China has made it clear in its defence white papers and in many public statements by leaders that Tibet, Taiwan, Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands and South China Sea are inalienable parts of China and comprise its core areas which means these are non-negotiable in its foreign policy. Further developments in Xinjiang, and Hong Kong have led the Pentagon to make public statements which has been critiqued by Beijing and has led to strong diplomatic verbal exchanges between the two countries. The interesting part is that the list of China’s core areas is ever expanding and US is making conscious efforts to undermine it.
Former president of the United States, Barack Obama once said, “The relationship between the United States and China is the most important bilateral relationships of the 21st centuryâ€. This statement still stands true today, and maybe even more, given the recent developments. The United States and China share a bittersweet relationship. However, ever since the US administration has experienced a change, the prior cooperation has turned more into a competition. Since the 2018 trade war, the economies of both the nations have been in the limelight. But other aspects of the Sino- US relations have also been affected greatly due to the battling markets.
Apart from being keenly interested in the Chinese economy, the US is also venturing out other avenues through which it can get ahead of its rival. The US is trying to implement the age-old strategy of an ‘enemy’s enemy being one's friend’. In the recent past the United States has passed many bills and laws concerning some key areas that have been in conflict with China. States like Tibet, Taiwan, and Xinjiang, fall relatively weak as compared to China. By voicing the demands of the minorities on the grounds of human rights, the US gets to paint a desirable picture of itself on the international front. By depicting China to be a tyrant that oppresses its own population, the US is playing on a subtle scheme to overpower its rival. But the catch lies in the ultra-fine patterns that have emerged in its successive policies.
Xinjiang
China introduced its ‘Strike Hard’ policy in the May of 2014. This policy aimed at countering terrorism and the increasing extremism within its borders. However, this strategy soon took an ugly turn when over 1,000,000 Muslims were reportedly sent to internment camps. Along with the multiple accounts of human rights abuses and ‘political re-education camps’ that were brought to light by media sources, China faced a major international backlash. In the United Nations session of October, 2019, more than two dozen countries condemned China for its actions. One nation, however, stood out from the rest in its accusations.
The United States saw this upheaval as a great opportunity to bank on and target its rival. Since mid- 2018, discussions regarding imposition of sanctions on China for its human rights violations had started taking place in the US parliament. By November 14, 2018, the first bill of the ‘Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act’ was introduced. This bill specifically mentioned imposing sanctions against senior Chinese officials and individuals who were responsible for the violations. The bill particularly mentioned the name of Chen Quanguo, who is currently the Communist Party secretary of Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous region. In the following months, the bill included stronger amendments which targeted the Chinese tech companies. Most of the sanctions were levied on private security firms and surveillance companies.
By June of 2019, US had blacklisted five Chinese firms that worked with super computing. This included one of the leading supercomputer makers Sugon and its three affiliates. These companies were put on the Entity list, on the grounds of their activities being contrary to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United states. These firms are said to be owned by the Chinese Army Research institute, which aim to develop ‘exascale’ high generation computing systems that would aid in military modernization. According to technology analyst, Paul Triolo, these technologies will assist in running nuclear simulations, hypersonic algorithms, calculating missile trajectories and other such military related tasks. Apart from laying restrictions on Chinese firms, the US also limited the role of its own technology agencies. US firms were barred from selling technology to Chinese organizations without government approval. The restrictions were not simply limited to five companies. Within the next three months, i.e. October, 2019, 28 Chinese companies had made it to the Entity list. US’s rationale behind levying sanctions of these 28 firms was that these companies were ‘involved in building detention camps and surveillance systems, used to track and monitor Uighurs’.
Amidst US’s efforts at apparently safeguarding the rights of the Uighur Muslims and other minorities residing in Xinjiang, it is crucial to pay attention to the timing of these incidents. The bill was introduced during an ongoing trade war between the US and China, which began in 2018. With the markets collapsing on both sides, the US needed to find different ways to weaken its competitor. Defending the rights of the Uighur Muslims was just an pretense to impose more sanctions on Chinese companies. Apart from that this move made by the US served another purpose. It was to accuse China of cyber warfare and data theft.
Earlier in 2018, the US government got into a spat with Huawei officials, which still continues. The United States accused the company of spying on behalf of the Chinese administration. The attack on the company enraged China, and led to diplomatic tensions between both the nations. So far, Huawei too has made it on the Entity list and its future relations with the US appear to be bleak.
Taiwan
Located off the coast of China, the tiny island of Taiwan has been a frequent subject of interest between the United States and China. Even though the issue of Taiwan's recognition as a state dates back to the 1990’s, it still appears to be a matter of concern. The US' support of Taiwan’s independence and acknowledging its role in the international space, has caused considerable discomfort for China.
In 2016, Donald Trump was sworn into the presidential office. That very year the president of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, contacted the US president via a phone call. This was a historic move as it was the first time since 1979 that a US president had directly spoken to the ROC (Republic of China) president. This phone call proved to play a pivotal point in the US - Taiwan relationship, as the US's stance regarding Taiwan’s statehood seemed to have altered. What began as ‘unofficial ties’ soon turned out to be a strategic partnership.
The Taiwan Travel Act was first passed in 2018, according to which healthy economic, diplomatic and cultural ties were maintained between the two states. But this was soon to experience a slight shift. By May of 2019, the TAIPEI (Taiwan Allies International Protection and Enhancement Initiative) act was introduced in the parliament. This bill suggested ramping up USA's defence aids to the island state and support it at international forums. It recommended that Taiwan should become a member of international organizations which did not have statehood as a criterion, and enroll as an observer state for institutions that had so.
The US's reasoning behind backing Taiwan was to protect it from China's escalating diplomatic coercion. Taiwan’s international space kept shrinking considerably in the past few years, as China repeatedly interfered with those nations that recognised Taiwan as a nation, even going to the extent of imposing sanctions on multinational companies and airline firms that failed to address Taiwan as a part of the People’s Republic of China. As a result of the pressure experienced from a strong country like China, Taiwan lost 7 of its allies, bringing down the number from 22 to 15.
US’s introduction of the TAIPEI bill which was passed on the 26th of March, 2020, enraged China. However, it wasn't the open support that caused the controversy, but rather what was mentioned in the bill. The act refers to Taiwan as a ‘nation’. The mere use of the word ‘nation’ speaks volumes about the shift in policies that has taken place within the three countries. The US's altered partnership with Taiwan can play a strategic role in the US- China relations. Its increased defence aid too is an area to keep a close eye on.
Tibet
Similar to Taiwan, Tibet too has been subjected to China's policies of absolute rule. China has repeatedly meddled with Tibet's religious and political rights for years now. However, the support from the international community in terms of maintaining the Buddhist state’s autonomy has been unwavering. And since the Trump administration came to power in 2016, the endorsement that Tibet previously received from the US seems to have surged considerably.
On 30th January, 2020, the Tibetan policy and support act of 2019 was passed by the US parliament. This act was a modification of the Tibetan policy act of 2002 , which made an effort to encourage the Chinese government and the Dalai Lama to hold dialogues in order to resolve their issues. According to the latest change made in 2020, the US has clearly stated that if China tries to interfere into the selection process of the successor of Dalai Lama, it would meet with diplomatic sanctions. Apart from protecting Tibet’s cultural and religious autonomy, the bill also proposed to bolster its diplomatic relations with the state. The United States wishes to set up a consulate in Lhasa, and has refused to permit the establishment of any Chinese consulates within the US borders, if China fails to comply with its requests.
The proposition of laying the foundations of a consulate in Lhasa, is a clear message to China that the scales are shifting with regards to Tibet's autonomy and the traction it enjoys from the US. However, this move was just to bolster an earlier policy that was passed by the US legislation. In December of 2018, the US parliament passed the reciprocal access to Tibet law. This was to ensure that US citizens, including tourists, journalists, and diplomats, enjoyed the freedom to enter certain parts of Tibet, which was not allowed by the Chinese government. But the bill wasn't passed without thorough research on part of the US government. From May 19th to 25th, 2019, US ambassador to China, Terry Branstad, scheduled a visit to Tibet. This was the first visit to the disputed region since 2015. This proved to be strategic as China is notorious for denying ambassadorial visits to certain parts of the nation. Out of 9 requests for consular visits sent to China, it had rejected 5 of them, one of them being Branstad's as well.
With the Trump administration in power, so far there have been two bills passed in favour of Tibet. Even though the bill tried to present a picture of protecting the religious and cultural values of Tibet, this affinity also came with hidden motives. The more assertive shift towards Tibet, during an ensuing trade war between the US and China, leaves many questions in its wake.
Further US undertaking group sail and exercises in South China Sea clearly highlights that the US did not give heed to China’s core interests and making every possible move to infringe it through politics and proactive legislation against Chinese interests.
Conclusion
In the world of international politics, it is no secret that a state can go to any extent to preserve its national interests. In the case of US and China too, this stands true. Yet, the manner in which both the nations have made use of their foreign policy tactics has been an interesting subject to look at, especially in the recent times. The current status of US-China relations gives one an impression that it is riddled with controversies and blame games. However, there is more than what meets the eye.
On merely observing the three cases mentioned above, one would recognise that all allegations that the United States makes against China are mainly on the basis of human rights violations and protection of indigenous religion and culture. In Xinjiang, the US advocated to protect the rights of the Uighur Muslims. This seems ironic, given US’s recent policies that have been implicated to be xenophobic in nature, in addition to the surging levels of violence under the Trump administration, not to mention the US's grand plan of building a wall to keep the Mexicans out. The travel ban imposed on majority Muslim countries by Trump, also indicates a certain degree of rising Islamophobia. US’s history of linking terrorism with Islam post the 9/11 attacks eventually led to the series of atrocities that were carried out at Guantanamo bay. Amidst such transgressions taking place on its own soil, it stands out as odd that the US would be supporting the rights of the Uighur Muslims so vehemently.
Apart from contradicting its own strategies, its interference with respect to these three states hints at a grand idea that the US has always stood for from its very inception, Democracy. By supporting these states to become autonomous and vouching for their rights, US has reiterated that it would want procedures to be followed in a democratic manner. In the latest modification that it brought about in the Tibetan Policy Act of 2002, it has made an insertion stating, “democratically elected leaders of the Tibetan communityâ€. The addition of this clause subtly denotes an anti-communist take on the situation. By endorsing these states, US in a very clever way has managed to play the ideology card against Communist China. Similar to the times of the Cold War, when an ideological battle brewed between the Soviet Union and the US. The repeated emphasis on democratic values by the US is almost an attempt to curb the influence of China's Communism before it impacts other nations.
Be it clashing economies or a struggle to be the most powerful state on the international front, relations between the US and China are one of the most important bilateral relations in the 21st century. In the wake of the current pandemic, these relations have been clearly strained more than ever before. As the United States grapples to maintain its stronghold on global politics against the rising dominance of China, it would be crucial to look at the future policies of US as an attempt to counter China’s growth.
(The author was Research Intern with CS3 between March-April 2020. The views expressed are personal)