously, the Europeans (together with China and Russia) have kept the agreement on “life support” after the US withdrawal. The US and Israel have kept Iran in their sights, and have taken provocative actions that only strengthen the radical elements within Iran, and then use the results of those provocations to show how dangerous Iran is.

Here again, the Trump administration has left the US with some cards to play. Sanctions could be lifted in exchange for that which the US and its allies want. For example, a whole host of sanctions could be lifted for some movement on Iran’s limiting its missile program, one that causes much more threat to its neighborhood than a nuclear capability.

It was the US and Israel that wanted Iran to re-negotiate the JCPOA to include this program that caused the US to withdraw from the JCPOA. The strategy was that crippling sanctions would drive Iran back to the table to negotiate over its missile program. This did not happen. The Iranians, just like the Cubans bore the brunt of US sanctions and did not fold.

The Biden administration could begin immediately to re-weave the JCPOA. First by re-joining, and then when Iran is found in compliance, to release much-needed funds to the government of Iran.

The original strategy of the JCPOA was to strengthen the moderate elements in the Iran power structure, and it is likely that this strategy will again be used.

Taiwan-VS-China-VS-US: The bottom line is this–the US Taiwan policy will not fundamentally change, but the tone will. Support for Taiwan (as is) is rock solid in the US congress. Weapons sales will continue. What will happen first is the rhetoric regarding China will be toned-down.

Also, the drawing of Taiwan closer to US will probably stop. Despite the Taiwan Relations Act, high-level visits by US officials will be seen for what they are: provocative acts which could potentially de-stabilize a precarious situation. Acts that could be seen as re-recognizing Taiwan as “China” will be toned-down or eliminated. But the US will not budge on Taiwan or on the “freedom of navigation” within the Taiwan Strait.

In a sense, this takes the US out of the equation in the question of China-vs-Taiwan. In another sense, both parties are back to “square one.” And what is “square one?” China claims Taiwan as its territory and has promised to return the island to the PRC even using force if necessary. Taiwan sees itself as a de-facto independent country, and clings to the Republic of China name not as an anachronism but as a reality. Again and again the people of the island have reported that they see themselves as Taiwanese and not Chinese.

President Tsai Ing-wen’s Democratic Progressive Party is called an “independence” party, but it knows that if it declares “independence” it will cross a redline that will probably lead to the PRC invading.

China may be thinking (and hoping) that if the DPP does not deliver to its constituents, then the pro-Beijing Kuomintang opposition party may take power and relations would again improve significantly.

The situation for now: stalemate. But from the PRC’s point of view, the clock is ticking. Tick-tock, tick-tock.

US-VS-Europe: Old friends meet again. Traditional allies close ranks. Relations between the US and Europe will take a monumental leap forward once Joe Biden raises his hand and takes the oath of office of the President of the United States. Trump’s distain for diplomacy and for long-standing relationships that do not benefit the US in his way of calculating will no longer be policy.

The Biden administration will again re-assert US world leadership and call on the Europeans to join. With its strong traditional allies the US will have a joint face regarding both China and Russia.

US-Turkey-NATO: President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey is going his own way and is far along on making Turkey a viable regional power. There have been comments that he is creating a new Ottoman Empire with himself at the center. Turkey is the only Muslim member of NATO, and the US has for years had a base at Incirlik on Turkish soil. And yet, Turkey despite its NATO membership went ahead and bought the powerful and capable Russian Triumph S-400 missile system. In retaliation, the US removed Turkey from a lucrative and advanced program in fabricating the cutting-edge F35 fighter.

Erdogan also has brought force to bear on the Kurdish fighters in Syria whom it counts as terrorists. These same Kurds are seen as staunch US allies, or at least they were before the Trump administration pulled US advisors out, thereby signaling Erdogan that is OK to do what he wishes with the Kurds.

It is likely that the US will mend fences with the Kurds as well as soon as Donald Trump is gone. But the US will now have to face new challenges in the region. Both Iran and Turkey will be mid-level players who will be calling the shots in their neighborhood. It will be up to the Biden administration to formulate a strategy to deal with these two emerging and powerful regional powers.

Korea-VS-The World: There are no signs that the Kim dynasty will go away any time soon. Kim Jong-un will continue to rule and will continue to hone his nuclear powered military. He will probably try to upgrade his submarine fleet (if anyone will sell him the boats) and will continue to strengthen his special forces as well.

Kim’s strategy for the South in the event of war would be asymmetrical warfare to start with including the use of special forces to disrupt communications and transport in the South and then use his massive conventional forces to invade following a withering rain of artillery fire on Seoul and a missile attack on the largest US base in the country, Camp Humphreys, which is just 97km (60 miles) from the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ).

Donald Trump’s attempt to get concessions from Kim failed. His meetings resulted in nothing taking place except the optics of a meeting. The Biden administration will have to deal with the Korea stalemate as well. Kim will probably use his nuclear arsenal to try to intimidate the US and Japan, and extract some kind of concessions from the South.

Perhaps the only negative to be found in the departure of Donald Trump from the office of US president will be the fact that Kim could never be sure of Trump’s mental state, and he could never be sure that Trump would not “press the button” on the DPRK.

With a more measured and professional Biden in office, it is likely that Kim, without the fear of immediate nuclear reprisal from Trump, will again begin to stir things up on the Korean peninsula.

There are a few more areas of interest that could heat up in 2021. Next time we will take a look at a few including Russia, Syria, Central Africa, and the Nordic countries.

Photo: Marshall Space Flight Center via flickr

US Election 2020 : Waiting for the Other Shoe to Drop.

by David Parmer / Tokyo

Seven days after November 2, Election Day 2020, the United States presidential election has been called: Vice President Joe Biden and his running mate Kamala Harris have won, Donald Trump has lost.

The drama of the counting of the votes took 5 days. The dynamic was not very difficult to understand: Trump voters voted in person and were counted early. Biden voters mostly mailed in their ballots.

These were two different approaches to the election and to dealing with the COVID pandemic.

Initially, Donald Trump had a significant lead the first night due to the in-person votes, but as time passed, the mail-in ballots were counted and Biden took the lead and kept it until his eventual victory. (270+ electoral votes).

For some time before the election Donald Trump was already claiming voter fraud without any proof. When the election came he increased his rhetoric, again without any proof. The Trump campaign filed lawsuits in several states claiming irregularities in the voting process. The lawsuits are ongoing.

As of November 8, 2020 there are 73 days until Mr. Biden is sworn in as President of the United States. Until then, Donald Trump will still be president. The question is what will Mr. Trump do during those 73 days and how will he conduct himself?

Donald Trump really has only two courses of action before his term of office ends.

The first course of action is what might be called “scorched earth.” He will fire up his base of voters, and in rally after rally claim the election results are bogus and that Biden is not the legitimate winner. He will incite his most radical followers to action, perhaps even violence. His army of lawyers will file lawsuit after lawsuit. He will not invite Joe Biden to the White House as a courtesy and he will not concede that he has lost the election. Perhaps he will even refuse to attend the inauguration of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. He will take every opportunity to be small, vindictive, petty, and mean.

The second course of action is for Donald Trump to act “presidential.” That is to concede the election, and attend the swearing in of the new president and vice-president. He could also cooperate in a smooth transition of power from Republicans to Democrats.

Would Donald Trump do this willingly? Probably not; it is just not in his DNA. However, there is a good chance that the elders of the Republican party will have a sit down with the president and explain the facts: that it is in his self interest to make a smooth transition, and if he pursues a “scorched earth” policy, he will do irreparable damage to the Republican party (which has enabled and sheltered him) for decades to come. More importantly for Trump he will damage his own reputation and legacy in the eyes of History.

Another compelling reason, also linked to his self-interest, is that if he fails to concede and fights on he will damage the Trump brand and the futures of his sons and daughter. Also, if he acts as much as statesman and president as he can in those 73 days, he will be able to be seen as an elder statesman and have great influence over those who practice his kind of politics both in the United States and around the world.

Of course, Trump could also do some kind of middle ground between the two extremes; acknowledge the transition but continue his bogus claims of election fraud right up until the end. This, however, would entail walking a fine line, and fine lines are not what Donald Trump does.

With the mercurial Donald Trump it is hard to predict which course he will choose. There seems to be little doubt that in 70-some days he will vacate the White House. The question is how will he do it?

What do you think will happen? Please let us know.

Photo: Gage Skidmore via flickr