Top Banner
POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy U.S.-China Relations: How Should the U.S. Deal with a Rising Power?
19

POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

Feb 22, 2016

Download

Documents

decena decena

POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy. U.S.-China Relations: How Should the U.S. Deal with a Rising Power?. U.S. Foreign Policy The United States and China. Background Video. What perspective is represented in the video?. U.S. Foreign Policy The United States and China. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

U.S.-China Relations: How Should the U.S. Deal with a Rising Power?

Page 2: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

2

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

Background Video

QuickTime™ and ah264 decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

What perspective is represented in the video?

Page 3: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

3

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

• How should the United States deal with China?

What is the first step we must take before answering this question?

Hint: Think like a constructivist

We must determine what China’s interests and intentions are: everything flows from the assumptions we make about what “China wants”

Page 4: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

4

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

• What does “China want”Realist answer: ________________________________Liberal answer: ________________________________Marxist answer: ________________________________

Constructivst answer: __________________________

Power and regional dominance

Economic growth and prosperity

Economic dominance

“Whatever we say it wants”

Page 5: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

5

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

What are the policy implications of this realistassumption? That is, how do realist answer the question, “How should the U.S. deal with China?”

“China wants power and regional dominance”

Page 6: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

6

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

Key Implication: Realists tell us that China must be treated as a strategic threat, an enemy …

“China cannot rise peacefully” (Mearschiemer)

“[China] is bound to be no strategic friend of the United States, but a long-term adversary” (Bernstein and Munro)

“China wants power and regional dominance”

Page 7: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

7

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

What is the logic of the realist arguments provided by Mearsheimer and Bernstein/Munro?Mearscheimer: “Better to be Godzilla than Bambi”TranslationStates with the potentialto become a great power,a regional hegemon, willalways do so

“China wants power and regional dominance”

Page 8: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

8

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

Mearscheimer

“To predict the future of Asia, one needs a theory [i.e., realism] that explains how rising powers are likely to act and how other states attempt to establish hegemony …. The ultimate goals of every great power is to maximize its share of world power and eventually dominate the system”

“China wants power and regional dominance”

Page 9: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

9

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

Bernstein and Munro “Nothing could be more important in understanding China’s

goals and self-image than its military modernization program”

Basis logic: China’s military program is objective proof that the Chinese are hell bent on countering U.S. power and, eventually, pushing the United States out of Asia altogether. When the Chinese are ready, they will not hesitate to use force to achieve their goals

“China wants power and regional dominance”

According to the authors, what is significant about China’s military build-up? What does it tell us about China’s intentions?

Page 10: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

10

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

What are the policy implications of this liberalassumption? That is, how do liberals answer the question, “How should the U.S. deal with China?”

“China wants economic growth and prosperity”

Page 11: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

11

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

Key Implications. China’s energies are directed toward creating a more prosperous economy, and confrontation with the United States will not serve this purpose

The United States, therefore, should treat China as potential strategic partner; it should build rather than burn bridges (perhaps by encouraging China’s greater integration into global institutions), and by recognizing that China has legitimate interests in Asia

“China wants economic growth and prosperity”

Page 12: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

12

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

Logic of Liberal Argument …

Internationally: China’s economic growth is creating stronger basis for regional integration, which increases incentive for cooperation and reduces incentive for conflict or force

China is increasingly replacing Japan as the “hub of a transnational assembly line of production” (Feffer)A confrontational foreign policy could disrupt China’s growth, “harm hundreds of millions of Chinese, and threaten the Communist Party’s hold on power” (Brzezinski)

“China wants economic growth and prosperity”

Page 13: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

13

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

Logic of Liberal Argument …

Domestically: The democratic peace thesispresupposes that a democratic China would be less threatening; ironically, this point was made by Bernstein and Munro …

“If China became a democracy its military build-up would be far less threatening than if it remained a dictatorship”

“China wants economic growth and prosperity”

Bernstein and Munro’s point raises an important question …

Page 14: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

14

Will China become a

democracy?How do Bernstein and Munro answer this question? Do they provide a convincing argument?

Bernstein and Munro’s argument …

• Democracy is “contrary to Chinese political culture”

• Bureaucrats would have to relinquish power

• The Chinese people don’t want democracy

• Democracy would subvert foreign policy interests

Page 15: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

15

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

China as a democracy? Points to ConsiderThe past is not the future: no country was a democracy before it became a democracyDemocracy has always been about power and it has always involved taking power from one groupThe Chinese population is huge and hugely diverse: millions may be satisfied with the status quo, but millions may want a fundamental changeThe 20th century witnessed a huge increase in the number of democracies: there is no reason to believe that Chinese leaders are any more capable of stopping this trend than other dictatorsThere is an undeniable connection between capitalist development and democracy

Page 16: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

16

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

The Logic of Liberal Argument

Whether or not China becomes a democracy, liberals tell us that the country--or, more accurately, important actors within the country--will have an interest in avoiding conflict

U.S. foreign policy, therefore, should be premised on encouraging cooperation and partnership, while ensuring that China does not seriously threaten US interests; liberals, then, might support a policy of “congagement”

“China wants economic growth and prosperity”

Page 17: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

17

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

A Key Distinction

Realists believe in certainties: the certainty of confrontation, the certainty of great power behavior, the certainty of Chinese aggression

Liberals believe in uncertainty: the uncertainty of economic growth, the uncertainty of integration, the uncertainty of political change (e.g., democratization), the uncertainty of “choice”

Realism and Liberalism Compared

Page 18: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

18

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

Who makes the better argument?

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the realist and liberal perspectives?

Is there an alternative?

Realism and Liberalism Compared

How would a constructivist approach the question of US-China relations?

Page 19: POLS 425 U.S. Foreign Policy

19

U.S. Foreign PolicyThe United States and China

A Constructivist Approach