In contrast to the outgoing Trump Administration, there are disturbing signs that the new Biden Administration in the US will revert to the unsuccessful appeasement strategy of eight years of the earlier Obama presidency.
While Barack Obama pontificated, looked professorial and twiddled his thumbs, China essentially captured the South China Sea. Given a Biden administration full of rehabilitated Obama-era relics, it is likely China will feel emboldened.
A signal indication of this likely U-turn was the fact that the very word “Indo-Pacific” was omitted by Biden in a major policy speech, reverting to the old and tired “Asia Pacific”. This was duly noted by the Chinese mouthpiece Global Times, and surely seen as a dog-whistle by Beijing’s America-watchers.
The consequences of abetting Chinese hubris are unclear at the moment, but a forced annexation of Taiwan is certainly not off the table. Nor is a physical invasion of Japan’s Senkaku islands. And a massive Himalayan attack on India in Ladakh or anywhere along the Line of Actual Control is entirely possible. It is in this context that a series of moves by incumbent Foreign Secretary Mike Pompeo needs to be evaluated. The fact is that, despite what the usual suspects say, there have been significant wins in Trump’s foreign policy. Just three: unlike his predecessors, he didn’t go to war; Israel has signed peace agreements with several neighbors; and he pushed back, hard, against China.
One could legitimately question the downsides of exiting the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Paris accord on climate change, or the Iran nuclear treaty; but none of them is an unequivocal error. And one could suggest that by pushing back on European allies, Trump has forced them to be more responsible.
The hard line against China, however, is the most important, and it is tempting to think that there is a bipartisan consensus in the US that China has become Enemy No. 1, no ifs, thens and buts. But if you consider the Obama legacy (for example, an ex-aide at UC San Diego is practically a spokesperson for China), and how many of them are in the Biden Administration, there is reason to worry.
There is, for example, with John Kerry back in the Cabinet, the possibility that, in the zeal to get back in the good graces of the global-warming mafiosi, Biden will bend over backwards to appease China. I would be saddened, but not amazed if he even accepts the 9-dash line in the South China Sea as China’s territorial waters!
The 9-dash line, for which China makes highly dubious ‘historical’ claims using some old maps, in effect suggests that the entire South China Sea belongs to China. In reality, there has been no time in history when China dominated that sea, and it is a major economic lifeline, as a great deal of gloabal trade passes through it via the Straits of Malacca. The rest of the world cannot sit by and allow China to deny FON (freedom of navigation) in these open seas.
Thus the importance of the single-minded steps taken by Pompeo. For instance, he recently said the following regarding the Wuhan Virus (aka COVID-19):
Wuhan Virus: CCP covered it up. CCP disappeared the doctors who knew. CCP still refuses to let the world in to see what it wrought. CCP lied about where the virus came from. CCP closed travel inside China and allowed the world to suffer. America invents vaccines for the world. Every human being can see this contrast.
This was followed up by a fact sheet from the US State Department that squarely puts the blame for the virus on the Wuhan Institute of Virology, brushing aside the usual obfuscation about the “wet market” and so on:(https://www.state.gov/fact-sheet-activity-at-the-wuhan-institute-of-virology/). It stops just short of directly accusing the lab of having engineered the virus.
The charade continues, however. A belated WHO fact-finding team found obstacles placed in its way, according to a January 5 report by CNN.
The World Health Organization said that China has blocked the arrival of a team investigating the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, in a rare rebuke from the UN agency.
On Taiwan, Pompeo, without necessarily violating the US’ long-standing “One China Policy”, eased restrictions on contacts between Taiwanese officials and American diplomats. That is only fair because China has a history of not abiding by the treaties or agreements it has signed, for instance the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS).
When the binding court of arbitration ruled in 2015 that China had violated the Philippines’ territorial integrity in the Scarborough Shoal, China simply ignored it. The arbitrator also found no merit to China’s ‘historical’ claim, based on some doubtful old maps, to the infamous “9-dash line” as its territorial boundary (which means almost the entire South China Sea). This too was ignored.
Unilateral adherence by other signatories to treaties China signed is pointless, because China does not live up to its obligations: another instance is India’s concession by Vajpayee on Tibet. A good case can be made for India to abandon its own “One China” policy, considering China has no obvious “One India” policy: the latter interferes in J&K, questions Sikkim, and of course squats on Aksai Chin.
There have been several other strong indications of US displeasure with China on human rights issues and trade, including over human rights violations in Chinese-occupied Tibet (CoT). Sanctions have been slapped on exports of Chinese-occupied Xinjiang (CoX) products such as cotton, based on systematic allegations of slave labor, forced sterilization, and denial of religious freedoms to Uighurs.
The latest is the strong and unusually blunt statement on January 19th — that is, the very last day of the Trump administration — from the State Department accusing China of genocide.
“I believe this genocide is ongoing, and that we are witnessing the systematic attempt to destroy Uighurs by the Chinese party-state,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement, adding that Chinese officials were “engaged in the forced assimilation and eventual erasure of a vulnerable ethnic and religious minority group.”
The January 5 crackdown on protesters in Hong Kong against Chinese usurpation of democratic rights in that territory had also attracted Pompeo’s wrath.
But the strategic South China Sea probably remains the most contentious issue, as Beijing builds up its military muscle and treats the sea as its inland lake, threatening freedom of navigation. It has long been obvious that China will attempt serious mischief. I said the following as far back as 1998 in “The Danger from China” https://www.rediff.com/news/1998/jun/15rajeev.htm:
China is attempting to establish the South China Sea (the name has 'China' in it and so it must be China's private lake, you see) and its potential mineral (natural gas and oil deposits) as its own private property. The activities around the Spratly Islands, Mischief Reef, the Paracel Islands etc are well-known -- China simply walked in and grabbed these, paying no attention to prior Vietnamese, Malaysian, Taiwanese and Filipino claims, for instance.
Thus the welcome decision by Pompeo on January 15th to impose travel bans and trade sanctions on violators. Says the report from the AP, reprinted in The Hindu:
In its waning days, the Trump administration put in place travel bans on an unspecified number of Chinese officials and their families for what it said were violations of international standards regarding the freedom of navigation in those waters.
The administration also said it was adding China’s state oil company, the China National Offshore Oil Corporation, to a list of companies with which U.S. citizens are banned from doing business…
“The United States stands with Southeast Asian claimant states seeking to defend their sovereign rights and interests, consistent with international law,” Mr. Pompeo said.
“We will continue to act until we see Beijing cease its coercive behaviour in the South China Sea.”
This is as much a warning to China to behave as it is to the Biden administration to not attempt grandstanding and appeasement. After all, we are still experiencing massive human suffering and economic loss wrought by the Chinese-origin virus. There is a limit to how much forbearance the rest of the world can muster.
I did go further in my 1998 predictions about Chinese misbehavior. Obviously I got the dates wrong, but my concerns may not be that far off the mark.
My forecast is that, if unchecked, there will be continued Chinese military adventurism in Asia. I predict that by 2003, the Chinese will cross the Ussuri River and attack Russian Siberia, citing flimsy historical claims; impoverished Russians will have no way of defending themselves.
Further, I suspect China will either threaten to, or actually conduct, an atmospheric nuclear blast over Japan by 2005, with the clear threat of frying all their transistors -- and thus infrastructure -- with an electromagnetic pulse. America will stand by, powerless, and its nuclear umbrella for Japan will turn out to be a fiction.
China will almost definitely attack Taiwan by 2002; I wonder if it makes sense for India to befriend Taiwan, and perhaps even offer it certain nuclear components, including blueprints and enriched uranium, returning China's favour vis a vis Pakistan. The chances of China attacking India over Arunachal Pradesh have perhaps receded a little after India's clear indication that it will deploy nuclear missiles. The Chinese understand belligerence -- they practice it and respect it.
I am no expert at global strategy, so I am quoting people who are: Caspar Weinberger, formerly US secretary of state, projected the Taiwan scenario to happen in 1998; the Economist suggests the Japan scenario. Well, okay, I made up the Siberia scenario myself: it stands to reason.
As a confirmed China-hawk, I predicted doom:
A couple of years ago, I read a review of a hugely successful Taiwanese book called Yellow Peril, in which a series of altercations between Taiwan and China end up in a few nuclear bombs being exchanged. I think the PRC attacks Taiwan, which retaliates with an atom bomb; Russian and American nukes enter the picture somehow. The final scene is yet another sorry exodus of Chinese -- by boat towards Australia, and by land over the Silk Road towards Central Asia. In the end, that is the issue, isn't it -- lebensraum?
I really hope that Chinese belligerence does not lead to such a scenario. Even though China has come a long way economically and militarily, it shouldn’t overplay its hand.
Share this post