MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political analyst Dmitry Kosyrev) - A one-week hiatus has been the most incredible feature of the current Sino-American rift. Nothing was happening this week, except for a mounting wave of panicky publications in the media.
Washington has tried to pretend that nothing unusual is happening, and that this does not mark the beginning of Barack Obama's most serious and, apparently, most desperate foreign policy crisis.
But hiatuses are not permanent, even in relations with the Chinese. The Beijing media report that Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi will attend a security forum in Munich, for the first time in its history, and will probably have informal meetings with his American colleagues at the weekend. Judging by the forum's guest list, the Chinese foreign minister will talk with U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
As a rule, crucial diplomatic decisions are made at informal meetings, so let's hope that the conflict will gradually subside after Munich. Nevertheless, this conflict has demonstrated many realities of our new world order, and this is a good thing.
As in the majority of such cases, what we are seeing is not what is happening in reality. Last Friday, Washington announced that it would finally fulfill its contract to supply $6.4 billion-worth of arms to Taiwan. Moreover, after some delay the U.S. president will meet with the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan leader in exile. In response, China scaled back military contacts with the United States and threatened to impose sanctions on American companies involved in the Taiwan deal, including Boeing.
This is just another round of the traditional diplomatic dance between the two countries. Washington has always sold weapons to Taiwan and met with the Tibetan exiles. China has always protested but made sure that its protests did not do real material damage. The two countries cannot do otherwise; it's tradition.
However, the year is now 2010, and the global situation has undergone a radical change. The $6.4 billion-contract is several years old. It was delayed under George W. Bush. The only difference is that at that time the weapons would have been received by the pro-American President Chen Shui-bian, whereas Taiwan's current leader, Ma Ying-jeou, is from a completely different party. He is not exactly pro-Beijing, but relations with mainland China are quickly improving. The weapons are the same, but they not so urgently needed.
Secondly, it would be ridiculous to assume that today's United States would truly support separatists from Taiwan (or, say Xingjian). Washington could entertain this idea under Bill Clinton, but already under Bush the plan to weaken China by supporting Taiwan, Tibetan exiles or Xingjian terrorists looked desperately obsolete. Both China and America have changed since then.
Having announced the Taiwan deal, Obama made an obvious mistake, which even Bush managed to avoid. Did he want China to join the sanctions against Iran? At this point, it is hardly possible to compel China into anything.
The decision to scale back military cooperation with the United States is not important for China. This cooperation is as meaningless as the sessions of the NATO-Russia Council. China's economic sanctions against the United States are really serious. Boeing is planning to sell to China $200 billion worth of aircraft in the next 20 years. But there is more to it. One third of spare parts of a Boeing aircraft (in terms of value) taking off from Frankfurt or, say, Nairobi are made in China. Should all this be discontinued because of upgraded Patriots, mine sweepers, helicopters and other defensive weapons? (Taiwan also asked for submarines and F-16s, but Obama refused). Is it worth quarreling with America because of them?
Two of the world's biggest powers have quarreled against their own interests. It is possible that both are wrong. For instance, China still finds it inadmissible not to react to the Dalai Lama's forthcoming visit to the White House or the sale of American weapons to Taiwan. Obama, who must face upcoming congressional elections, considers it impossible to admit to the less-educated Americans that America has long changed. As a result, both sides will issue the required threats, say all the appropriate things, and then come to terms.
However, there are more serious explanations. The Washington Post reported that in recent times China has changed the tone and style of its behavior. This seems only natural, since China has become the world's second most powerful country. But many Chinese are repeating the bad American manners from the 1990s, when the United States believed it would be the only superpower forever. But there are other Chinese who are not making such mistakes. During Obama's visit to Beijing last year, China mildly rejected the idea of American-Chinese joint management of the world that is popular with the Obama team. It does not matter what was said during the visit. The real reasons are important: Washington still believes that "joint management" means that it will play first fiddle and China only second. China will wait for America to get rid of this illusion, which shouldn't take very long.
Or will it take a long time? It is important to analyze the reasons why the Obama team led the U.S. into a quarrel with a country relations with which it proclaimed a priority for the 21st century? Foreign Affairs magazine draws this conclusion: America cannot make a choice between the two powerful forces that have torn asunder its mentality and foreign policy since its inception. One force believed that America cannot be stable as long as "dictatorships," that is countries different from America, exist in the world. The other believed that the force of example - of a prosperous America - will allow it to achieve everything it wants.
The Obama administration still lacks a foreign policy strategy. It is only using tactics. The current Sino-American quarrel has also revealed this reality.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
