Roger, you are absolutely wrong about this. The burgeoning attacks on China that are becoming part of the mainstream in the US are worrying and illustrate that the US needs an external enemy in order to distract it from its internal problems and justify its existence. Moreover, the crusading form of liberalism that your comments embody has been proven incredibly dangerous time and again. How many people must die and how many wars fought in the name of liberal ideals? China has done nothing in the past 20 years that comes close to the atrocity of the US invasion and occupation or Iraq. The US has been far more inclined to use violence against other states than any other country in the world. Indeed, almost everything of which you accuse China has been done in the recent past by Western states rigging the international system to favor them. China is a country with a lot of problems, but the fact is that the rules of the system need to change to accommodate rising powers. Even more, the massive global problems we face today require global solutions and cooperation, not scare-mongering and war-mongering, which is what you are engaging in here. China has taken no hostile moves against the West; it benefits from the system, even as it tries - quite reasonably - to get the system to better reflect its interests. That is exactly what the US has done. Demonizing China does nothing to address the real problems of the world.
296
@Shaun Narine
Wow! Nice guys like Saddam Hussein and Mr. Xi should not be demonized by the evil ole USA! I can just hear the voters and veterans cheering to that.
58
The notion that Donald Trump has anything "about right" depends on a studied denial of his outright bad policy, when he has one, and his general lack of policy most of the time. Trump's policy toward China has nothing to do with totalitarianism, which he has tended to support when it's an issue. His policy toward China is about markets and his complete ignorance of how they work. He hasn't drawn a line in the sand, he's burdened the American people with a fruitless and expensive expression of vanity.
349
The observation that China competes unfairly and ignores the terms of past agreements is not some brilliant observation that occurred to Trump (and Mr. Cohen) while all others ignored the threat. Nor is the desire to aggressively challenge China something that is novel and new. The Obama administration had it right when it negotiated the Trans Pacific Trade pact that would have surrounded China with competition from its neighbors in a pact with the USA. The Obama administration was also creating a unified front with Europe and the USA to jointly negotiate with China. Strength and patience is the only way to negotiate and get the necessary concessions from China. Trump's tactics of confronting China alone while alienating potential European and South Eastern Asian suffers from the Trump approach to everything: bully and bluff and then see if you can get away with it.
894
@Fourteen14
Well said. I know of no Progressives who supported it. Neither Warren nor Sanders supported TPP and, in fact, last year they both slammed Trump when he indicated that he might reconsider TPP. This is a classic case of TDS! Sometimes Trump is correct.
38
Then why did China hate the TPP so much and why on earth did Trump just cancel it when he could have received concessions from China for the cancellation? The point is Trump is playing checkers while China is playing chess.
77
@Andy
Forget Mattis, Obama is the man Trump wishes he were.
11
There's no question we need to stand up to China on trade and intellectual property. But the question is how. President Trump takes a "go it alone" approach on China because he wants to be seen as the architect of any success. Everything is about him and his ego. He could have looked more closely at the TPP and worked with our international allies to contain Chinese abuses. Instead, Mr. Trump has alienated our allies and weakened our hand against China with his misguided tariffs. And he has done nothing to stand up to Xi's human rights abuses because such matters simply don't interest him. Even his comment about Tiananmen Square is linked to economics. Mr. Trump simply can't understand anything of value other than money, power, and fame, and how those things relate to his own life.
775
We have to remember, as this commenter does that Trump has a history of destroying if he can, anything that the Obama administration did or was attempting to do. TPP was a well thought out approach to addressing some of the overreach that China has since done. Trump opposed it and killed it, much to the dismay of many of the countries that would have been part of it, as I personally heard in Vietnam. But the Democrats also opposed it. There are certainly things, as named by the others in their comments that need to be addressed, such as industrial and military espionage, requirements for US companies to share technology with their Chines counterparts. But Trump has shown no understanding of the potential damage he is doing to the US economy. China has its own problems, and they are growing, whether it is less workers as the population grows older or building infrastructure that can not be justified on an economic basis. Xi has become much more authoritarian over time, and the human rights issues are real, as I saw back in 2010 in Kashgar and other cities. But none f this is black and white, there are multiple shades of gray. And we must remember that we have two societies with very different social systems, and viewing China through our individual driven society isn't all that useful. @jrinsc
72
@jrinsc
Why exactly do "we have to stand up against China" on intellectual property?
How do "we" -- meaning ordinary people, without large holdings in Microsoft, Pfizer or Disney -- benefit from imposing U.S. copyright and patent restrictions on China?
What do ordinary people gain from the foreign profits enjoyed by U.S. corporations, when many of them pay no taxes even on their American revenues?
On the contrary, impose these these fees on China and U.S. consumers will pay more for Chinese products, just as they do under Trump's tariffs.
44
@Steve Ziman,
TPP was never about "containing China", and never had any hope of doing so. That false claim is just another attempt to justify policy that hurts the US, just to enrich a few.
Like most legislation, TPP was a fulfillment of lobbyist wish lists.
Trade negotiations always have winners and losers. The winners from each nation involved, are those with the political clout - the losers, are those without a voice.
The large US trade deficit with China has been going on for decades. Technology transferred. The idea that US will be the source of high end work and innovation, after all manufacturing is moved overseas is ludicrous. Anyone involved in innovation and manufacturing, understands that shifting production overseas, *also* shifts opportunity for IP creation overseas. Re-establishment of lost industries is difficult. One sided dependence, is a national security issue.
Lack of consumption demand, is the defining feature of the world economy, including the US economy. Trade deficits exacerbate the US demand shortfall: Aggregate Demand = C+I+G+(X-M). (X-M being the US trade deficit).
It is foolish to believe that allowing foreign nations to continue accumulating dollars and US assets - including technology companies - will not have long term negative effects for the US.
Just as China, Japan, Germany, and other nations have national industrial policy focused on the industrial success of *their* *nations* (not their donors), so must the US.
37
Dear Mr Cohen, having recently read your article about Trumps truly disgusting and inhuman treatment of a rape survivor and decorated advocate, I am perplexed at any sort of “credit” you seem to be giving him. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/26/opinion/trump-nadia-murad-meeting.html
No, a broken clock is not right twice a day. A broken clock is a broken clock. It has nothing to do with reality and it needs to be replaced.
Trumps behavior has long passed the threshold of anything that would remotely deserve to be discussed with any sort of humor.
21
A “stopped-watch” policy is about right?
5
So why don't we all refuse to acknowledge China's bogus "Communism' facade and call it what it is--a paramilitary police state lead by a ruthless, corrupt. power-mad despot?
Sounds about right to me.
18
Trump has the audacity to stand in front the world and tell everyone he is going to get a great deal from China.
All the while, Xi is no chump.
Xi knows when the election is.
Xi knows all the top Dems are beating Trump VERY handsomely in head-to-head match up polls.
Very handsomely.
Xi knows Trump is a very weakly positioned leader.
And Trump is acting like he has 'teriffic' leverage over Xi.
Donald, we can see you. We can hear you. China can too.
15
This article is a joke I think. Trump would love to be wearing Xi’s shoes. He is dictator in training. Trump loves to create crisis and act like he alone will save us. He loves to smash things apart and has no idea how to put them together again.
We gave over to China our manufacturing and now resent they became powerful because of it? Not so much fun when the chickens come home to roost. Give me a break.
29
I think you are confused about Trumps motives. He doesn't care that Xi appointed himself president for life (he even joked that is sounded like a good idea). He doesn't care that China is treating various the Uighurs horribly. He doesn't care that the Chinese govt is becoming a surveillance state. He doesn't care that China is becoming more aggressive militarily. He only cares that (he believes) the US is losing money in it's trade with China. You say he's getting China about right? It's by accident.
Personally, I'd prefer a president that, when he negotiates with a leader like Xi and his cronies, isn't the dumbest person in the room.
33
The USA has 1 big advantage over China: if it's President doesn't function well, the people and his fellow politicians don't hesitate to express themselves loud and clear, as the NYT illustrates on a daily bases.
There is no such balance in the Chinese system: even President Xi's intelligence does'nt know everything and would they really share all information with him?
China's seemingly stable politics do have very, very dark shades.
8
Regarding Tiananmen Square Cohen writes “I just hope he meant it, despite the contempt he has otherwise shown for human rights.”
I Mr. Cohen doesn’t absolutely know by now that Trump has no concerns for anyone’s human rights other than his own then shame on him. Shame, shame, shame.
14
Please do not confer credibility to Bannon, who is in no position in terms of education and pedigree, to influence the political discourse and should rightfully be marginalized.
17
A response that would have worked: The Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Oh, never mind.
10
The Best way to rally all countrymen is to start a war was the mantra of the late 19th century. Is it Bosnian crisis- WWI period Deja Vu?
2
"Lawless Chinese authoritarianism."
Are those the guys that ignore Constitutionally valid subpoenas, the Constitution's emoluments clause, have multiple conflicts of interest, divert funds already appropriated by Congress for political goals, lie, and denigrate world leaders as well as public figures.
That kind of lawless authoritarianism? Just checking.
John
29
"The United States is now in a direct ideological war with China over the shape of the world in the 21st century."
Well, bust my buttons Roge, but ideology has nothing to do with this. It's about money. Money money money. Billions for billionaires. Get your ideology straight.
21
Right ! Good thing the United States never subsidizes any industries, never develops a giant war machine, spies on it's own citizens or exploits other countries !
19
Common. Every clock is right twice a day and is still useless.
5
Roger, what policies? Free misguided association of tweets describes trump “policies”. This piece is not of a quality I’d expect from Cohen.
9
The old saying “if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem” applies here. Trump is not part of the solution.
6
Roger, about three inches from you (in the Times) Paul Krugman,a Nobel Prize winning economist who specializes in international economics, routinely refutes what you say here. You might want to read your colleague's thoughts on these matters.
10
Xi may be an evil, authoritarian nationalist but he hasn't invaded any other country or sought to side militarily in their civil wars.
13
Agree that China is a threat, or better said, already a danger. And that a confrontation with the US is impending.
That Trump got it right is ridiculous. He "intuits" that other leaders are getting more powerful than him, and he admires them (see Putin). Mix that up with some not so veiled racism and you get a much better explanation of Trump's "approach" to China.
Roger, you are such a fine thinker and writer, but you are trying too hard on this one. Get back to your senses.
13
America is not in direct ideological warfare with China because Trump has no ideas and he has no clue. He surrounds himself with sycophants, who if they had ideas, abandoned them to for the “power” of working in the White House.
8
EVERY developing country steals IP from others in order to catch up with everyone else — the United States was famous for doing this with the British and Germans. It is intellectually dishonest to vilify China for doing what any other country would be doing in their position.
9
USA designed corporations and the Supremes made China Great Again
45 will light the match
Not Good
2
From 2000, Bill Clinton, on admitting China to the WTO
"China is not simply agreeing to import more of our products; it is agreeing to import one of democracy's most cherished values: economic freedom. The more China liberalizes its economy, the more fully it will liberate the potential of its people"
Bill Clinton, March 9, 2000
Instead China, under free trade, became more oppressive, from Xinjiang and to Hong Kong
https://www.iatp.org/sites/default/files/Full_Text_of_Clintons_Speech_on_China_Trade_Bi.htm
2
Any so-called ‘leader’ who would, after walking back his hardline position at the G7, shrug and say “Why not? I have second thoughts on everything,” is not the foe to take on Xi.
4
Notice how China is lending a “hand up” to Asian nations? Why can’t we do the same for Central America? Might a Latin American version of Lee Iacocca get the job done?
9
When your in the middle of a disastrous trade standoff and you lie about the other side ringing you to capitulate why would anyone conclude that your policy settings were about right..?
4
Trump likes to say that he is accomplishing things that none of his predecessors were able to accomplish. Is that true in regard to China?
One of China's advantages is its enormous population. That was a disadvantage for many years because of the poverty and lagging industrial capacity.
Now, it is emerging as a powerful consumer market while it is working on enhancing productivity. It may be an advantage that the government has few qualms about overriding free markets when it suits their national goals.
After WWII, when the developed world was reeling from the destruction and displacement caused by the war, the USA enjoyed a period of dominance in economic and military power. That era is over.
If the Trump strategy in dealing with China demonstrates anything, it may be that we don't have the ability to affect the trajectory of Chinese development on our own. I think that is the fundamental mistake Trump and his America First crowd are making.
The Soviet Union was an ideal enemy. It did not have the resources to make an effective challenge to the US. Its ideology made conflict seem like a struggle between democracy and authoritarianism.
The struggle with China is not that clear, even we acknowledge that the Chinese government is willing and able to be draconian in suppressing human rights. Chinese businesses and its government are working in developing nations to build a framework of influence. We are doing little or nothing to counter that.
129
@Betsy S, Actually, Private Bone-spur has accomplished very little of substance since he became president. Lot's of big talk and bluster with very little to show for it. Unless of course you're wealthy, in which case you win.
15
@Betsy S-Excellent assessment.
10
As many other columnists this 1 detects correct all the problems with China and praise Trump. Hurrah for that. However as all the other columnist mr. Cohen FAILS MISERABLY TO OFFER A CURE.
So why all the fancy words ? Like the hu,an RIGHT activist
4
Trump's reaction toward Xi Jinping for ruthless military action in Hong Kong will be to call for our nation's "thoughts and prayers" to go out to the civilian victims.
Then it's back to his Twitter Universe.
8
The saying about "stopped clocks" comes to mind.
4
Sorry, mr. Cohen, Trump has not been right about anything! You got it all wrong! Just ask the farmers and the truckers and the miners and the steel workers etc etc.
12
This article is just another confirmation of what every Chinese has known for decades: America can tolerate almost anything in another nation (crimes against humanity: Israel, totalitarianism: Saudi Arabia). The one thing America cannot forgive is success.
And now the US has nothing but demagogery and jingoist hatred. Writers desperately try to recast the erratic acts of Donald Trump as hidden gems of wisdom. The signs of decline are everywhere. China will lead the 21st century.
18
This article is just another confirmation of what every Chinese has known for decades: America can tolerate almost anything in another nation (crimes against humanity: Israel, totalitarianism: Saudi Arabia). The one thing America cannot forgive is success.
And now the US has nothing but demagoguery and jingoist hatred. Writers desperately try to recast the erratic acts of Donald Trump as hidden gems of wisdom. The signs of decline are everywhere. China will lead the 21st century.
7
Human survival on this planet has now become a battle between two systems of thought and governance; one the American now under President Trump and the Republican Party based on Western Neo-Liberalism and the other the Chinese under Premier Xi Jinping based on a restating of Marxist Socialism. The implications for the future of human civilization are profound. In competition with the American are 1.388 billion Chinese citizens as well as those in Asian nations outside of China. Additionally there are the so called “Belt and Road Initiative” nations. As this battle of ideas is unfolding, globally American power militarily and by extension its “Western” value system is diminishing. One reason is that the American Neo-Liberal system of belief gives full rein to the dark neurotic psychotic side of the human impulse. That impulse is in a sense driven by narcissism. Also, it has the force of religious belief. A serious drawback is that it is ethically problematic. Those who adhere become blinded to the suffering of the downtrodden. That includes the suffering that will follow as we continue to do ecological harm to our planet. At the other end of the spectrum is the Chinese form of thought which on the surface would appear to counteract the American human weaknesses.
4
On the other hand, the country that benefits from our trade war with China: Russia.
3
To a third party with no skin in the game, it just appears to be power plays between two mercantilistic, aggressive countries.
Spare the rest of us such moral righteousness.
12
You "just hope he meant it?
If we know one thing with certainty, it's that Donald Trump doesn't "mean" anything he says.
Where have you been?
9
This article is just another confirmation of what every Chinese has known for decades: America can tolerate almost anything in another nation (crimes against humanity: Israel, totalitarianism: Saudi Arabia). The one thing America cannot forgive is success.
And now the US has nothing but demagogery and jingoist hatred. The signs of decline are everywhere. China will lead the 21st century.
4
Who needs China with their huge manufacturing base and their billion consumers…when we have Greenland, and Trump tweets?
8
Thirty years too late. Bannon was correct when he said Capitalism thrives on slave labor. Unions demanded a middle class standard of living, now they’ve been largely slain by the ultimate tool, Offshoring. If previous traitorous Republican President’s had not allowed our manufacturing base to leave for a slave wage country, most of the pain and unrest would not have happened. Too late now
16
I don't see what Trump has to do with this article at all.
Trump started by imposing tariffs on Canada for God's sake.
The headline "Trump Has China About Right" is about the sloppiest written line I've ever read.
11
"was perhaps his finest hour . . . if he meant it."
And "trade wars are easy to win."
Mr. Cohen, have you been asleep for the past two years?
This president means nothing that does not line his pockets or the pockets of his cronies.
Internationally, he is in way, way over his head.
16
Nothing about U.S. corporations' complicity in the rise of China to a position dangerous to the United States?
Nothing about how U.S. corporate greed fueled decades-long deliberate "naivete" about Chinese intentions?
Nothing about how U.S. corporatists essentially told U.S. labor to "drop dead" in the drive for profits über alles, including U.S. economic security?
17
Roger Cohen would do himself well by talking to Thomas Friedman before cheering on Donald Trump’s China policy. After cheering on Trump’s trade policy earlier this year on the pages of NY Times, Friedman has done a complete 180 degree, realizing that Trump has neither the moral strength nor the political touch to take China on. Ultimately, Trump is no champion of principles—he’ll throw American national interests under the bus if he can benefit personally or politically. Time to raise the tariffs? Let’s wait until the Christmas season so the economic numbers look good for the reelection. Hold Chinese leadership accountable? Not as long as Xi Jinping is a good friend and a strong leader. Where has Roger Cohen been last two years? If he thinks Trump can somehow reign in Xi, I have a fine bridge in New York that I’d like to sell him. Totally clueless.
16
Better to do these things with allies at your side.
5
What a great piece of writing. This is why I subscribe to the NYT! Interestingly, Roger Cohen quotes Steve Bannon a man who, in many respects, was the key to some of the virtues of Trump's foreign policy. Bannon is not the sinister nationalist that SNL portrayed. Consider watching the interview he gave a few days ago regarding China and Hong Kong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xDQs5M7lHw
2
To credit Trump with having an actual policy ... as opposed to acting on narcissistic, knee jerk, gut reactions ... is a step too far!
12
Low wage payers
New York Times - I do not get why your paper shrinks away from describing to your readers just how ruthlessly “lawless” China’s authoritarian communist party is and has been, starting with Mao and including Mr. Xi (Mao 2.0). That means covering its ruthlessness to human rights lawyers, religious groups, including the peaceful Falun Gong, Tibetan Buddhists, and fishermen in international waters. It is one thing to suppress people in its own country, but when it systematically bullies citizens of other countries, that pattern worth documenting and reporting for the record.
6
The pot calling the kettle black.
5
Every capitalist?
Right issue
Wrong policy: tariffs
Wrong posture: dis our allies, go it alone
Wrong president: insecure, incompetent, ignorant, erratic, autocratic, self-serving, narcissistic, immature, petulant, vindictive . . .
29
It's called cutting off your nose to spite your face.
8
Pass the smelling salts! A NYT columnist saying Mr Trump is doing something right!
5
Finally, someone in the editorial department at The NYT is getting it right!!!
5
The one thing Trump stumblingly got right. How will he screw it up?
2
brilliant analysis of the Chinese syndrome, time for containment until the middle class revolt as in Hong Kong, The Deng revolution is long gone, shift the production chain to Vietnam, India, Bangladesh, Mexico and why not Central America which really needs economic revitalization and stop the refugee crisis!
11
Now is the time to point out what Roger Cohen failed to point out. Chinese foreign policy is based on decades and not for a few short years. The game plan has been in place ever since Mao took over in 1949. The game requires lots of patience and the Chinese have it in spades. Foreign policy in the US relies on the whim of Donald Trump and he won't be president forever.
13
"China has had a pass for too long." Oh so true and some thanks (begrudgingly) to Trump for finally seeing Xi for what he is - a dangerous demagogue/dictator whose sole goal is to rule the world. The danger here is that the world is watching two very cunning and desperate megalomaniacs wresting for the top spot. the reality is that both should step back and agree to a middle ground (i.e., compromise) so that both of these vile, loathsome leaders can save face and avoid sending the global economy into a tailspin with very negative ramifications here. in China, Africa and Europe. Does Trump see the future here? Doubtful, he only cares about his bottomless ego and winning the deal so he can crow and strut about - no concern for his actions or impact here and abroad. In fairness the same can be said about the cunning Xi. Two cut from the same cloth.
1
Oh boy.... I love reading China anxiety articles (and the comment section) written by clueless Americans. The conclusion I always come to is it’s a lost cause. China will roll right over impotent (and ignorant) Western objections.
1) Western ignorance is astonishing. There are hundreds of thousands of Chinese students studying overseas. There are perhaps 10s of millions of bilingual Chinese with nuanced
understanding of the West. I am a dime a dozen. In my life, I’ve met perhaps 5 Westerners with Mandarin proficiency at say a college level.
2) It’s way too late. China has 5 times the STEM graduates as the US. In a decade, it will have 4-5 times as many scientists and engineers. It’s a numbers game.
3) Americans ultimately don’t care. These articles on China attract a few hundred comments, compared to the thousands on some oped on racism or guns or LGBT issue.
33
Unfortunately mr Cohen left out china buy up our debt. We in turn have been acting like a teenager with a credit card. The trump card is a paper pipe dream.
4
The policy is correct, if not executed properly. the current tariff gambit will end up costing US consumers billions when we have already paid for a quicker solution - an international embargo enforced by a sea and air blockade. True siege is much more effective than this phony war the White House is currently engaged in. The ships are paid for. The sailors and airmen get paid no matter what. Let's use what we've got and quit trying to tactically outsmart the Chinese using the dumbest administration since Coolidge.
4
So, you think that demonstration like those, if held in another country, like France, Germany or Italy and, why not, USA would be received by the local police with throwing of candies?
7
Trump has made it abundantly clear he idolizes “strong leaders” like Xi, Kim Jong Un, Putin, Duterte, et al. His confrontation with China has nothing whatsoever to do with concern about human rights... it’s purely mercantile, and driven by the whispers in his ear from fringe economists like Navarro. Asked about the situation in Hong Kong, Trump has done nothing more than shrug his shoulders and continue bloviating.
A man whose answer to every challenge is “I have an absolute right to do whatever I want” and whose idea of governing is to intone “I hereby declare...” is not the man I’d look to for protection of democratic institutions, the rule of law and human rights. That man is a ‘dictator,’ in the literal and figurative sense.
There was a way to address the rise of China and its unfair trade practices other than butting heads and engaging in an extended, self-destructive game of ‘so’s your old man,’ ‘neener neener,’ and ‘mine’s bigger than yours.’ It was forming a strong trade alliance to out-compete China, subject to terms requiring trading partners to improve working conditions, honor and protect intellectual property and address similar issues in a manner beneficial to the U.S. and the members of the alliance.
That’s what the TPP was all about - but Trump had to blow it up because it had Barack Obama’s fingerprints on it; you couldn’t fit a synopsis of its terms on the front of a silly red hat; nor would it fit on one page, as Trump’s short attention span requires.
16
Mr Cohen
I don't believe it you wrote this article.
The WHOLE world "gets" China's shabang, it is only Americans who are late to the carcass on the banquet table.
The American President should not only get it and be savvy and cunning enough to deal with it... but what do we have, a "buffoon entertainer" to quote exact word-translation of what he's called on mainland China.
Trump can't concentrate for a straight ten minutes, can't do an extempore speech, cannot form an idiomatically legit English sentence and you expect what from him... to take on Xi's years-in-the-making authoritarian machine with a plastic gun-toy?
He is hurting the US economy, farmers, businesses in this war of tariffs. He is "cutting off the nose to spite the face."
Everything you said about China is true, the US was not very far in its foreign policy not so very long ago.. we interfered everywhere. We just aren't the 'super-power' we used to be.
10
Roger, you could not be more wrong. Even worse, your article smacks of typical Western chauvinism and the double-standards and implicit racism that underlie such things. There is nothing -absolutely nothing -that China has done in the past 20 years that comes even close to the atrocity of the US attack on and invasion of Iraq. No country has been so fast to abuse its power and use force against the rest of the world as the US. The only reason that this glaringly obvious point is not more clearly grasped by Westerners is the aforementioned myopia, but also the fact that the importance of the US to the world system has caused us to normalize for American atrocities. China definitely has its problems and issues, but approaching it as an enemy to be crushed is the surest way to create conflict and discord for the rest of the century and beyond. It is the largest country in the world; it cannot and should not be ostracized. The biggest problems of the world today require international cooperation. China is a necessary part of that. Moreover, almost everything of which you accuse China has been done by the West. For centuries, the Western states have rigged the international system to benefit them and used violence to maintain that order. The rules of the system have to change to accommodate powerful new actors. Sadly, what you are doing here is scare-mongering and war-mongering using alarmist language. I expected better of you.
14
All true, but the lip from the Bronx will fold.
A very lot to digest, as always of China. Ignore her not! And stay tuned.
A very weak column. It reminds me of all the people who demanded Obama do something when Putin annexed Crimea and that we have to get tough, but when asked "what should he do" all these Bruni-like tough talkers replied "well, I'm not talking about military force" and ultimately agreed that Obama was already doing the right things.
Bruni spends a lot of time telling us why China is bad, but offers nothing by way of solution other than to say "get tough."
2
No need at all to respond to China, they will never be a world power, the current Anglo-American is the final one and goes off into destruction along with the rest of the nation states at the hands of Gods Kingdom at Armageddon. Up next is the destruction of false religion at the hands of the political leading to the Great Tribulation. This system is passing away and will never again see the light of day once its smashed.
1
If Roger Cohen were running the country, because of his assessment of China, I might have hope the problem could be solved. But he is off his rocker in suggesting that Trump understands the problem and is doing the right thing. Trump wants to be regarded as 'strong,' but he comes off to millions here and abroad as a weakling and blowhard and nothing more. Few people, I believe, would give him credit for being insightful and even cunning in any high degree. As long as Trump is at the head of our country, China will have the upper hand.
10
Recognizing the threat and smartly challenging it are two very different things.
Me Cohen’s point is that to date only Pres Trump has been wiling to take tough action, but as any boxer can tell you, just being willing to throw a punch will not make you the champ.
3
Trump’s ‘flailing’ undermines whatever goals he might have in dealing with China. The mixed messages he sends out are confusing at best. And provocative, if not even dangerous, at worst. His justification that this is how he negotiates demonstrates just how little he really understands diplomatic negotiations.
4
Trump has NO China Policy. Yes, he recognizes that China is a problem. But he has no policy, no strategy. He won't recognize a good deal should one arrive at his feet. The TPPA was a strategic move against China, and was stronger than anything we can do as a single nation. Trump confuses our military and economic strength with ability to impose our will. Nonsense. Roger, I do not like anything about Xi's actions, but Trump is not the one to fix anything. Just look at his record. Sheesh.
11
To discuss Trump as if he were a normal person capable of thoughtful analysis and responsible action is not only an insult to the readers, it is a danger to this nation. Trump is an extreme narcissist whose only rationale is self-promotion at the expense of everyone else. He admires Xi and wants to imitate him if he we allow him to. To deal firmly and insightfully with foreign governments is far beyond Trump's skill level.
We actually have no idea who Trump is actually serving with his chaotic trade wars. It certainly is not the United States. Please, Mr. Cohen- now more than ever, we need journalists that can tell it like it is ..not like they wish it were.
8
I emphatically disagree.
Taking on a big problem like China requires allies. Trump should have gone to the U.N. and the EU for support. He should have stayed in the Trans Pacific trade pact which excluded China.
He did none of that. In fact he’s alienated the very allies he needs to temper Chinese ambition.
Everything he’s done has actually helped Chinese global ambitions.
8
This is a very important issue nobody has addressed until now.,, but
["The president’s statement linking a trade deal and the Hong Kong demonstrations — “It would be very hard to deal if they do violence. I mean, if it’s another Tiananmen Square, it’s — I think it’s a very hard thing to do if there’s violence” — was perhaps his finest hour. I just hope he meant it, despite the contempt he has otherwise shown for human rights."]
we shouldn't deceive ourselves. Trump sees only the part of the picture that he's invested in, not the world view (nor does he care). Xi will weigh trade against HK and placate Trump, and then move on. He's less a fool than Trump is. Ask Rex Tillerson.
3
Trump is just continuing Obama's anti-China policies. His tactics are a bit different but the goals are the same.
China is a rising power. Just like with Japan in the 1980s the US faces the choice whether to accept it as an equal or to crush it into an inferior position like Japan then.
Treating China as an equal would mean that the world would become multi-polar again - as it has been thoughout history. It would mean encouraging China to become a responsible country that stops claiming ever more of its neighbors. It would mean pressuring China on points where it can cede without losing face.
The US has chosen the confrontation. As the campaign against Huawei clearly illustrates its present policies are about more than fair trade relations.
6
Something we should not forget is that the Chinese, every bit as much as us, believe in their exceptionalism and genuinely believe that their way of doing things is the right way. It’s very easy to make tremendous mistakes and to do terribly harmful things when you see yourself that way.
4
There's an excellent comprehensive comment by jrinsc.
For me, in order to even discuss TRUMP's China "policy" ) I need to be convinced that the man has a "policy." I'm not certain Trump could even get through Mr Cohen's arguments. Everything he has done is scattershot, and meant to get headlines: nothing is ever fleshed out. And it isn;t because he's keeping a secret.
We could discuss Cohen's points, but they aren;t emanating from the President*, who is oblivious to the consequences of blurting out threats. ( and today, apparently releasing a classified picture of an explosion in Iran, because he's the President and can do stupid stuff).
There should be serious discussion of how to make China a more lawful player in the world; Trump won't have anything to contribute.
3
Trump hasn’t a clue about how to deal with China. If "the Donald," was truly serious about getting China in line, he would have built on the excellent work Obama did in creating the TPP. With our democratic partners in Asia, China would not have been able to “divide and conquer,” as it is now free to do. How frustrating and pathetic that the president will not do what is best for America, simply because Obama was the architect. Now we have NO allies in the far east or in Europe or practically anywhere else except the Middle East. It seems our president hopes is to make Russia our biggest ally.
To win the future, our country needs to dump Trump and this unhinged Republican party and get America back on track. First, reinstate the corporate taxes: especially on executive pay through stock options in order to help fund a massive infrastructure overhaul. Many of our companies and executives have secured unprecedented profits and payouts – often by limiting pay and benefits or by moving manufacturing out of the U.S. These companies and "job creators," can and should help us rebuild our schools, roads, airports, high speed rail lines, technical colleges, etc. Second reinvigorate our allies who share our democratic ideals and practices with new economic partnerships. Then we can begin to leverage them against totalitarian regimes like China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Iran, etc. That is the only way to secure a future of peace and prosperity for us, and the world.
4
Often what one does is not as important as how one does what one does. Trump’s implementation of tariffs has been rather stupid even if he was right call out China for its expansionist ambitions. The TPP would have been the place to start with a united front against China. Instead Trump has flailed alone, and he will fail alone.
3
You're giving Trump far more intellectual heft than he deserves. He is as obsessive with his tariffs as he is with his wall. He has no shrewdness in these negotiations. This is all about his ego. China will play the long game and out wait him. Meanwhile, farmers will be our badly hurt and Trump's tariffs will result in consumer prices going up.
Trump's line in the sand is a blunt object to the head.
4
In my view, Trump's China policy isn't "about right," it's a potential disaster. Trump is utterly ignorant of the geopolitical, military and human rights factors involved in crafting an intelligent policy toward China. Former SecDef Mattis had it right when he said the man has limited cognitive ability.
Trump's thinking appears to be based entirely on appealing to the xenophobic, low-information voters in his base. His America First policy seems to be built on first alienating traditional allies who share Western values rather than skillfully coddling them along into an international bloc that could more effectively confront China.
He could start by tweaking TPP and joining the other dozen countries who could offer meaningful pushback against China. And others have mentioned, rather than a U.S. version of belt and road, we're cutting back foreign aid into a stance of growing isolationism.
3
Anything Trump has done that is successful regarding China is dumb luck because he hasn't a clue about foreign policy and his Trade War is a disaster for American companies, farmers and consumers.
To insinuate that Trump has consciously implemented any policy with China is a gross exaggeration that credits him far more than he deserves. Trump's foreign policy is erratic and a failure everywhere in the world.
3
I hate to compliment Trump on anything but China does need to be stopped. These protests in Hong Kong highlight the horror of Chinese policy without the US actually getting involved. Unfortunately, Trump made the horrific decision to kill the TPP which would have put US tentacles in Asian trade and pressured China. The US needs to put all of its efforts into the subversion of the Chinese state without actually meeting militarily. We cannot have a colossus like China that terrorizes its own people.
On the flip side, the US is currently terrorizing its own immigrant populations, so it is not exactly acting on high ground in a fight of ethics with China. The US should probably clean up its own mess before it goes on attacking another country's mess. The Trump Administration needs to go.
2
I couldn't disagree more with this piece by Cohen. The topic is too complex to do justice in a single comment, so I'll just make the following points: yes, the Communist regime in China operates an authoritarian state. Indeed, the People's Republic of China is almost a textbook definition of a fascist polity. This isn't news to anybody, Mr. Cohen.
But changing this reality -- democratization, in other words -- something all reasonable people yearn for -- is made more, not less, difficult, virtually every time Trump opens his mouth about China, or increases tariffs.
Trump's UTTERLY un-nuanced, over the top, hyper aggressive, China-bashing "strategy" is a huge gift to the Xi Jinping regime, because it makes it pathetically easy for them to paint America as an evil regime out to harm China. And the Chinese people by and large lap it up.
In essence, Trump's flailing, quasi-brain dead China policy, while weakening the US economy, likewise weakens American prestige and influence in mainland China, even as it strengthens the hand of Xi as the protector and defender of the motherland in the eyes of ordinary Chinese people.
3
An effective trade strategy has to involve more than one country.If I see a fire off in the distance I can shout about how dangerous it is but that has almost nothing to do with putting it out.That’s the problem with Trump.Trying to go it alone,thinking he’s going to do it all by himself is not only stupid but dangerous.China is moving quickly to open trade talks with the many countries Trump has alienated or otherwise hurt in some way.Actually, Trump IS the problem.Obama and Bush before him realized the seriousness of the situation with China.Obama and the Congress developed the TPP as a way to unite several nations in order to slow China down.We’re all tired of hearing about that treaty but it was a sensible way to start moving foreword.Trump goes charging into the international poker game showing all his cards and bragging about his great strategic mind.The solution to our problems with China doesn’t need to involve “drawing a line in the sand” .Rather, it should involve strengthening our alliances with like-minded foreign leaders.If anything,Trump ,through his crude and childish behavior,has given China an opening to world markets that they would have never dreamt possible.So ...sorry...Trump and his rhetoric are making the problem worse not better.
2
It's all about short term pain for long term gain. Even a loser like Donald Trump is likely to get something right once and a while, and he is right in his China policy so far. But I fear that one morning he will wake up and decide to sell the country out in order to get a deal that will make him look good to voters (Donald will likely go to jail if he doesn't get re-elected). The Chinese will pretend to go along and then revert back to their old selves after the election. That seems to me to be the easiest path for political water to flow. Never forget that it is all about Donald Trump. In the meantime Democrats need to wake up to the idea that the American people support Trump's trade policies, and that free trade brainwash is passe. Balanced and fair trade is the new normal.
1
I usually expect and applaud clarity in your columns. This one is just so much dithering: which side of the fence are you on? Crediting Trump for his barely comprehensible stand against China with his inept and clumsy use of tariffs, accompanied by his inability to resist twitter at key moments of the ongoing negotiations, which seem intended to sabotage these negotiations moments before a way forward opens up.
2
What Trump got wrong about China
was his belief that it would bow to him.
it will not.
trade with China needs to be made fair
but don't send a swaggerer to bring her to its knees.
the outcome of the tariff war has been a damaged economy
and a hardening of positions.
Trump thought it would be his great achievement,
instead it lays bare his lack of depth.
and we and the world to pay the price.
2
Mr. Cohen, don't be Trump's dupe.
Trump hasn't gotten ANYTHING right. Anything.
[And "lines in the sand" are absurd and dangerous concepts.]
3
You give Trump too much credit. His confrontational economic policy with China is based entirely on his perception that America is being exploited because China sells more goods and services to us than we buy from them.
He is less concerned about China’s goal of becoming the dominant world power, its intent to control the South China Sea, and its threatening global authoritarian presence, and indifferent to its disregard of personal freedom and civil rights, the plight of the Uighurs, and the fight for democracy and the rule of law raging in Hong Kong.
His concerns are transactional.
Take the appropriate measure of our incessantly-lying, bigoted and racist commander in chief.
However many people ("folks") may agree with Mr. Cohen's analysis of China's distemper, that it was even the faintest of Trump's cellular-concepts to best China is lunatic. First, Trump demonstrably does not have cellular concepts, Secondly, Trump's behaviour ( ACTION NOT WORDS) illustrates he is simply not capable of acting on simple ideas. E.g. ,Trump cannot take a dog for a walk. (Dogs be thankful.) Pause for thought. Why not? well, if you need explanations...
1
I believe that the Chinese government cannot be trusted. There is most definitely overreach. Here in Canada students and other Chinese nationals working here are harassed and under surveillance. They have had family members in China punished because they spoke against the repressive Chinese government. But because universities make good money enrolling foreign students, very few are willing to crack down on the "cultural organizations" really designed to spy on Chinese nationals in Canada. I have no doubt this is done in the U.S. as well. As for Trump, I would give him credit for his stance on China if his daughter hadn't managed to register multiple trademarks (including one for voting machines!) in that country and if he and his daughter didn't manufacture many of their products there. Hard to believe a hypocrite.
3
Spot on but I think Trumps negotiating skills are far more prudent then the media understands. Keep um guessing and speak loudly and carry a big stick!
"China Policy?" What would that be?
Confronting China is just another episode in many, of Trump's mad hatter performance in the center ring of the carnival "government" the GOP has forced upon America.
Were Trump's tariff threats to Mexico and Canada also part of some grand policy strategy? Or just an earlier act in Trump's authoritarian posturing and build up to his chaos mission tour de force.
Trump has no China policy. China is simply the latest convenient foil Trump has dragged into center ring for his personal entertainment and the applause of his MAGAts. Every hour he seeks new players/targets to keep his madness fresh:
Immigrants, Muslims, gays, white supremacists, NATO, Elizabeth Warren, James Comey, the failing NYT, the purchase of Greenland, and on and on...
And that is Trump's grand policy (if his incoherence can be described as policy), do something bizarre, the more chaotic the better. All eyes on him, smile at the applause, lash out with insults and cruelty at critics.
The Trump Show is playing everywhere. Produced and distributed by the GOP.
3
Being in concurrence with you, that Chinese despotism is no way to advance in the world, and that Communism is utopia personalized given that, in the name of 'social order', Xi has no compunction in sacrificing the individual...and it's basic human rights and freedom to think, speak and do to benefit that nation. Repression depicts not strength, awful weakness instead. But praising vulgar Trump is not right either, an unscrupulous demagogue, abuser of power, and cruel towards 'the other' in a most conspicuos way. And speaking of capitalism, China does it from the top down, no questions allowed; whereas in these United States, unless a healthier competition is the norm, and some ethics in their dealings with the people is seen, our odious inequality shall rise disproportionately, and allow greed's ugly head to show. Both instances are deleterious to the world at large, especially when we abuse our station in the name of a democracy, and disparage our Allies in the process. Strength in Union, but the antithesis is all we see in these treacherous Trumpian times. That the world is upside-down, indeed...but we need not contribute to the mayhem. And Xi must be aware and cautious of our determination to show resolve and defend our values...in spite of Trump's iniquities, a political weather vane causing havoc in markets' need for stability.
Roger Cohen must calculate that Mr. Trump will be re-elected in 2020. How else to explain his very first positive review of the President... especially when there is still so very much about Mr. Trump to ridicule, demean and insult?
Yes, the Chinese needed to be challenged on their intellectual property theft and predatory practices, but painting Xi as the boogeyman isn't helpful.
American greed created modern China. CEO's gleefully closed US manufacturing plants and shipped those plants to China, all in the name of bigger profits and bonuses.
While Trump is right to challenge the Chinese, his execution has been inept, loutish and counter productive. Pulling out of the TPP was a monumental error. Starting trade wars with our European allies instead of co-opting them into confronting China was another huge error, and issuing public threats to China through Twitter is nothing short of assinine.
Trump may be right on China, but he's wrong on everything else.
3
Bravo Cohen. You just wrote the article that makes Trump look like a genius. Whether you intended that or not is immaterial; his people will take accolades, however indirect, wherever they can find them. His approach to China (and other foreign policy) is more like the proverbial bull in a china shop (pun intended) but your article makes it seem like he has a method to his madness. Hardly. Yes, China is very complicated, important and potentially explosive and, unfortunately for America, Trump is not a smart man: Xi is playing him like a fiddle. I can only hope that there is a new president as of 2020 who actually understands the complexity and has some long-term solutions embedded in a comprehensive foreign policy agenda--not a tweet-raged, knee-jerk, off-on trade war.
Trump on human rights: Drop Dead. Not interested in the slightest. The USA should be partnering with allies against China across the board. The problem is most allies in the G7 are now working around us because they've all been upended by Trump. The US moral authority was lost on day two of the Trump presidency. The man is a weapons grade diplomatic disaster. He cannot even keep his story or demands on China straight.
1
If only the President wasn't such a divisive person he might have communicated to our country, and the world, this very message. But it is sad that the president of the United States has so put off 2/3rds of the population that no one hears anything he has to say that is correct.
51
Cohen: "Trump was right to recognize the threat and respond, however erratically."
However erratically? Really?
22
Is it just me, but this is rather over the top in its vilifying the Chinese government? I do not need to reach back very far in American history to see examples of protesters being given the boot or worse by police.
16
This was very helpful. It explained a lot. Thank you.
3
There is little doubt that China has not played by the rules.
And there is little doubt that Steve Bannon’s comment possesses more than a kernel’s worth of truth, as many commenters have already noted.
I simply wish to address your statement concerning Trump’s finest hour by making a few substitutions:
“It would be very hard to deal if they do violence. I mean, if it’s Yemen, if it’s Khashoggi — I think it’s a very hard thing to do if there’s violence”
15
Absolutely true. I will never understand how so many politicians, both Republican and Democrats, turned a blind eye towards China's ultimate goal of world domination. No doubt, I despise trump, but it was high time somebody, trump, or the powers behind trump, did something to bring this to the forefront.
6
Democracy is a weapon of choice by the US to fight against any other forms of the political system except the half-baked democracy where the rich have an oversized influence over the political system with 90% of wealth controlled by 3% of the population, daily racial strife, 30k gunshot death, 80k drug overdoses and etc. The selective use of democracy against a country such as China and not for an even more despotic state of Saudi Arabia suggest Democracy is only a tool of convenience to extend the US hegemony in the new century.
14
I disagree that Trump has China policy about right.
The intelligent way to control China would be with an alliance of its economic and trading partners .... oh right, Trump threw out the Trans Pacific Partnership purely out of spite, because Obama.
53
Trump ran on confrontation with China and he has followed through with his pledge, albeit clumsily As a veteran businessman in China for over 35 years, everyone knows that one does not negotiate with China in public, especially on social media. That being said he is doing the right thing. We have very few allies in this struggle. The ones we do have, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, and the Philippines all are on our side in the struggle Vietnam specifically has a 1000 year old enmity with China and they and the other South China Sea countries have been paying to dredge their harbors to accommodate US warships which they encourage and welcome Where are our European allies? Feckless as usual!
28
China is a brutal one-party dictatorship that cheats when it comes to international trade and bullies its neighbors in the South China Sea. It is high time that the West and our allies in Asia drew a red line around many of the PRC's actions.
But I'm afraid Trump's concern for the brave people of Hong Kong is just another bargaining chip to him, ready to be traded away for of a "favorable" trade deal from Xi.
15
Everyone across the political spectrum agrees China has taken undue advantage and been a bad actor on trade. But going it alone with a self-destructive trade war is the wrong approach.
Beyond that, Trump's mercurial nature makes him an untrustworthy negotiating partner and no one, friend or foe, can believe a word he says.
110
Really?
China's main threat is to replace America as “number one” which we just can’t stand. Yes they live under communist rule but that is the boogie man of the past, the Taliban and ISIS have replaced Communism as the organization to fear. The main problem is that we have been out worked and out smarted by the Chinese, not surprising considering our educational system and the lackluster work ethics we have adopted. China has been willing to sacrifice their people for years to work in factories making trinkets to fill American Walmarts. Now they're cashing in all that hard work for world domination and our best response to stomp our foot and declare, “it’s not fare”. As America grew into a world super power we too suppressed, coerces, and killed our way to the top. China is closely following the same pattern that America use to rise to the top, a combination of military and economic power, why not it worked for America. In the end if we really have to stay number one we need to put in the time and efforts to make it happen not draw a line in the sand like some school yard bully.
45
Suppose that town fire marshal is substantially incompetent. Suppose that he dwells on crackpot methods to put out fires, that he usually gets wrong which buildings are on fire, and that he arbitrarily berates and dismisses his own staff. Suppose that for once such a leader correctly identifies a building that is on fire. Do you then say that he has policy "about right"? No, you say that he is accidentally, partly correct.
That's where we are with Trump and China. He happens to be right about something, but he is right for the wrong reasons and he won't solve anything. He is obsessed with China's trade surplus, which is not what China is doing wrong. He won't actually draw a line in the sand, and he won't actually hold China accountable. As he already did with NAFTA, he will only at best surrender and declare victory.
58
This is bizarre beyond the extreme. Nothing Trump is doing is intended to help the people of Hong Kong, let alone Americans. Nothing Trump is doing can possibly help the people of Hong Kong, as nothing he's said or done could lead anyone (apparently other than Roger Cohen) to believe Trump would consider raising human rights issues as part of any negotiation with Xi Jinping as Trump has total contempt for human rights. Trump could not care less what Xi Jinping does in Hong Kong any more than he cares about what Xi is doing to China's Uighurs.
Nothing good can come of Trump's supposed "flailing", as Cohen wrongly describes it, as even flailing connotes a purpose, even as one swings wildly.
There is nothing remotely purposeful or strategic about anything Trump is doing, so nothing positive can come of it. Trump started a trade war with China out of vanity and with no idea but to rile up his nativist protectionist base for his reelection.
What we see now is Trump burning the economy to the ground because he never had any purpose in engaging with China other than to treat it as a game which he thought, as if it was a scripted reality show, he couldn't lose.
Trump doesn’t know how to do anything but to keep constantly increasing tariffs, which are just taxes on American business and the American people, while blaming everyone but China, (meaning Fed Chair Jerome Powell, American businesses, Democrats, and the free press, to name just a few), for the disaster he's created.
100
Do you really believe that China is more a threat to the world in terms of human rights than Putin? Do you feel Xi is more of a ruthless dictator than Putin? Is Xi stealing all the money from his country and ruining its economy as Putin has? Did Xi actively interfere in our elections as Putin did? Where are any lines drawn regarding Putin and Russia. Also Xi is repressive in clear ways against Muslim minority (but did he separate them from their children and lock children in cages?). You are right about the TPP and Warren can take us back in that direction. Regarding Hong Kong we have to see what happens but so far Xi has done nothing comparable to what Russians have done in Ukraine and Georgia which were independent countries. Yet Trump does not place any economic sanctions on Russia and even wants them back into the G7. China is guilty of many bad trade practices but Trump is going about it all the wrong way, taxing the American people and possibly leading us into a recession. Instead he should be working with our trade partners instead in dealing with China rather than fighting with them and pushing that they give more support to Russia.
20
I don't think many people dispute the notion that China is, and has been for a long time now, a very bad actor on the trade and international stage. That Trump recognizes this earns him a little recognition in my opinion. I believe, however, that his "strategy", such as it is, is all wrong.
He blames Obama, and other past presidents, for being soft on China. I believe this is revisionist history. No one expected China to take the hard turn toward authoritarianism that it has under Xi. Now that the world recognizes this, nations need to work together to convince the Chinese they must change their ways, or they will be left out. The TPP was a step in that direction. European nations were a little slow to come to the table, but are fully aware and ready now. Almost completely isolated from other major economies around the globe, the Chinese would have no choice but to evolve.
The Chinese are very sensitive to being told what to do by the west. Pounding them with tariffs, and expecting this will cause them to change their ways, is a fools errand. Neither side will win this fight, despite Trump's claim that trade wars are easy to win. Xi has complete control since consolidating power, but this also makes him completely responsible. He cannot be seen as caving to American pressure.
The only possible win I see coming from this is Trump losing the 2020 election because of a recession he caused with his reckless behavior on the economy.
25
1) The Chinese economy has grown during forty years like no other in history.
On the other hand it had superpower guidance and nursing, ours, as has no other large economy in history.
Our thanks for being the force underlying the dazzling Chinese performance is a gathering political and, perhaps, military confrontation with our former disciple.
2) One is reminded of the British creation of the Imperial Japanese Navy at the beginning of the last century. This favor was paid back with the sinking of the Battleship Prince of Wales and the Battlecruiser Repulse a few days after Pearl Harbor.
3) Or, our building up the Taliban and other Muslim extremists in Afghanistan. Indeed, according to our National Security Advisor, then, we started the Afghanistan War. See Zbigniew Brzezinski's Interview with Le Nouvel Observateur (1998).
Our thanks was 9/11.
4) A developing problem is nationalism ("populism") in Hungary and Poland, which is breaking them away from the EU. We can thank our failure of the 1990s to debunk Polish and Hungarian victim ideology and victim posturing inspired by one-sided tales of the prewar and war.
This vengefulness helped to assemble eastern Europe into an extension of NATO. Ironically, such antediluvian nationalism is now leading some of that eastern Europe toward Russia.
All of these actions, which blew up in our faces, were directed against Russia.
Obsessions make for rash decisions with very painful unintended consequences.
13
So the clunkhead intuits correctly, but his mental issues keep him from doing anything but make matters worse. There was a coalition of nations joining together to resist chinese expansion, but the stable genius prefers to go it alone. Since no one trusts his words anymore, whatever needs to be done will have to wait until we get effective leadership and restore the departments and agencies that trump tore apart while playing in the presidential sand box.
44
News flash! Trump sees the obvious. The issue is not that China is determined to rule the world's economy and Trump sees it. Everybody sees it. The issue is that Trump wants all the credit for opposing it more than he cares about succeeding. For him, it is just optics toward re-election. A President committed to restraining China would be working with our allies and other nations to effect a united front against China. That's not Trump.
53
China is a rising power. It followed the strategies of the other Asian Tigers--labor-intensive exports plus industrial policy fostering high wage capital- and technology-intensive industries. They stole for us, and we did from the Brits and so on. They have made amazing gains for their people. But, like us, at huge costs to segments of the population. To suggest a see-saw tariff war with China is a productive engagement with a an emerging power is like saying a tantrum is effective diplomacy. We need their peaceful cooperation, we benefit from their prosperity as they benefit from ours. We need to work with allies to achieve shared values--which we will never get from this President.
30
Approving Trump's China policy as this article outlines, is a blunt assertion that the United States reigns over all other nations and has the right to dictate how those nations operate. China, as an impoverished backwards nation, was a great place for American corporations to find cheap labor and no regulation. China, as a thriving nation has no right to determine its place in the world.
No country can rule the world, not even the United States.
23
And no country should ever be tolerated as they stomp-out the will of the People.
China will be to this century what Germany was to the last. For the last 20 years, we have been distracted by Muslim extremism in the Middle East, which in the long run is a nuisance and not a serious threat.
While Trump has been willing to challenge China unlike his predecessors, his focus on trade is much too narrow, and he lacks the vision and foresight and wisdom to understand the extent of China's long-term challenge and to build the coalition needed to contain China. In fact, he is ironically in temperament the Wilhelm II of this century, and his policies are counterproductive to the coalition-building we will need.
21
It is bizarre that liberal, progressive commentators now court even Trump on the very wrong China policy.
The American progressive liberals should ask themselves why a Communist regime in China was able to build up the most competitive economy of our planet and ensure a tacit consensus from its people.
The same American liberals should wonder why our beloved America is losing its once great soft power of attraction for the dependent and not dependent countries.
Finally, they should ask why the smart American business people have substantially promoted the Chinese economic growth.
10
@renarapa "Finally, they should ask why the smart American business people have substantially promoted the Chinese economic growth".
There's a simple answer cheap products, huge profits. Ever heard of Walmart.?
23
@renarapa
Didn’t the shift of America from being the biggest exporter of finished goods and importer of raw materials to the biggest importer of finished goods and exporter of raw materials on Reagan’s watch? It’s curious that right-leaning posts here blame so called liberals for the consequences of unregulated capitalism. Corporations are bound to serve the interests of shareholders above duty to the nation unless constrained by law to serve the public good.
20
American businesses built this mess, but they did it with the complicity of the liberal establishment that for some reason agreed with them that "reducing labor inputs" would somehow make life better.
OF COURSE people are turning to Bernie and Donny (and the League, AfD, Kacynzki in Poland and Urban in Hungary). Are they supposed to remain obedient and loyal to masters who have sold them down the river?
6
@Green Tea
Actually, the 'mess' began with Nixon and Kissinger, who opened up China to US industry. I spent several weeks in the PRC, presenting seminars on technology, not long after China opened its doors. So it's hardly a 'liberal establishment' that produced the problem. Unless you think Nixon was a liberal, that is.
Asian investment by multinational firms has been in pursuit of the emerging Asian middle class market(s). As well, proximity to heavy metals used in semiconductor manufacturing, as firms shortened their supply lines.
Most of the world's semiconductor chips are coming from fabs in Taiwan, Singapore, the Philippines, and Thailand.
Yes, the designs are coming from EU and US companies, so called 'fabless' firms, who can only get their stuff made in asian fabs. Trump doesn't understand what he's trying to control, by taxing the US for buying "chips from china"
The problem is that companies have become multinational. And many have moved their HQ out of the US because of our tax policies. The genie won't go back in the bottle. We can't simply become isolationist, without becoming isolated from a global economy. And one, I should add, that China would be pleased to lead.
Obama's trans pacific partnership would have contained China. Our withdrawal gave them a red carpet invitation to dominate pacific markets and geography. Trump knows not what he does.
16
The greatest threat that China poses to the United States is that when it makes long term decisions, it bases them on empirical evidence not adherence to Republican dogma or the influence of fossil fuel oligarchs. The wisdom of the Brick and Roads iniative is in sharp contrast to the mistaken American withdrawal from the TPP. The Chinese construction of military bases on atolls in the South China Sea is symbolic. Those bases would have a life span of mere seconds in a military conflict. The Chinese goal is economic, not military domination.
33
@Don Shipp.
I agree with this. It’s telling that studying engineering, not law, is a common pathway to a career in government in China. It could be a truly great nation if the leadership was not afraid of the population and did not pursue a self-defeating China First policy.
10
@Don Shipp.
Chinese are as well seeking political dominance (refer to Cathay Pacific & Hong Kong), which is a frightening. And they are already dominating our consumer good - try for a week to buy NO Chinese product.....!
"The United States is now in a direct ideological war with China over the shape of the world in the 21st century."
Roger, you are sooo right. Let's review the difference between the American Way and the Chinese Way.
The Chinese are individually and collectively willing to sacrifice and endure great hardship in order to own the future. Yes, some individuals get trampled in the process. And people sometimes wake up to find that they owe so much that they are effectively owned.
Each American feels entitled to their future and so feels no need to suffer for it. Because each individual is so entitled, there is no compunction about exploiting fellow citizens or bombing another nation into chaos. Only "I" matters in the land of perpetual childhood. Because the children enjoy a huge arsenal, people are not infrequently awoken by exploding bombs.
The real outrage is that the Chinese are not content to make our clothes and then launder them. That the laundry owner had been scrimping and slaving not because that is who he is, but that he had done it to buy the bigger house on your block.
Trump, embodies what America has become. So, yes, let's put the Chinese back in their place. If we keep letting them get ahead by hard work, they will steal the privilege that is our birthright. We need to be vigilant against the Chinese Way abroad as well as at home. Our illustrious NYC mayor is on the right track. Stop letting kids who put in an unfair amount of work get ahead. It's unAmerican!
22
I don’t think Bannon’s comment was hyperbolic at all. It’s an apt description of investment bankers and CEOs’ race to the bottom for labor and the environment - facilitated, of course, by neoliberal New Democrats and Establishment Republicans who sat on their hands and gave bankers and corporations carte blanche.
It also explains why working class people on both sides of the Atlantic will choose fascists over neoliberals - they’re desperate and will vote for absolutely anyone promising to apply the breaks in the race to the bottom.
You don’t have to be a socialist to recognize the fundamental sanity of the New Deal - and the intransigent insanity of neoliberalism. Of course governments rather than bankers need to be in charge of global economic integration. Social welfare and environmental responsibility are irrelevant to bankers.
31
It would have been good to include in this piece the strain of bigotry (against all who do not look like Europeans) that unfortunately runs through these actions. It would have also been good to include more than just a passing line about any increase in the well-being of the Chinese people being in the interest of the American people. Also it would have been good to mention the terrible repression of the Tibetans. What is very good in this piece, however, is the identification of the importance of democracy, and the horror of totalitarian, capitalist dictatorship.
9
It might be time to admit Trump not only got it "about right" but he actually reversed US policies vis a vis China against the experts' opinions. At least the country is finally seeing his wisdom.
4
If Trump is "about right" with his trade war, when are we going to know that we've won?
Is the goal to get China to bow to the United States? Is the goal to get the trade imbalance tilted to the United States? Is the goal to get American consumers to pay more in tariffs to increase Federal government revenue which is really a back-door tax increase on the middle class?
Please help me understand what it is that Trump is hoping to accomplish?
21
Trump is hoping to stay in office forever and avoid prison.
1
You are correct that Trump will link the HK protests to a trade deal. I expect that Trump, desperate to end the trade war before it costs him the 2020 election, will use US support (or potential US support) for the protesters as a bargaining chip in trade discussions and ultimately sell the HK protesters down the river. He will allow Beijing to have its way with the activists and protesters with at best a muted response from the US government to get concessions on trade from Xi. Isn't this consistent with how Trump operates?
13
Okay, I get it. China is a bad actor and a threat economically, not only because of their politics, but because they play the long game and we play quarter to quarter. And it is right to stand up to China and level the playing field, but saying Trump is about right on his China policy is ludicrus. The reality is Trump has fumbled the ball once again. Xi holds all the cards precisely because they play the long game. First Trump withdrew from the Trans Pacific Partnership limiting our leverage in Asia. Second Trump is now desperate to make a deal before the 2020 election, and Xi can wait him out. The result will be a favorable deal for China (and Trump will lie about it) or China will refuse to make a deal at all disappointing Trump supporters going to the polls. There is little chance our stable genius/great negotiator will get the result he wants and the country needs.
65
@Robert Antall
How would TPP have prevented or minimised China’s serial predations?
7
Why does everyone fear the belt and road initiative...... My real question is why doesn't the US have it's own belt and road initiative. Why did we give 2 trillion dollars to the very wealthy in this country and then not have any cash for our own version of the belt and road either here (infrastructure) or strategically overseas. Why did we drop the trade pact that would have isolated China. There are other ways to meeting China on economic battle grounds and beating them............but then you have to play chess and Mr. Trump is not even capable at checkers.
47
One more reason to support Sen. Warren. Tragic that Trump lacks the qualities of character that will be needed to persist and prevail in this mortal struggle w/ China (Xi will offer him an emolument or photo-op or bragging rights and he'll fold).
22
The really sad part of this is that, since the 1950's, the prevailing assumption was that economic development creates political stability. Huntington argued, back in 1968, that in fact, "economic development and political stability are two independent goals and progress toward one has no ncessary connection with the progress toward the other."
10
The broken clock gets no credit for being right twice a day. Does anyone even believe that trump can “negotiate” with China to a successful conclusion? Remember how easy trade wars used to be to win?
16
After reading many of the comments I think of Winston Churchill's famous observation, " America always does the right thing, after they have tried everything else." That, it would seem is our MO.
19
Since the 1980's there has been tremendous economic growth in the People's Republic of China. This has coincided with a switch from a socialist economy to a mixed economy with both state-owned companies and private businesses. The Chinese Communist Party, a democratic centralist organization rules the country. On a day to day basis President Xi leads with the standing committee of the Politburo.
The Chinese economy grew at high rates year after year as more and more Western companies moved production to China to take advantage of cheap labor. However production of high tech products in China has made it easy for Chinese technicians and engineers to become expert in the trade secrets of many leading edge companies making intellectual property theft easy to accomplish and difficult to prosecute. Unlicensed copying of software, movies, and TV shows is also a big problem.
In Hong Kong there are massive pro-democracy protests, but China has so far avoided a huge Tienanmen Square type massacre, probably because it hopes to control the situation with lesser measures. Right now, the Hong Kong government seems to be focusing on arresting leaders of the protest movement and then randomly arresting a few dozen protesters at a time. No concessions are being made. I find it hard to believe that Roger Cohen believes that President Trump has China policy about right, because it's hard to believe the trade war is related to what he sees as President Xi's autocratic vision.
10
This bit about American jobs going to China is not the fault of China or Corporate America. Its the fault of the US consumer. Its nice to ware the red hats but when shopping day rolls around its off to Walmart where everything is made in China and cheap. Everything we do is based on getting the cheapest deal, cheapest product, cheapest labor. China will correct itself as the people demand more and more for themselves. Look at Japan, during the 50 and 60 it was cheap stuff from Japan, not any more!
21
@Thomas Renner Could not agree more. As consumers were presented with good old made in the USA products versus a cheaper foreign knock off, American consumers sowed the seeds of our manufacturing base destruction by, guess what - buying the cheaper foreign knock off. That led to not just a decline in US manufacturing jobs, but an eventual decline and in some cases total loss of the skilled knowledge base to even consider bringing those lost jobs back to the US. American consumers to the delight of American corporations - i.e. greater profit by off shoring the product manufacturing. Walmart was delighted to sell Chinese made products to the very consumers that were losing their jobs to the Chinese making the products these same consumers used to make - the same ones wearing MAGA hats these days. Ask any manufacturer these days about "bringing manufacturing jobs back home" and you'll find they can't because we no longer have the skilled labor to do the kind of work the Chinese do.
12
@Thomas Renner I could not disagree more. The poor consumer was not asking the companies to set up shop in China, ship his job to China, produce the goods in China and deliver them in Walmart.
It is the CEOs, aided by FASB rules on accounting for stock options, executive compensation consultants facilitating award of huge stock options, boards spouting the mantra “shareholder value maximization”, who set up shop in China. Not the poor shopper at Walmart. It was supply begetting demand.
It is refreshing to see some CEOs and corporations moving away from this mantra.
17
Does the Chinese military engage in humanitarian efforts similar to those the U.S. military performs? That's the true indicator of a country's intent and morality.
7
A new anti-China consensus may arise between the two US parties, among America’s political class and amongst many Western nations in general. Similar to the consensus against the Soviets. This consensus may outlast Trump and last for decades. Many may disagree with Trump’s methods but many of his points on China are actually reasonable.
12
"the brave protesters in Hong Kong fighting for the preservation of the rule of law against the threat of absorption into lawless Chinese authoritarianism"?
The brave protesters in Hong Kong enjoy British democracy, British justice, British judges, British police officers and their official language is English. They contribute nothing to the PRC in taxes yet also enjoy the benefits of the world's longest bridge and the world's fastest trains connecting them to the rest of the world.
The rioters are not only ignoring the democratic process with which the British gifted them, but also ignoring rule of law.
Their tantrum has nothing whatever to do with the Mainland and everything to do with the fact that Hong Kong is no longer a comprador heaven and, even worse, has lower salaries and higher poverty levels than their nation as a whole.
6
Totally agree. But how do you call a US worker who is afraid to take few hours to see his doctor? Slave labor practices exist in the US and addressing them is also a way to confront China.
14
While it won’t bear thinking about Trump, thank you for calling out the danger of China’s powerful authoritarian regime. It’s true, as others said, you’ve left out that US corporations spirited the good union jobs away. Still, we, especially on the Left, have to start taking principled stances on authoritarian regimes—that is what will support the human rights of people living under them. We should be marching to support Hong Kong. The New Left was born taking on an authoritarianism that made war in SE Asia and enforced Jim Crow. Playing the enemy of my enemy is my friend, now, is a sickness. There is a place for the colonial/indigenous model, but it doesn’t fit every circumstance. Syria? How many tens of thousands have to die for us to weep? The Kurds? The Uyghurs? The Chechins, whom Putin bombed into rubble? Power-mad people arise whenever people are not protected by democratic institutions, sometimes the tyrants are colonialists, sometimes they are not. For those posting that it isn’t fair to call China’s government out, when we have much to answer for, I ask you to imagine saying that to Chinese citizens imprisoned (or worse) for fighting for the rights we value ourselves. If we take an anti-authoritarian, pro-Democracy stance, we’ll be able to fight both here and on behalf of others. A good measure: these regimes and political parties, are also male dominant, look for the women.
10
@SB We should be marching to defend democracy in the US.
1
The Trans Pacific Partnership that our best in the world diplomatic corps forged is brilliant. Trump's policy is not. TPP is a club that surrounds China that China is not invited to join. It is "speak softly and carry a big stick brilliance" that Trump regrets discarding.
Thankfully, the countries surrounding China that know to fear Han ethnocentrism are doing it without us. TPP with us would be so much more powerful than the current approach to China. And, our diplomats ensured it Incorporates learnings from past treaties to better protect and benefit all sectors of the American economy. It is WTO with labor rights required.
China presumes it will win the world for reasons ranging from population size to recent success to abusing the system with no repercussions to Han ethnocentrism. Let's rejoin TPP and work with our friends to help China understand how good cooperation can be.
28
Great comments here.
Any pushback on China is only going to work if the US and its European, North American and Asian allies stand together. Trump destroyed the allies trust in US leadership, and he gained nothing in doing that. Most Europeans currently fear the US more than China. No European politician would collaborate with Trump at this point to take on China. So in my view he has already lost the game.
101
China has no intentions of joining a global communion of countries seeking economic prosperity, human rights, and protection of the environment for humankind. Quite the contrary. President Xi seeks global domination for the remainder of the 21st century and beyond. He knows President Trump’s presidency is over in 2020 or 2024. As the self-appointed ruler for life, Xi has to simply bide his time until Trump, the disrupter, is gone. But every president, for the remainder of this century, has to regard China for the enemy that it is. China truly poses an existential threat to the U.S. China is not our friend.
17
That may be true, but a new anti-China consensus may arise between the two US parties and among America’s political class. Similar to that against the Soviets. This consensus may outlast Trump and last for decades. Many of Trump’s points on China are actually reasonable.
5
@Dan But none of his actions have a shred of strategy.
Donald Trump may be correct in assessing China as a potential threat to the United States. But his methods and manner for dealing with that threat seem unlikely to be effective, and likely cause great damage to our ability to ultimately prevail.
The US followed a policy of containment towards a massive, powerful, and aggressive Soviet Union in the decades following WWII. And it was this policy, the result of calm professional diplomacy, and a highly effective string of alliances that ultimately saw the Soviet Union collapse.
If we are to deal with the threat posed by an expansive and wealthy China, we need to redouble our commitment to the International Order. To organisations such as NATO and the TransPacific Partnership. Not abrogate our country's commitments in a Twitter rant.
If the US is remain the pre-eminent nation in the world, then we need to resume the mantle of leadership, generosity, friendship, and principle that guided every President from Harry Truman to Barack Obama. Not slip into the tawdry, and ill-fitting, glad rags of Donald Trump. A man who thinks he can "make great deals" with dictators and autocrats.
15
@Drew Henderson You write "likely cause great damage to our ability to ultimately prevail."
"If we are to deal with the threat posed by an expansive and wealthy China"
"If the US is remain the pre-eminent nation in the world," (sic)
These statements reflect a zero sum solution to what need not be a zero sum game. I indicated in my comment to Mr Cohen that I find his comment that this is an ideological conflict to be superficial and inflamatory. Your comments certainly substantiate that claim.
Authoritarian crony capitalism is the emergent ideology of Russia, China, of Brazil, much of Africa and Hispano America, the south Asian penisula, of Australia, AND the United States. American exceptionalism, the ability to assert moral authority was shaken by the events of the 1960s (although not initiated then), but has been uprooted by the present administration. It won't recover. And as expressed by those who approve competition as the overwhelming raison dêtre for conflict it is a frightening prospect for the resolution of inevitable problems deriving from this world view.
It really is time that the workers of the world unite recognizing the frauds of states, nationalism and borders, throw off their chains and save their planet from destruction by rapacious, short-sighted exploitation.
12
@Drew Henderson
Good comment. You fully understand the problem of personality which is at work here.
Although Donald Trump may finally grasp the ruthless ambition of President Xi Jinping and may even be willing, with great reluctance, to partner with our traditional allies in the European Union to put the brakes on China, Trump’s irresistible impulse for personal attention and his penchant for ignorant Tweets and reckless inconsistent statement to the press have nearly destroyed the one thing the United States has to sell which is truly unique in the world.
The one treasure which makes America the economic envy of every other country is our safe, stable government debt instruments.
Buying an American bond has been popular with investors from around the globe for decades because it is predictable.
Donald Trump’s mismanagement of the American economy has produced wild swings in our markets, exacerbated by the wild swings in Trump’s moods and his inane ramblings.
Trump’s right that China needed confronting but he does not care a whit about Xi’s authoritarian policies, indeed he envies them. He doesn’t even care about the American worker (look at his stance on labor unions), he just wants to “win” something according to his odd and elusive definition of that term. By his clumsy use of tariffs, by isolating the US from the countries that should be our allies in this fight, by ignoring the Hong Kong protests, Trump has strengthened Xi’s hand, not weakened it. That is far from getting China policy right.
23
@Michael Hill absolutely! I couldn't have summed it up better. If I knew Trump was sincere in standing up to China and actually had an intelligent, well-thought-out strategy instead of his mindless, knee-jerk, reactionary trade war posturing I'd support him. But as with all things Trump his behavior is more like cutting off the nose to spite the face.
It’s funny: it feels as if most of the comments, although written under different names, were written by the same person expressing similar sentiments.
Is this what authoritarianism looks like? If so then the Chinese people have my sympathy.
8
@Larry Dickman and you assume that it is the same person? could it be that many folks understand the situation?
You write: " The United States is now in a direct ideological war with China over the shape of the world in the 21st century." Sorry, but I don't see it as an ideological conflict when both systems promote the exploitation of workers to the benefit of the few. It's a conflict for control, but it's not ideological.
17
@D. Yohalem
Wonderful comment.
Often Roger fluctuates between being Gandhi Cohen and General Cohen. Gandhi Cohen sounds more like you do here. But never quite.
To the side. I've noticed Steve Bannon is being quoted more and more in the Times. It reflects something. What I don't know.
3
@D. Yohalem . Agreed. In one case it is a totalitarian state exploiting a population by means of a repressive government that violates the rule of law and suppresses a free press. In he other it is a would-be totalitarian state exploiting a population by means of a repressive government that violates the rule of law and suppresses a free press. But, give the Republicans time - the can turn that "would be" into reality.
2
@D. Yohalem Exactly.
2
There is nothing wrong with other countries having different political systems. China is a benign power because unlike some people in the US, it doesn’t try to change other countries’ political systems. Except for building military bases on some unpopulated islands (not as bad as when the US and UK kicked all the natives out of Diego Garcia to build a base there), all the examples of “external aggression” in this article are economic, essentially business deals that this article think won’t pay off but that the countries on the other side of the deal voluntarily agree to because they think those deals will pay off. Although I personally would not want to live in a system like China’s, we should accept a pluralistic world of different political systems, and not let our ideologies stand in the way of global economic development (the billions of people lifted out of extreme poverty since the 1980s is the biggest story in the world and ought to continue).
13
How predictable that no mention is made of greedy, irresponsible, exploitative, profit-driven corporate America, which abandoned American workers, cities, and towns (in a word: America) for the Chinese labor market.
Or the overtly bellicose, provocative actions of the American military elite, which has routinely conducted "military exercises" just miles off mainland China's coastline (just imagine if the Chinese were doing the same miles from New York or California). Nor is there mention of the billions in military funding that the US has provided to Taiwan.
And we can only wish for the day when Western writers will tire of lecturing other parts of the world about human rights and democracy.
Why Guantanamo is still open? How many people languish in American prisons? Why do mass shootings continue to plague American society? Why is there an ongoing American war in Afghanistan eighteen years later? Why do African Americans continue to be brutalized by police officers? Why is wealth inequality so extreme in such a fair and democratic country such as America?
And it's almost obscene to valorize Hong Kong students when ruling American elites have ensnared American students into a 21st century form of indentured servitude via student debt.
As recent cultural developments have demonstrated, there isn't one single narrative, but many narratives, and America's voice is no longer the primary or trusted one (much to the chagrin of its elites).
45
The Chinese government has very good writers! And make some very good points, too.
5
It is humorous to read “China gobbled up American heartland manufacturing jobs”. As if the innocent US companies were not trampling each other to get essentially free labor to make their products. Let’s not be disingenuous. Manufacturing moved to China because here in the US, a company is obligated to treat a worker as a human being. Companies have to pay for healthcare, provide retirement benefits, pay overtime, provide safe working conditions. Capitalists saw China as a place to avoid all this humanity that was dragging down the bottom line.
This brings us to what are the tariffs for? Is manufacturing coming here? Doubtful. It will just go to the next place where free labor can be found. Capitalists will pillage the next third-world country until they start looking out for themselves. Manufacturing isn’t coming to America when there is so many impoverished countries with workers ready to make stuff for America and collect our trash.
So what is the purpose of the tariffs?
81
When I visited Hong Kong and Canton in 1978 China had not begun the Deng policy that making money is good.
Both the people and the city were grey in color and poor. All that changed in a miraculous transformation to state run capitalism.
The Chinese work ethic far surpasses our American or European work ethic. Very soon China will assume the lead role throughout the world with the strongest economy.
7
I think Donald Trump believes he can have it both ways: force China into a corner so he can claim trade war victory, and somehow bring about a magical yet satisfactory ending to the strife in Hong Kong,
But so far, that approach is getting nowhere. The next few days will be critical as we watch the future of Hong Kong get settled right before our eyes.
3
I agree with much of Mr. Cohen's opinions on China policy--but not the article title. The President's erratic approach and poor implementation of a well meaning policy has too many drawbacks to enumerate here.
The US should realign China trade policy to protect national security interests. Two goals should guide the change: 1) domestic industrial production of technology-requiring products essential to military and national defense, and 2) protection of human & labor rights and the environment. Compromising these principles to allow American companies to reap higher profits has been shortsighted.
A combination of gradually increasing tariffs on strategic Chinese imports, congressionally allocated funding to subsidize industrial regrowth and revitalization, and consistent policies defining how the tariffs could be relaxed are required. China must demonstrate measurable progress on human and labor rights before tariffs are relaxed. The guiding principle should be that China must share our cultural values if they wish to return to open trade.
To implement this without disrupting trade-dependent business, tariff rate increases should be scheduled at increments of 2-4 %age points per year. This would allow impacted businesses time to adapt to slower, more predictable market changes. Congressional allocation of monies equal to or exceeding tariff proceeds for grants, loans, and other instruments for the specific purpose of boosting domestic production is essential.
5
Yes, President Donald Trump finally gets what President Xi Jinping is up to, and now Trump is trying to make up for lost time – and lost opportunities.
By blocking U.S. participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership with allies along the Pacific rim, Republican free-traders removed what would have been a counter-balance to China’s trade dominance in the area, as the sole reliable source of cheap, skilled labor on a big scale.
By refusing to enter into close trading agreements with allies in the European Union, Donald Trump has failed to establish another counterweight to the ambitious President Xi.
By cozying up to a militarily strong, but economically small, Russia with a mercurial and corrupt leader like Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump wasted focus – probably for Trump’s personal financial benefit – which ought to have been on China.
By relying on the sledge hammers of tariffs, instead of the surgical scalpels of enforcing patent and trademark protections against China and persuading our friends to do the same, Trump lost ground.
There are many other examples of lost opportunities, but Roger Cohen is correct that Trump finally gets China right.
8
Trump’s vacant stare, incoherent and wounding comments during his meeting with Yazidi Nobel Prize winner Nadia Murad and other victims of persecution, illustrates perfectly how little interest the president and his administration have in human rights violations -in China or elsewhere.
Trump may have paid lip service to the Hong Kong protests and Tiananmen Square, but I think his attitude is best summed up by Wilbur Ross’s comments during the president’s visit to Saudi Arabia in 2017 when he spoke of how “nice” it was not to see any protesters in the streets of Riyadh.
Mr. Cohen speaks of Trump wanting to “draw a line in the sand against Xi and his overreach,” but despite the Saudi slaughter of civilians in Yemen and the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, he has never seen fit to “draw a line in the sand” for MBS.” If things do go south in Hong Kong, don’t look for Trump to stand up for the protesters in any meaningful way.
19
After WWII the US was the single global super power. Despite this dominate position we were unable to prevent the Communist takeover of China. It is delusional to imagine that US power today can have anything but a trivial influence on Chinese destiny. The time when a British isle ruled the world are long gone. Out time has come and gone as well, we can't even bend little Cuba to our will.
6
Finally.
The seeds of a badly needed bipartisan consensus.
Now, and quickly, we need to mend fences with our traditional allies. The threat is real, and more powerful than Soviet Union ever was. Without allies a new dark age looms.
9
I agree that the Democrats should not let Trump own the China issue. Democrats, in the 2020 election campaign, need to put their own tough China policy front and center. Liberals for too long have pampered and appeased China. They need to show that they can be as tough as, but more intelligent than Trump in their response to China's authoritarian aspirations.
10
Once upon on a time, it was Nancy Pelosi who fought for human rights/labor rights if China were to get favored trading status—she lost, the corporations and their political allies won. Had she succeeded would we be living in very different world.
8
@SB I do not believe Pelosi is at or has been at the forefront of any issue. The frequent pattern is " and Nancy People said" long after the issue has been exploited by the media.
@Pragmatist "Liberals for too long have pampered and appeased China." I do not even know what that means anymore. But I do know every time I see that word being tossed around ... it ain't good. George H.W. Bush would not even say the "L" word. Like uttering the word would damage his brain.
1
America's opposition to China's "overreach" has nothing to do with morality. Be honest: the United States simply does not want competition from China. This strikes me as a somewhat reasonable article, except for the fact that it plays the game of the West — vilify China for beginning to be successful in the approach taken by the the colonial-imperialist West.
The United States wants to compete by not letting anyone else play the games that have worked for them. I don't hear anyone talking about the IP theft America committed to catch up to the Germans and Brits. At least China so far has not engaged in the blatant political manipulation and control America is famous for. Exactly how many governments has China overthrown, how many uprisings has it facilitated and financed, how many endless wars has it engaged in?
17
Trump wants to be the Lone Ranger that rides into town and saves the day.
American presidents learned long ago that a cooperative effort between numerous countries was preferable to a single minded approach.
Trump wants to undo all of Obama’s accomplishments and claim credit alone for everything.
Hopefully the next president will restore sanity to the American government.
16
@Michael Kittle
China only seeks co-operation so that it can
expand its economic empire and it military presence.
Under Obama, China militarily took over the
South China Sea...
So much for compromise...
1
Let's separate the wheat from the chaff.
If there are objective historians writing in 2040. it is likely they will bestow on Deng Xiaoping the title of China's greatest ruler of the modern era, certainly greater than Mao and XI, who hs given the lie to Beijing's perennial bromide about China, that it is not an imperial power.
Except for the massacre. where Deng concluded the student rebels could lift tha mandate of heaven from the party, Deng was, as Cohen said, prepared to wait. Moreover, in telling all China it was OK to make money, he beat back a revanchist movement against economic progress and a degree of political moderation. With Xi, that prudence has been lost and China's Belt and Road has become a vehicle rent seeking and environmental disaster.
Trump understands China is a problem but his policies are don't deal with the problem. Huff and puff tariff diplomacy that sacrifices the American family farm not so much to China as to big agrobusiness does not address either China's unfair economic practice or its overweening territorial ambitions, especially in Southeast Asian. A lack of coherent American policy undercuts Cohen's thesis.
7
None of you cared about China before Trump. Neither did I. In fact, Trump was ridiculed for his fixation on China in 2016. But Trump has won the argument on China in the minds of the American people. The Democrats know it too. Now they resort to the more nuanced criticism that he's doing the right thing the 'wrong' way -- never mind the fact that several Democratic presidential candidates support *keeping* Trump's tariffs on China if elected. History will acknowledge Trump's leadership on this issue, and the effort to discredit that is a lost cause.
5
@Aaron The "more nuanced criticism" that must result from adhering to this tariff policy must be reality-based, unlike any response Trump has adopted to a problem. The cost to the country of the tariff policy, in part, is a massive bailout of American farmers. The "more nuanced criticism" must be to actually pay for that bailout, rather than racking up even more debt.
7
@Aaron
I suggest that China has been on the radar long before Mr. Trump took the mantle, as evidenced by the TPP, a surgical effort to hamper China’s ambitions, just one prong to that end.
2
@Patty
How would TPP have hampered China’s ambitions?
1
I just watched the documentary on Fuyao Glass in Dayton. The Chinese workers forced to come to the States for 2 years to help set up the plant said they worked 12 hour days 6 days a week and I don't recall any mention of paid holidays. They found the American workers lazy by comparison. As soon as they could they fired older workers and those who wanted a union and began to replace people with robotics. The actual physical plant had many unsafe physical features.
The company was given millions of dollars in tax breaks and other incentives to provide very few jobs that were mind numbingly repetitive but could result in catastrophic injuries if mistakes were made. Clearly, the Chinese aren't the only ones who know how to make glass but they sure know how to exploit people and American lawmakers are letting them do it. If this is how a "return of manufacturing" will look then be careful what you wish for MAGA folks.
19
@Agnate Yeah I old enough to remember the peace dividends American workers got after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Seems to me we are well on our way of emulating China methods in the US.
Mr. Cohen articulates a very concise take.
The Chinese juggernaut, with its global quest, exploits America for wealth and knowledge and now Russia for military expediency. Real friends and allies are not part of their playbook.
7
"Trump Has China Policy About Right"
"If you focus on the signal and not the wildly gyrating noise, President Trump has gotten China policy about right."
I read the piece several times and couldn't find the China Policy it spruiked.
Where is it so I can assess it?
5
What a preposterous piece. Yes, China's behavior in many areas is problematic in ways that have to be address, but the way it's addressed is crucial. Our relation ship with China is incredibly complicated, and reforming it will require a consistently-applied, highly intelligent plan, not the scattershot tantrums of a man in the Oval Office with the intellect and maturity of a 5 year-old.
If you think I'm being hyperbolic, consider this quote from 2015:
"When I look at myself in the first grade and I look at myself now, I’m basically the same. The temperament is not that different."
20
@RGreen......well said from a fellow Akronite.
How is it that I came all the way from Akron to San Francisco and then Hawaii with retirement in France?
Looking back to my childhood in Akron, Ohio I cant believe how America has changed!
1
I don't ascribe all of the malevolent intentions and actions to China that Mr. Cohen and Mr. Trump do. After all, it was American companies and our government who aided and abetted the Chinese, allowing them the economic might they now enjoy. Do they steal our technology? Of course, and that should be stopped. Do we steal their technology and do American companies steal other competitors' technology? All day long and the litigation amongst high tech companies is proof of its prevalence.
American companies take advantage of Chinese cheap labor and lack of environmental regulations to maximize their profits. Isn't that really an American problem?
Would I like to live under a Communist regime? Absolutely not, but it seems like a whole lot of the world doesn't mind doing so. Are the Chinese military aggressors? In comparison to the United States, they are absolute doves. They have not invaded another country, as America has, in many, many years. Are the Chinese developing their military potential? Of course they are, but not nearly at the rate America is and has for decades. The Chinese still only have 380 nuclear weapons to our 4,000.
Finally, it would be nice if America could employ some moral authority in negotiating with the Chinese. But unfortunately we have a President and ruling party in this country that are as corrupt, or maybe more so, than the Chinese. I think we should focus on getting our own house in order before disrupting someone else's.
94
Tibet?
2
@Rich D An outstanding comment.
3
Obama’s attempt to pivot to East Asia was the right strategy. Unfortunately, Middle East dysfunction thwarted that move and continues to be the center of conflict, with no end in sight. Too bad we can’t deep six the whole region.
Xi is smart and ruthless. I hope America produces leaders who recognize the challenge China poses and are smart enough to fashion a foreign policy capable of countering China’s global ambitions.
4
The US press lies about China. Non-stop. For 90% of recorded history, China was the richest, most powerful, most advanced nation. Then, in 1422, the Emperor found the Chinese version of the Amish: if Confucius didn't have it, we don't need it. This fit with the Victorian novelists who wrote about how bad the industrial revolution was for the proletariat, and the Emperor didn't want that. So China turned back, relying on the Great Wall to keep them safe. Then the Manchu bribed a guard to open a gate in the Great Wall, and conquered China. Then the British conquered the Manchu, and stole so much they made China one of the world's poorest countries. Them days is now long gone. China is once again the largest economy by PPP.
From a country where few had electricity in 1970, now most have A/C for when it's hot. From a country where few ever had meat or dairy, most have meat with every meal and frequently have pizza with real cheese.
And China, while spending a tiny fraction as much on its military as the US, is probably far stronger (and I strongly recommend the US not try a confrontation with China--it will NOT turn out well).
14
Roger's usual audience may be appalled that he actually has something positive to say about Trump. But even Trump can stumble into doing something right...which is to confront China's cheating mercantilism and aggressive nationalism and the threat they pose to the Western liberal order. Yes, Trump's policies are helter-skelter, but they FRAME the problem, which now seems one of the few things agreed by both political parties and by business and labor. No other President had the guts to take this on, but Trump (for whatever twisted reason) has done so. Praise is due.
Confronting China in a trade war is inevitably going to be painful to us..as well as to them. That's the price we must pay for being crack-addicted for years to cheap Chinese goods and over-dependence on the Chinese market, making us vulnerable to technology transfer blackmail...not to mention technology espionage. We must disentangle the two economies and supply chains, and that will bring disruption, but it is worth it in the long run to curb the economic heft and the political ambitions of a hostile would-be hegemon whose values are totally antithetic to our own. Bravo, Roger, for telling it as it is.
12
Roger Cohen, you make it seem like Trump is leading the charge for human rights in China. Trump doesn't care about human rights. Does he care about justice for Jamal Kashoggi or human rights for the people in Saudi Arabia? No, he'd rather sell MBS billions of dollars of weapons.
If Trump were the leader of China, he would be worse than Xi. The growth of trade between the US and China preceded both Trump and Xi. Trump pursues trade war with China to pump up his base. I doubt that he ever asked Ivanka not to outsource her products to China before he was elected.
29
This is partly a self-inflicted wound. We’ve only been training Chinese engineers and scientists at our premier universities for the last thirty years. What did we think the outcome would be? Taught them everything they know about high tech, and we’re surprised? Maybe a ‘tariff’ on training our competitors might be considered.
17
@PAD
The London School of Economics has applications in two languages, English and Chinese. It is not only the U.S. seeking Chinese students.
7
The effeteness of the pundit class is extraordinary! Have they ever been in a negotiation wherein one side was determined to advance it's position? Do they think there is a win win outcome possibility in the U.S. Chinese relationship? Well, there isn't.
The continuation of the status quo is unsustainable. It is unsustainable economically. It is unsustainable militarily. It has certainly been unsustainable from the standpoint of resource depletion and the additional pollution China imposes on the world.
2016 may have also proved our current relationship with China is unsustainable at the U.S. ballot box.
Trump's style is utterly perfect for the gargantuan task of resetting our relationship with China. His unpredictability and most of all his willingness to go back and up the deal are essential to keeping the Chinese unbalanced. Every single fault he has becomes a strength as he has the total self confidence to move forward against the wishes of Wall Street and in the face of the punditry who wring their little hands about some increases in prices - forgetting that a dominant China will one day stick a bayonet in their children's eye as they inevitably expand in one of four directions.
Trump is an absolute gift to this nation. Just as Patton was in WWII. He has the audacity to win. It's too bad you can't set aside your hate long enough to see the good that Trump is doing.
5
@Arthur Taylor, trump is a gift to Putin, and Kim, and BiBi but certainly not to this country. While taking on China is something that has been done by most recent presidents, usually through diplomacy and behind-the-scenes negotiations, suggesting trump has the intellect, strategic wisdom, or even a goal is laughable. Don't kid yourself.
34
@Arthur Taylor The problem is not that we hate Trump. The problem is that Trump hates us. What he says and does every day makes this clear. He dislikes most Americans, and hates what we stand for. Which is, "Out of the many -- one." Check it out, Arthur. It's written on the cash in your wallet.
The "good" that Trump is doing for the country is -- what? Yes, everyone knows that something had to be done about China's unfair, unstable, and predatory trade practices. But the way that Trump is going about it boils down to his usual incoherent, incompetent, childish bluster and feeble see-sawing. The world needs American leadership in order to build a united, forceful policy to force the Chinese leadership to realize that they must trade in a fair, legitimate, honest, and legal manner, or they are going to be out of the world's economic system. Trump, however, has alienated the leadership and population of every nation in the world. With the possible exception of North Korea, Saudi Arabia, and Russia. A truly wonderful bunch.
1
Mr. Cohen is right about President Xi and the need to confront China. He is wrong about Donald Trump.
Trump is not upset at China because of their behavior and authoritarianism. He is angry because we have a trade deficit with the Chinese. In Trump's mind, a trade deficit means another country is "winning". And Trump hates that. The fact that Trump doesn't know what he's talking about and doesn't seem to be able to learn is a side issue.
Mr. Cohen misdiagnoses the reasons Trump wants to be tough on China.
51
If you ask ordinary Chinese in China, they do love their country and their leader. Their daily living standard are improving, and they are also patriotic. When Mr. Cohen talked about "lawless" Chinese authoritarianism, he is talking about the LAWS made by the Western Imperialism in the last few hundred years when China had no input making them. The current world order is becoming multipolar, there is not the old world Mr. Cohen accustoms too.
12
“The Western Imperialism” you disdain, and the rising Chinese power that opposes it, which you seem to value, is really comes down to this:
On all of the Earth, (including in the West), before the Enlightenment, there was no freedom of religion; there was no freedom of the press; there was no freedom of expression. There was no democracy, but only Kings and Queens. Today China imprisons millions of people because of their religion; China jails those who speak freely. China has a ruler who is not chosen by the people and cannot be replaced by the people. So yes, you are correct. There is a formidable new power in the world, China, which represents the darkness that the West used to be before or Enlightenment.
It is one thing to be proud that one region of the world is no longer the sole power, and that your area has gained power. But you should think about what your new power really stands for. China may now be a great power, but that does not mean it is a good country.
@Sam
If I was an ordinary Chinese in China I'd say the same thing.
Mr. Cohen, you excel in foreign affairs analysis, but even a Rolex occasionally breaks down.
Trump is right to identify bad-faith negotiations, blatant trade agreement violations, reneged contracts, and corporate espionage. However, please remember he has not suggested a single policy change in response to the CCP's bad actions. Nor has he proposed any new policies.
His tariffs are, according to his own statements, in response to the trade deficit, which Chona does not control since the CCP stopped fixing exchange rates years ago. Trump pulled us out of TPP, a real, smart attempt to combat China's illegal moves.
He has said nothing about Xi's slaughter of his own people, because he clearly does not care.
Trump gets the tone right, but none of the substance and he misses the bigger picture.
15
@pastorkirk
Yep, all that AND he gets the tone WRONG.
Bravo! An article that presents a realistic view of the Chinese regime and acknowledges that Trump - alone - has had the courage to confront it.
Trump is a deeply flawed man. That doesn't automatically make him wrong on every subject. His victory in the 2020 election will be because most people want a leader who actually gets stuff done.
8
Cancelled Pan Pacific and started a unilateral trade war with an autocratic government that doesn’t much care about
the deprivation of its own people. Smart. Wouldn’t it have been smarter to counterbalance China and change its behavior with tighter economic ties to other Asian nations? Tariffs will do NOTHING. But oh, I forgot, Trump doesn’t do JV’s. So we’ll all suffer
1
@Mark
The only things he's gotten done are horrible things. Largely things like rolling back regulations on corporations to wreak havoc on the environment, recently with undoing methane regulations.
He has done nothing to better our lives. Unless you are a white nationalist, it's true he has been aiding them. They can celebrate.
1
@Mark
What is Trump getting done?
1
I had no problem with taking on China had it been done in a sane and ordered way. Putting it simply, if you want to put the maximum pressure on China, first you don’t scrap the alliance pit together to do just that (TPP) and you don’t alienate the strongest ally you could have Europe making a solid front with them.
Second, you don’t assume your adversary will just roll over, especially in a political system
which is less dependent on public support (ie mo election worries) and where they’re used to playing a long game. Third try to act consistently, so your own corporations know what to expect and can plan accordingly.
Fourth, ask for and listen to expert advice, so you may actually know that “trade wars are actually NOT easy to win “
Oh and get your facts right!
China does not pay the tariffs you put on them, just as Mexico isn’t paying for the wall!
Of course the above course is what a smart, sane President would do! I need say no more!
29
@Steven Chinn
While I agree he shouldn't have dumped the TPP it's still progressing and the US can re-join anytime.
Not sure I'd trust the EU as an ally against China. The EU will look after themselves first.
For the reasons you state China will not roll over and has for years refused to do so through normal methods. So Trumps typical chaotic style just may work. The CCP are as scared of an economic downtown as Trump is for 2020.
3
Fully agree with Mr. Cohen, and applaud his courage as a pundit to actually say Trump got something "about right."
We should have begun dealing with China during the Obama administration, when most of the damage was done in terms of IP theft, building military islands, and demanding technology transfer. But Obama was hamstrung by the still-powerful establishment of business and political leaders who are scared of upsetting China, and imperiling any revenue to be gained from using their cheap labor. Indeed, most pundits continue to hold that the trade tariffs and diplomatic huff with China are or will be "disastrous"!
Kudos to Cohen, and to Trump for their courage.
7
Your facts are wrong.
China started demanding technology transfer decades ago. It didn’t start under Obama, not even close.
2
Down the road apiece in Honduras, China is making a big move in the solar energy market.
China’s Yingli Green Energy, is supply solar panels to a 50-megawatt complex in Nacaome, Honduras.
The rise of China evolved in concert with the rise of the cult of the CEO back at the ranch.
9
Those of us that have been ringing the alarm about China for over a decade were hoping that the US and the West would wake up to the threat of Chinese economic nationalism, unfair trade practices and human rights abuses - but Trump has not been the answer. He has actually undermined the cause with his reckless, simple-minded tariff war and strategic blunders. If anything, he has divided us from the allies we needed, harmed the US economy and discredited a strong pushback on China. We need a smart strategy that includes a coalition of democracies. We control about a third of REG global economy on a good day and we cannot succeed in demanding China change without allies. Trump is actually, ironically, China’s benefactor.
25
People are giving Trump credit for something beyond his capacity, the ability to plan or implement a policy. The trade war with china was something Trump thought was going to be easy and a bone to his base. Now that he has started a trade war he doesn't have a clue what to do next. There is/was no plan on implementing or achieving an end game here. This will not turn out well for us
62
Trump is right, but China is stuck. 30 years ago they were a country of poor peasant farmers. Today, they have lifted about 500 million of those peasants out of poverty through industrialization. The problem is that the advanced countries have now advanced past the Industrial Age and are now in the Knowledge Age
China is desperate to catch up to the advanced countries, but lack knowledge based economy infrastructure of research college and universities, public private partnerships, technology transfer, intellectual property laws, basic property rights, etc., that drive the US and European economies and the future.
There is no reason to believe that an authoritarian centrally planned communist system can compete in a technology based knowledge economy world where freedom of ideas and collaboration, rule of law, and property rights are critical.
China is terrified that they will become the permanent slave labor force to the advanced economies and this is why they steal intellectual property and commit corporate espionage. But even this has limits, and China has no other way of competing.
At a State level we are witnessing an increasing gap between the advance knowledge based economies and the 20th century styled industrial ones. China on a per capita basis is still a poor country, and the per capital income gap between them and the rich countries will only grow over time.
11
There are several problem addressed in this article:
1. China treats its people horribly. We should set an example for the rest of the world to follow.
2. American businesses and farmers want to take advantage of China's vast markets and labor pools. If we don't like that, change our laws on the flow of capital and foreign tax benefits. Would our economic powerhouses tolerate that?
3. China is a technological competitor. To deal with that, roll up our sleeves and compete. It's always worked.
4. China will become a military competitor. Develop alliances.
Instead we have a trade war, which puts all the blame on China for not correcting ourselves.
13
@AIR
The problem with number 4 is that our so-called potential alliance partners are very comfortable with the USA doing all the heavy lifting - especially in the Pacific.
What is Germany's or France's military contribution to keeping the seaways open in Pacific waters? As President Obama said, "they are freeloaders."
5
And the problem with #3 is that China is not a technological competitor in the sense we think of competitors. Stealing your opponent's technology, heavily subsidizing your own companies so they can do business at a loss until they run their US competitors into bankruptcy, forcing your opponent's companies to hand over their technology - these are not instances of fair competition but acts of economic aggression.
7
Why does the US then allow the export of tear gas munitions to Hong Kong ? The European Union, and the UK first, have withdrawn export licenses for tear gas, but the US hasn't. US companies profit handsomely from Chinese communist oppression and violence.
37
How many Trump Towers in Chinese cities would it take for Trump to sell out the U.S. to China?
How much has Trump gotten to sell out the U.S. to Russia?
And Russia is not the only country Trump has sold the U.S. out to for money. Of course, in this, Trump is only following the lead of most Republican and Democratic Congresspeople and Senators, and the RNC and DNC.
10
@Robert Henry Eller It is a continuation of deep state propaganda to regurgitate the lie of Trump's alliance with Russia. There was a major investigation by people who were very intent on finding something - anything - linking Trump to Russia. The investigation failed in it's primary purpose (charges of obstruction have nothing to do with the primary intent of the investigation).
We have even gone so far as to strip the justice owed to each and every American citizen - that, fundamentally, one is presumed innocent - we have stripped that right from President Trump as per Nadler's question to Mueller: "Did you exonerate the President?"
When will the obscene hatred - that far exceeds any statement by the President - ever be called out for despicable ugliness it is?
No Klansmen referring to Obama ever matched the vituperative hatred shown by the left towards Trump. Keep going though, it reveals them for what they are.
1
The trouble with Trump's strategy is that it takes down a lot of other countries as well. But I guess Americans don't care about that as long as they win.
If Trump wins his trade war, America will increase its dominance in the world by means of sanctions, tariffs, military and economic might. These strategies aren't written into trade deals or alliances but are the grease that enables America to dictate terms with its allies and trading partners.
The New York Times Australian bureau recently asked Australian subscribers "Which country of great importance to Australia do you fear more right now: China, or the United States?" In my view, in the short term, America is definitely the greatest threat to Australia. Trump's tariffs and sanctions have the very real chance of tanking our economy: soon and significantly. In the longer term, China potentially is a threat to our independence in the same way that America is now. With Trump's penchant for breaking deals and alliances, all that we have sacrificed to gain America's favour is under threat. At least, for the moment, our politicians are willing to criticise China but are mute when it comes to America. I pity the UK now, wanting to forge trade deals with America in its much-weakened position under Brexit.
Xi might be a dictator at home, but Trump is a dictator on the world stage with an eye on becoming a dictator at home.
21
@Barry Long Very well said! America is indeed a big threat to Australia's interests in the Asia-Pacific. Recently, US "hawk" Mike Pompeo was in Australia trying to sell the idea of basing US missiles in Darwin and this seemed to have support from Australian Foreign Minister Maryse Payne, who at the same time said "China was a 'vitally important partner' to Australia."
According to the Financial Review: "Deploying the missiles to northern Australia would put Chinese targets in range: Darwin to Shanghai is about 5000 kilometres while China's military installations on disputed features in the South China Sea are 3000 kilometres away."
What message is that to our "vitally important" partner?
You can't have your cake and eat it too!
1
If, God forbid, China will one day replace the United States as the "world's policeman," you and those who complain about the US will bitterly regret the good ol' days of American dominance, as flawed as it's admittedly been. For one, enjoy the new version of the Five Eyes, involving a brotherly alliance of China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and Australia.
Trump is not doing this about China because of China's actions. He is doing it to fire up his base for the next election. Trump could care less about the economic relationship between China and the US since Trump does not have a hotel in China.
49
@Jeff,
Not really Trump's base, yet; but yep, I agree with his commitment to strict immigration, although it is some what vacillating in its enforcement.
I agree as well with the actions on confronting China's aggressive trade policies and blatant thievery.
No Democrat has a well thought out policy on immigration enforcement nor on confrontation of Chinese miscreants.
Perhaps Trump recalls how the Reagan amnesty deal opened the floodgates to massive illegal immigration; never again.
3
@JRS
The only problem with your argument is the democrats haven’t been in a position of power in order to pass some sort of comprehensive immigration reform, up until the the 2018 midterms the Republican Party has been in control of congress, and the GOP doesn’t want a comprehensive immigration policy, because that would mean that they wouldn’t be able to fear monger, using brown people as the villain. It would mean that the republicans would have to actually have policies, instead of a nothing burger while hiding behind fear. No one of any importance wants open borders, sure there are some that don’t believe in borders anywhere in the world, and most sane people know that’s not reasonable, nor is it the answer.
But humane immigration and a path to citizenship, comprehensive reform is what is needed. This country lacks the political leadership to put in place the infrastructure, meaning immigration courts that have the judges, clean sanitary holding areas while they are being processed, that is what Ellis island was for the monetary support that’s needed to process immigrants and requests for asylum. That is how other industrialized countries do it, they have comprehensive immigration. Fear mongering is for people that don’t have passports, .
12
@James,
A citizen of this nation, I do recall a Presidency, a House of Representatives as well as a Senate controlled by Democrats in 2009-2010; they didn’t address immigration, they blinked then choked but there was nary an attempt to address this massive problem; they hide behind rhetoric and banter; they have no intention to change the current crises, other than to release the constrains placed on illegal entry if and when they have control of government, I hope it doesn’t happen; we know their intentions, we reject their complacency.
1
Where Trump is wrong, as he is with most everything, is his insistence on acting alone - instead of with allies.
47
What Donald Trump said about Hong Kong not becoming another Tiananmen was scripted, though no less praiseworthy. His own thoughts on Tiananmen are that China's leaders showed "strength." The implication being that it was praiseworthy.
The more aggressive stance toward Beijing in the military realm is at least better than in the economic realm. In the latest Foreign Affairs, Douglas Irwin and Chad Brown have an essay on "Trump's Assault on the Global Trading System."
"China would have to end forced technology transfers, stop stealing intellectual property, curtail subsidies to state-owned enterprises, abandon industrial policies designed to gain technological dominance, stop harassing foreign firms, and open markets that the government closed to give control to domestic firms. In other words, America wants China to turn its state-dominated economy into a market-based one overnight. ...
"If the administration had been serious about getting a deal from China, it would have [brought] along Japan and the EU, both of which have similar economic concerns." The Trump policies, Irwin and Brown claim, are not protectionism in the service of boosting specific industries so much as attempted economic decoupling. When China violates agreements, we can "join with trading partners and allies to file cases with the WTO." Where no explicit violations occur, we can "[multilaterally or unilaterally] sanction unfair practices." ... And on TPP, Warren and Trump concurred. They were both wrong.
3
@David L, Jr
If these forced technology transfers are really happening then why do US companies keep moving there. Why didn’t they just stay here in the good old USA, I mean why not just build the factories here and give China the bird. I’ll tell you why, the 500 plus million consumers, that’s why. And let’s not forget the good old shareholders, they benefit from companies they hold shares in that operate in China. I’m sick and tired of hearing about technology transfers, and theft of intellectual property, yet companies keep on moving there, Tesla being one, they are building a factory there, isn’t Elon worried about theft of his intellectual property, or being forced to “transfer” his technology, to say Nio or some other EV maker in China, yet there he his. His main argument, consumers, access to consumers.
To your point, the way you change a countries behavior is to have what GHW Bush would have called “a coalition”. Most Trump supporters don’t know what that word means, it simply means what you can’t do alone, you get like minded countries to band together, after all the US created the WTO, and that’s what it’s for to keep countries on the straight and narrow. Destroying economies, not to mention this countries agricultural elf, these people bet it all on Trump, the Chines won’t be back to buy in the quantity farmers are used to, not during trumps rein anyway, and then it will take years.
7
Thank you Roger, a very insightful piece you wrote here. The modest ways of dealing with China (TPP etc.) no longer matched Xi’s bold new ways of brutally furthering Chinese interests in the world.
Trump, not troubled by the self doubt of cerebral people, inadvertently did the right thing by confronting China. Let’s hope he doesn’t back off out of fear of not being elected due to (short term) economic repercussions.
If we need to produce in low wage countries, let’s do it in small, harmless countries like Vietnam and Mexico.
8
@Anne Because trade wars have historically been so productive. How can you criticize the idea behind the Trans Pacific Partnership when the US pulled out before putting it in place.
7
@Anne. Sorry trump did it all wrong!
1
Mr. Cohen you are not wrong about China and Xi. You did not mention Tibet but that human rights issue still is an albatross. And Xi has made inroads into South east Asia through Myanmar and supported its repressive regime. The threat from China both economically and militarily is very real and Trump deserves some credit for bringing it into the national spot light.
But policies have two aspects, the first stating the problem, and the second carrying out a policy consistently and effectively. Of the two the second is far more important than just stating an issue especially since Trump's statements are all over the map and vary from moment to moment and because of this Xi has mostly learned to ignore him and wait for him to leave. Trump is one man with limited powers to act effectively as he is hampered by our political system which has a lot to say and do about what he can do. He creates tariffs out of thin air thinking that China will kow tow, but it is our farmers and businesses who take it on the neck, something that could spell his political doom. On top of this he has created enemies out of our allies who are needed to support any policy he comes up with.
Does Trump deserve so much credit when he has failed to create an atmosphere that will lead to a change in Chinese policies? Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
6
@just Robert
Thank you for remembering the atrocities in Tibet, which many have forgotten or were never aware of them.
2
Cohen mixes in the protests in Hong Kong with a trade war the president started. That is a flawed ingredient for justifying his conclusion that the president has China policy "right."
In any other country, the violence that some HK protesters would be met with immediate martial law. Fortunately, the majority of the thousands of protesters are at it peacefully and that alone will prevent something like martial law provided the violent protesters can be isolated either by political and moral forces or by arrest.
Note that modern China has never invaded another country, and the US does this as a matter of course and history. Its goals today are accomplished economically, and the US cannot compete with that, so the aggressive president turns to trade wars, which never turn out well.
Cohen's arguments simply don't correspond to reality. It was not China who started the trade war, but it is the president who has started a trade war with multiple countries.
23
@Svirchev China’s dealings with HK and Uighurs reveal how intolerant Xi’s regime is. Cohen correctly points out that much of its international cooperation is a thin layer of veneer.
The flaw of repressive regimes is lack of innovation. The shy, nerdy kid with glasses doesn’t become a brilliant scientist there so to speak. If we prevent China from stealing our R&D, their rise will be thwarted.
1
"China can’t join all the right international clubs and go on playing by its own rules. It can’t make some trade “deal” and then not be held fully accountable, relying on the infinite global capacity to turn a blind eye to its predations."
Hmm...what other country does that sound like?
14
Unfortunately, Trump really has no "strategy" for dealing with China, and appears about as concerned about China's terrible human rights record as he does about Russian interference in US elections. China's policies on trade, on theft of technology and intellectual property, on territorial disputes with neighbors, and on other matters are deeply destabilizing, and a threat to the US in particular. These require coordinated diplomatic responses with our allies, and a long-term, bipartisan approach domestically, neither of which Trump has any interest in, or is remotely capable of organizing, even if he had the interest.
24
@Mike
Trump definitely has a strategy the only question is "will it work".
4
Trump absolutely has a China strategy. His strategy is to ratchet up tariffs until China blinks. His premise being that our economy can withstand tariffs longer than China’s. That said, the strategy is flawed. Trump will blink at any first sign of recession because he knows a recession will doom his re-election. Xi has no such worries. Time is on China’s side. Trump missed that part in his strategy.
4
@KJ
I generally agree with your comment, but I think that it's more complicated than Trump's fears over the election. Trump has blustered, threatened and tried to intimidate through his career. Sometimes it worked; sometimes he went bankrupt.
During his G-7 press conference, Trump said it's how he negotiates and he believes it will be successful. I've read "expert" opinion that China is also under pressure, but I think you are correct that time is on China's side.
The US is still an important player in the world economy and politics, but it seems as if Trump and his crew are trying to undermine that power. A global recession would be very dangerous because it would likely provide opportunity to ruthless people around the world. That's the sad reality we face.
1
The US has built an economy around exporting its exploitation to China. Additionally, the US has gifted its collective resources to the plutocracy by creating a bottomless abyss of debt owned by the Chinese. And all the while, we’ve always known that China will steal patents or islands or anything else for that matter until and beyond getting called out for it. We also understand that the Chinese have a 100 year plan to rule the world and will stop at nothing to see their ends met even if it means enslaving half their population toward that end. But rather than looking inward as a nation and determining what America really stands for and how to split from this toxic and parasitic relationship, we entrust a reality TV personality playing the role of demagogue who has no understanding of international economic theory. He creates tariffs on the fly with rules that change each day, depending on his moods and who talks to him. Sorry, but this is not a plan.
173
@Mickey
For those to whom you owe a little money they trust you will pay it back. For those to whom you owe a moderate amount - they want a guarantee. For those to whom you owe gargantuan sums - they must protect you or lose what you owe. China is not going to demand that the US hand over New York as payment- and they have little to no way to insist on being paid back. They were not as smart as they thought.
9
@DED
Except what happens if the US defaults on the trillions borrowed, who do we then turn to when the balance on our credit card is next to zero, sure the debt ceiling the republicans used to prolong the 2008 recession, blathering something about debt, debt that they don’t seem to concerned about now. What happens to the full faith and credit of the US if we defaulted on loans, so much for our currency. Currency has no real asset backing it, Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard. So our currency is backed only by the full faith and credit of the United States, meaning that dollar is backed solely on the say so of the government, if the world loses faith that the US won’t stiff them, currency falls. Before the dollar was the worlds currency the British Sterling was it, the Sterling is no longer the worlds currency. Look where the UK is on the world order, that will be the US.
8
Think the author missed the boat here.
“It would be very hard to deal if they do violence" was a transparently empty threat and oozed insecurity. There can be no doubt that Xi, a vastly polished political actor, smelled the desperation.
12
TPP would have weakened China's trade dominance and brought more trade partners, including Japan, closer to the US. Withrawing from it strengthened China's standing in the world but Trump thought he could do better. Trump is delusional if he believes he can negotiate a bilateral trade deal that will level the playing field. China is likely to be an important issue in 2020, but Elizabeth Warren is the only candidate that understands the China threat? Not by a longshot.
6
@Jrinsc Your comment and analysis are excellent - much better than the article which gives Trump credit he doesn’t deserve. Also, how many countries’ governments has the U.S. interfered with, its treatment of Native Americans, it’s racism, etc. Trump was actually factual for once when he said we are not that innocent.
5
@Ava. Nearly every country, if it's around long enough, has done some bad things, some worse than others. That is no reason to not act today.
@Ava - the Chinese Dictatorship is every bit as racist as the US. In fact, more so because they are where we were decades ago. If you were ever allowed to speak to a Tibetan or a Uighur or a Mongol you would know this.
About right for whom? Yes sir. America has certainly suffered for the last decades we've done business with China. GDP? The Dow?
I wasn't aware all our poor tech companies were run by minors and not responsible for their actions? You'll have to admit. Apple has suffered mightily while doing business with China.
If those tech companies didn't want to compete in the "big leagues" I'm betting they wouldn't have signed on.
Now? Chaos? You've seen nothing yet. Unless trump bails it's all just getting started. Not sure the old theme trump has used forever: get so far in debt "you" own the bank, not the other way around will fly this time around.
4
The idea that the US is in a global fight with China over the future of the world is delusional. We can’t even figure out how to give all our citizens healthcare.
Whatever fights Trump or Cohen pick around the world, you can be sure it will be other people’s children who will fight them.
American society is in decay. We should focus on the hard work of turning that around. Leave the grandiose dreams of global leadership for another day...
123
Liberals are in danger of making the same mistake as with the Soviet Union - failing to confront the existential threat to liberal democracy in our urge to live and let live, allowing our dislike for a president and his tactics to overwhelm our recognition of the underlying threat.
This article gets it absolutely right. We cannot have a free market when major counterparties practice mercantilism as state policy, fail to live up to their agreements (as seen in Hong Kong every day) and believe in authoritarianism. We will need to bear the short-term pain, rather than listening to the moaning of economists like Krugman about how consumers are getting hurt.
8
"he’s right that China can’t join all the right international clubs and go on playing by its own rules. It can’t make some trade “deal” and then not be held fully accountable,"....No, Trump blew it. The Obama Administration negotiated TPP for exactly the reasons discussed. It was designed to force China to comply without threats or hitting them with a hammer. TPP was handed to Trump, but it was too subtle for Trump to grasp, so he ignored it. Instead he chose the route of bluff and bluster; to go it alone with tariffs and make a lot of threatening noise. So now he has dug himself a hole with no way out. The farm economy is already in the dumpster with the rest of the economy likely soon to follow. The only thing Trump can do now is surrender and pretend he earned a great victory.
25
Trump is playing the same game he always plays.
If Xi is as smart as Kim he can easily manipulate Trump by giving Trump some bauble while Xi cominties to bully on as priority one.
Trump is up for another Cold War about as much as any other John Bircher.
And the democrats will change the subject in a panic of delusions of their own at risk if the question comes up about what to do about the imperial, vengeful, and about as Marxist as Kim, delusions of Xi. While libertarians and most democrats pretend communist dictatorship is just an illusion invent by Americans to keep the military industrial complex going. It is taught in schools that way and the single most popular opinion offered in comments on Times articles about China.
2
Cohen can't be serious. Trump's China policies have been a disaster and he doesn't care at all about people in Hong Kong. He just wants to be flattered by Xi. That's all it will take for Xi to win.
14
Roger, You are indeed a better man then your xenophobic rant would suggest. China has demonstrated an enviable level of restraint in responding to Trump’s “Let’s Make a Deal” approach to diplomacy. And, by comparison China is demonstrating more than restraint.
Trump has seriously eroded America’s moral authority. Earlier this week China’s Foreign Minister contradicted Trump’s assertions that 2 high level Chinese officials had contacted the White House to resume trade discussions. Today, most people believe the Chinese official over our own President.
Trump has failed to put forward a national vision other than to build walls to protect us from phantom foes or to sending us all back to the dusty coal mines. Meanwhile, in my neighborhood in Beijing (where I spend part of the year) children this summer are discussing quantum physics and the cause of the Chernobyl disaster.
Trump has fractured America’s alliances as part of his failed attempts to “make deals.” Why does America have to abandon its principals and its allies to “make deals?” China’s Belt and Road Initiative is hardly a zero sum game.
Roger, America is broken and divided. Imagine if we had spent the $4 trillion we waisted in Iraq on new roads, bridges, airports, and public transportation. Imagine if we had a single common goal that united and excited all Americans? China’s infrastructure far surpasses America’s.
Roger, if you take a closer look at the people of China today you will see yourself 70 years ago.
143
Blame China for the trade imbalance, are you kidding? US manufacturing beat a path to China to save money on labor, cost of goods to drive their bottom line.
I know because I’ve been traveling to China since 1989.
They aren’t innocent by any stretch of the imagination but they offered cheap labor, no environmental protections and every industry in America took advantage of this opportunity.
509
@PatMurphy77
Agree fully. Our companies not only sent our manufacturing to them but the technology/patents to mine rare minerals, the latest solar technology including moving production there, the list goes on. In other words we sold our children's future for short term monetary gain by the few. Just plain old greed got us where we are.
139
@Pat Murphy you are absolutely right. I worked with and China for a major home furnishings company. We couldn’t source furniture from North Carolina, even if we tried, because the American consumer wanted the cheap imports. We exported all the manufacturing waste—chemicals and paint—right along with that.
42
@PatMurphy77 Thank for the perspective, which seems so obvious but has been short changed in the media, in my opinion. I don’t understand why people keep blaming China for being better capitalists than the Americans. They simply used their “unfair and sustainable competitive advantage” (I learned in a US business school that we should all strive for one). And the US companies took the opportunity to improve their profitability. Can’t blame them either, because that’s what a capitalist is supposed to do.
Unless we are willing to change the US economy to some socialist model, I would suggest we start figuring out how to compete (instead of how to complain).
30
“Greed is good” was a memorable line in the movie Wall Street. It is imbedded in almost all large companies, without saying so. Lowering cost and increasing sales trumps every other concern an international company has. Trade deals with all countries must conform to American standards established to protect American workers. When our workers make more, theirs must too. If countries want to sell to America, they must follow our standards. Only then, will our workers be given the increases in wages needed to raise the middle class. I’m tired of hearing companies telling workers that jobs will be lost if they get a raise. Wouldn’t it be great if negotiations were what consumers could afford, not, it can be done somewhere else cheaper. Wouldn’t it be even better if we had environmental laws we force on our corporations that would have to be done at companies in other countries, if they wanted to do business here? I’m dreaming, but if America is to be a leader in climate change or anything else, our consumer demand could force other countries to conform, or lose us as a customer.
5
@Jay Except we're smaller than China or India as a consumer market.
2
"Xi believes in the sacredness of the Chinese Communist Party, not the sacredness of the individual."
We flee to the extremes. But we need to look for a middle ground between the claims of the individual and those of society. A choice between Mao and Ayn Rand is no choice at all. Both are deeply flawed.
America is stuck in the throes of hyper-individualism. A handful of entrepreneurs become insanely wealthy, and their bevy of court lackeys and political enablers comfortably occupy the next lower rung. Everyone who is not rich or a celebrity is devalued or manipulated. We boastfully revel in the illusion of political freedom but somehow the popular will is thwarted at every turn.
Meanwhile, amidst this excess roads crumble and bridges collapse, water becomes poisonous, universities embrace servitude as glorified trade schools, routine health care costs a fortune, and angry ordinary folk struggle to get by. National survival requires a bloated and useless military but somehow we can't quite afford basic social services.
The Chinese have no political freedom. Security cameras are ubiquitous. But in the cities they have new roads, bridges, apartments, offices, trains and airports. Small businesses thrive. And ordinary Chinese do not cower in the shadows. The government can't watch everybody at once, no matter how many cameras are installed. The cautiously apolitical Chinese life has suddenly become comfortable.
So which is better? Can we locate a middle ground?
11
The author seems confused about Trump's economic agenda with respect to erecting trade barriers against China. That policy is rooted in trying establish economic dominance over China in much the same way that Great Britain tried to establish economic dominance over the US when we were an up and coming economy in the late 1800s.
Much as we like to accuse China about unfair trade practices, we engage in them too. We strong arm the WTO to achieve the balance that we desire is in our favor. Maybe not so much with China but with a lot of countries over which the US wields significant buying power.
We use threat of nuclear power to bludgeon other countries into submission. We use our economic might to ruthlessly impose sanctions on countries often with catastrophic consequences to their civilian populations. We have meddled in the affairs of every country in Central and most of South America rendering much of that territory ineffective in setting robust domestic agendas.
Yes, China is authoritarian and deserves condemnation. However, the movement to fight such authoritarianism needs to come from within its territories. I don't hear Xi making noises about Trump the bigot, or Trump the misogynist or Trump the vagabond.
So come now Mr. Cohen ?
15
There are many ways to draw lines in the sand. Taxing Americans via tariffs, praising Xi, and abandoning our alliances is harming the U.S.
and the rest of the world just as much as China. Saying Trump has it right because he's standing up to China is simplistic.
68
The people of Hong Kong deserve a champion, but they don’t have one in Donald Trump.
There is his decided fondness for authoritarians the world over and his decided lack of concern for freedom movements everywhere.
For this in particular, Trump showed the depths of his interest by describing the situation as the ‘Hong Kong thing’ and expressing a wish that it be resolved peacefully and with enlightenment for everyone. Nothing to pin one’s hopes on here.
Some finest hour.
9
OK, Roger, China now is big and successful and challenging the West economically and philosophically, but why is that a need for confrontation rather than collaboration. If it were true that the U.S. was merely concerned about trade and intellectual property rights, then work multilaterally through the UN and WHO towards collective goals, but it is not and Trump's aggression is ultimately about fear and racism. Yes, he is wrong as ususal.
Xi is no Mao and a vast majority of Chinese are satisfied and proud of their government and their achievements. Sadly, a larger majority of Chinese like the direction of their government than Americans do. China is not "lawless", but very safe and lawful. Xi didn't abolish presidential term limits, the Politburo did and it is they who determine who is appointed president, not Xi. He is not an emperor and China government is very much a collective process dedicated to the greater welfare of Chinese citizen rather than the glory of any individual. No, the Belt & Road is not to "lock" Eurasia into "dependence" on China, but "interdependence" and cooperation rather than Western "regime change" tactics. Yes, the Chinese people believe in the "sacredness" of the CCP and the West would be wise to respect this belief. There, of course, is nothing sacred about Trump or the GOP.
14
This piece is actually fairly Trumpian, in that it hits us between the eyes with seemingly bold generalities, and offers almost no specifics.
It seems the author’s main (and only) objective is, as Trump’s usually is, simply to attract attention—and leave it at that. That is, leave it to somebody else to worry about the details (i.e., specifics).
What about the specifics—you know, those details, where the devil lives, the ones which often determine success or failure?
This piece seems to be saying Trump’s determination to stand up to Xi is just about right.
Ok.
Notions are one thing; execution, another. Surely Trump’s execution, with respect to international trade, generally, is the issue, and surely that warrants a D, at best. With that in mind, I think his conduct concerning China is far from “about right.” All in all, I’d say that, concerning Chiba, he’s earned a C-, and that that’s being kind.
But, at the time, the man is having an effect. He’s setting the bar for execution, broadly, so low that even one of our once greatest news and opinion sources, The NY Times, is, it seems, being affected by his example.
13
This piece is actually fairly Trumpian, in that it hits us between the eyes with seemingly bold generalities, and offers almost no specifics.
It seems the author’s main (and only) objective is, as Trump’s usually is, simply to attract attention—and leave it at that. That is, leave it to somebody else to worry about the details (i.e., specifics).
What about the specifics—you know, those details, where the devil lives, the ones which often determine success or failure?
This piece seems to be saying Trump’s determination to stand up to Xi is just about right.
Ok.
Notions are one thing; execution, another. Surely Trump’s execution, with respect to international trade, generally, is the issue, and surely that warrants a D, at best. With that in mind, I think his conduct concerning China is far from “about right.” All in all, I’d say that, concerning Chiba, he’s earned a C-, and that that’s being kind.
But, at the time, the man is having an effect. He’s setting the bar for execution, broadly, so low that even one of our once greatest news and opinion sources, The NY Times, is, it seems, being affected by his example.
2
There is nothing hyperbolic about Steve Bannon’s quote in Cohen’s column. Cf the birth of slavery and capitalism in the US.
As for the average Chinese guy in the street: playing to him from the West is hard. The belief that China’s rise is preordained is somewhat similar to our notion of manifest destiny.
Xi or someone else, it doesn’t matter. The US-China battle is destined to be played out for decades
4
I have been commenting in support of Trump’s tariffs on China. Now, I am happy to see a respected columnist joined me in support of Trump’s trade war with China. Either Trump looses or wins in 2020, China will loose. If Trump wins, he will lower the boom on China in his second term. If he thinks he will loose, he lowers the boom anyway. In addition, Warren coming around in support of Trump’s policy on China that does not bode well for China. We have to win against China on this trade war, not just for the economic welfare of our country but also win the ideological warfare that China initiated.
10
@ Kodali, Trump and Republicans are becoming more totalitarian - like China. China, is not becoming more democratic like the US. The US is losing the battle because Trump and Republicans do not believe in democracy.
2
Protest is HK is outburst of youthful exuberance perhaps with some instigation of USA. That is the response I have seen from many people there. But again I am 63 year old myself and way past any naïveté.
I don’t see anything wrong with China’s 2025 goal. Our corporations exported jobs to China and agreed to share their IP and patents. We failed to invest in our infrastructure, lavished the rich with tax break and government bailout ten years ago.
Xi’s move to grab absolute power will come back to haunt China.
China doesn’t have to evolved into a reflection of the USA or the west. I think Asians feel that Singapore is a much better model.
5
@M Alem They agreed to IP theft? I don't think so.
Roger Cohen is usually not only right, but eloquent s well. Therefore I find it puzzling that he would write that Trump has China Policy right.
Cohen writes, "China can’t join all the right international clubs and go on playing by its own rules. It can’t make some trade 'deal' and then not be held fully accountable, relying on the infinite global capacity to turn a blind eye to its predations".
Uncharacteristically Cohen fails to note that, instead of allying the United States with the "the right international clubs", Trump has been doing all he can to destroy our alliances and our ability to work together with them to curb China's bad behavior and hold it fully accountable.
By destroying or abandoning the alliances that can best help to increase pressure on China to improve its behavior, Trump clearly does not have his China policy right.
35
@James Cohen is not endorsing Trump, only writing that a reckoning with China was overdue and he is the first president to do it. While Obama was hoping TPP would work, China was buying anything ranging from rare mineral mines in Africa, Piraeus harbor in Greece, manufacturing and technology/engineering companies like Volvo, GE appliances, Motorola mobility, ...
4
@Anne
Was China buying all those things, or were Chinese businesses doing what businesses always do: go for the biggest profits possible?
The fact that the Chinese government is very willing to get involved in businesses to advance their national interest should not obscure the fact that US businesses have always tried to exploit resources and that US policies over the years have helped them do just that.
2
No doubt that China's aggression needs to be countered by the US and our allies. It requires a well-thought-out campaign, with coordinated efforts among our trading partners in the free world.
President Trump is clearly not up to this Monumental task as he lacks The business prowess and steady negotiating skills to succeed. Just look to his own businesses he has bankrupted for proof.
9
"President Trump has gotten China policy about right."
No he hasn't. Execution counts.
Trump has made a hash of it, as he has with every other deal he has attempted as President.
Execution counts. If you are a fan of say, Medicare for All and a President Warren or a President Sanders mismanages the politics of it or the execution of it they will rightfully deserve criticism.
Trump has mismanaged the politics and the execution of trade policy with China. And on Hong Kong? He hasn't even showed up.
198
@LT
I would like to add to your points. Leadership is at the very least three parts - one part vision, one part execution and one part team building. If you don't have at least these three efforts, the result will be failure.
Trump barely has a vision for anything (that Mr. Cohen thinks Trump has anything resembling a vision for China is puzzling). Trump's vision, execution and team building skills speaks for themselves - total absolute FAILURE.
21
@Econfix
In fact, the one part vision is all that Sanders and Warren offer. Both lack the execution part, that's for sure. Neither have successfully implemented anything. As for team building, not sure either of them have a deep bench of seasoned experts behind them to fill an administration. Both are controversial.
China has serious structural problems that are well known. It has an aging population without adequate replacement. Vast areas are underdeveloped. The financial system is corrupt. The economy is dependent on exports and as we are now seeing can be squeezed. Already other countries in SE Asia look more attractive. When I visited central Europe this spring Chinese tourists were everywhere in huge numbers, I assume the middle class. Having seen the freedom of democracy will they be willing to tolerate something different at home? I quite agree with you Mr. Cohen there is a lot of paper in the tiger. Trump has them by their tender parts and if he hangs on their hearts and minds will follow.
7
This article, especially the headline, is a real headscratcher.
A better headline would be "Trump uses the wrong tools to address the wrong problems with China."
Mr. Cohen speaks at length about China's totalitarian regime. Trump doesn't care one whit about that. He's been entirely focused on the trade deficit, a subject which he doesn't really understand and sees as a score in a game.
Trump's been entirely focused on trade, but he has no goal. There's no way to win when he hasn't defined what he wants from his trade war. It sure isn't an improvement in human rights in China.
As Paul Krugman has repeatedly pointed out here in the Times, tariffs would be a terrible tool to get what Trump wants, even if Trump knew what he wanted. Further, Trump's completely alienated all of our allies who could have helped apply pressure to China. Instead he's going it alone.
Trump's China policy is not "about right." It's pretty much entirely wrong.
563
"The president’s statement linking a trade deal and the Hong Kong demonstrations — “It would be very hard to deal if they do violence"... was perhaps his finest hour. I just hope he meant it, despite the contempt he has otherwise shown for human rights."
Unfortunately, with Trump, you can never be absoutely sure about any position he takes. But he does treat Xi differently than, say, Vladimir Putin whom it's abundantly clear he envies.
With Chinese troops poised to pounce, we're going to know pretty soon whether Xi means business in handling the protestors. And if he does act by ruthlessness, we'll also know how Trump responds.
And whether or not, when it comes to China, if he gets it right more than that proverbial clock.
The outcome will determine the trajectory of the global economy--and by extension, how happy global citizens are should China be subdued.
6
Trump: “It would be very hard to deal if they do violence. I mean, if it’s another Tiananmen Square, it’s — I think it’s a very hard thing to do if there’s violence.”
If it comes down to a question of tRump doing a deal and getting reelected, or not doing one and suffering the political consequences of a weakening economy, I'll wager my reproductive organs on the former.
6
The problem for the US, and the foundation of Xi's power rest on the same pillar; the billion people in China who don't want to know the truth about their regime and because they have no outside news sources, don't have to.
I worked with China's factories for decades. I have Chinese friends here in the US. When you talk to any of them about corruption in China or the beat down in Hong Kong or coal fired pollution or concentration camps for The Uirgurs, you get is blank stare and the party line which inevitably places all blame for anything on outside forces intent on keeping China down.
The Chinese people voluntarily cede their right to the truth every day and will do so as long as they are making money and believe their lives are improving.
Trump's has no idea what he's doing but his tactics may indeed help drive their fake economy - one that is entirely dependent on lavish government support - into a relapse. If that happens, if the population finally gets a dose of reality, Xi may get hurt. Until then, he will have a field day.
11
Pres. Trump is the first US President who seems to understand that the US and China are contesting global hegemony in virtually every field of human endeavor.
And that China’s astonishing military outlays, especially those devoted to securing a “First Line Blue Water Navy”, raise the specter of a “War in the Pacific” between the 2 nations. Some older strategic analysts recall the early 1930’s when concerns about Japan’s Blue Water Navy developed. Without major change in how China is governed the odds of a War in the Pacific are steadily increasing. By some estimates within a decade China will have matched the US Blue Water Navy in the Pacific. Given that the US has not had any designs on China one need only ask why such huge Chinese outlays are forthcoming.
7
Right. What the trade economist Krugman fails to understand is that the world’s resources are finite and that China is going after them aggressively. It’s not a simplistic “let’s optimize the GDP of both countries by trading”.
The world, heating up and with 7.5 billion people and rising, is getting ugly fast and we need to have leaders who are willing to secure our interests.
1
I applaud Mr Cohen for his clear sighted objectivity regarding China's geopolitical and domestic strategic goals, despite the side effect of it's aura of approbation regarding the policies of Presiden Trump. Kudos to you Mr Cohen. Now, if only Mr Tom Freidman would do something similar; i.e. acknowledge that the world was never " flat ", but was strongly tilted toward China.
6
Roger you state Trump is on the right track, but in almost every paragraph you say he's flailing. That doesn't make for a comfortable feeling that we're going to persevere in this new endeavor to place China in a checkmate.
I couldn't agree with you more about what needs to be done to compete with China on a level playing field. It's just that the President is too unstable, and could very easily place the country in a less favorable position rather than a favorable one.
38
The title of this article is very misleading. It should have been titled
"Trump Has China TRADE Policy About Right".
Mr. Cohen repeatedly alludes to the repression of the Chinese people by their own government, rightly concluding that it is fundamentally un-American. He also makes a point of highlighting the ongoing Hong Kong protests as illustrative of Xi's authoritarian world view. How can one speak of Trump's "China policy" as a whole without even mentioning that, under Trump, the U.S. has ceased applying any meaningful pressure to China on issues of human rights and Democratic freedom?
The reader is left to wonder whether Mr. Cohen admires Xi's authoritarianism as much as Trump does, or whether he simply does not consider democracy or human rights a "policy".
14
Roger, you are a better person than I. Call it what you want, but it will be a cold day in Hades before I give Trump any credit for anything. He deserves diddly-squat from this woman. The end does not justify the means. And look how this man is threatening our economy, most especially agriculture. Yes, our farmers are willing, for some unfathomable reason, to stick by their man. They trust him, also unfathomable. I do not, at all. There is no doubt that Xi is a dictator, his country guilty of human rights' violations and aggression beyond its borders. But we must consider the source of its critics. Trump's intentions of standing up to China has nothing to do with "making America great again." It has everything to do with greed, however..making the rich, richer while making sure his own pockets will be lined with gold. That being said, you were spot on in your praise of Elizabeth Warren. She will be able to do what Trump is incapable of doing. For that matter, any of our leading candidates are up to the task.
331
@Kathy Lollock
Nicely written and I completely concur. Let’s not give credit where it is not due.
Trump sometimes speaks harshly if Xi, but that’s because he finds it useful to have a geopolitical foil and a scapegoat for our economic problems. Political expediency is hardly laudable. Besides, Trump takes it back when they are ‘getting along nicely,’ hardly a principled position.
And yes, any Democratic candidate would put Trump to shame.
Thanks for what you wrote. Take care.
30
@NM Thank you, NM. Your reply to me is insightful, and I hope more of us read it. (Frankly, I am still trying to recover from Trump's latest heinous move of telling the critically ill here via Deferred Medical Action that they must leave and go back home within the next 30 days. That is really eating at me.)
28
@Kathy Lollock
What has Warren proposed that gives you such confidence in her vis-a-vis China?
I haven't heard one thing from her that is anything more than academic research and papers called "plans."
The policy of engaging China is surely over, but that of 'Strategic Competition' ? It needs strategic cooperation with all global majors, and these nations trade more with China than anybody else.
If US draws China into a one on one confrontation on economy, as is happening right now, China will have to balance between its domestic audience, US threats and its stature in the eyes of all other nations. In this triple contexts scenario, risk of miscalculations increase. It has not happened yet.
1
Trump a man pretty much void of any principle cannot be relied on the do the right thing. Sad but true. He made a mess of the trade war using the blunt instrument of tariffs as a tool for reshaping trade between the two countries. If I were a protester in Hong Kong I would not look to the West to bail me out.
209
The last sentence is bizarre and seems to have been added in there to promote Elizabeth Warren. Nothing about Elizabeth Warren tells me that she is the most capable of handling US-China relations.
5
Sure, it's the right mission, but with the (very, very) wrong person in the lead.
So it would be interesting to hear from the Democratic candidates -- any of whom I would prefer infinitely over Trump -- about how they would deal with China to drive the security and economic interests of the U.S. and to spread freedom.
42
@Cary
Maybe something like the TPP, which the Obama administration worked on for quite a long time. The Democrats can just revive that and improve on it.
101