World

Ignore the irritants: the US and China are getting on well

Despite Obama's meeting with the Dalai Lama today, tensions between the world's two superpowers are easing

February 05, 2015
A protestor calling for Tibet's freedom outside the White House. © Carolyn Kaster/AP/Press Association Images
A protestor calling for Tibet's freedom outside the White House. © Carolyn Kaster/AP/Press Association Images

President Barack Obama will make his first joint public appearance with the Dalai Lama today at the US National Prayer Breakfast on religious freedom, and may meet privately with him afterward. At a time when US-China relations are in a relatively positive shape, Washington’s latest overture to the Dalai Lama will anger Beijing, given his profile as Tibet’s most visible figure in its struggle for independence.

The Dalai Lama meeting also comes less than two weeks since Obama’s landmark visit to India. This yielded multiple commercial agreements, including on solar energy and nuclear power, a joint communique on Asia-Pacific affairs, including about the future of the South China Sea, and a discussion of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ambitions for a “quadrilateral security dialogue” between the United States, Japan, Australia and India.

The Obama-Modi meeting was closely scrutinised in Beijing. And predictably, it has been criticised in some Chinese quarters, including Xinhua (the official state news agency) which dismissed the US-Indian dialogue as no more than a “superficial rapprochement… more symbolic than pragmatic given their longstanding division."

Yet, despite the irritation of some in Beijing towards these recent events, the fact remains that US-China relations remain on at least a modest upswing. This was symbolised during Obama’s visit to China last November when he and President Xi Jinping showed international leadership by announcing a bilateral climate change agreement which could help catalyse a new global treaty later this year. Also, on the same day that Obama sees the Dalai Lama, US and Chinese top military officials meet at the Pentagon for comprehensive Defence Policy Coordination Talks whose agenda includes a slate of confidence building measures such as joint training and exercises, and exchange programmes.

While there remains fragility and disagreements in bi-lateral relations, with potential set-backs on the horizon, the outlook for 2015 is relatively positive. There are multiple reasons for this from the vantage points of both Washington and Beijing.

While China continues to build its influence on the international stage, it has recently softened its stance on some foreign policy issues. In part, this reflects the influence and changed calculations of Xi, now two years into his presidency, who has gradually extended his writ, including over the military.

In the US context, he has called for a “new type of great power relationship” to avoid any sense of inevitability of conflict between Beijing and Washington. While this new major power idea is an audacious goal that is unlikely to be fully realised, it reflects his desire to try to take unnecessary confrontation off the table.

To this end, while assertiveness will not disappear from Chinese policy, partly because of domestic public appetite for it, there has recently been reversion to greater diplomacy and defusing of tension. One example was the decision of the defence ministry in December to hold an unprecedented meeting between the two country’s defence policy planning staffs. Moreover, a party from Beijing visited Washington last Autumn to discuss cyber security issues which are a regular bi-lateral irritant.

While Washington does not believe that this conciliatory behaviour will necessarily last, it does appear to represent a break with the first 18 months of Xi’s presidency when Beijing’s foreign and military positions and rhetoric had become more pugnacious. This was showcased by the near-collision between a Chinese warship and the USS Cowpens in the South China Sea in December 2013 which the then-US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel blamed on “incendiary” and “irresponsible” Chinese behaviour. And also in August 2014 when a Chinese military fighter jet carried out what the Pentagon termed a “dangerous intercept” of a US surveillance aircraft, again over the South China Sea.

From Washington’s standpoint, this warming in relations is to be welcomed. Especially at a time when crises in the Middle East and Ukraine will continue to receive the bulk of high-level US attention and considerable military resources in 2015.

While the US long-term pivot towards Asia-Pacific will continue, Obama is keen to avoid a major spike in bi-lateral tensions. Washington will thus seek to avoid too many clear "red lines" in the region to provide greater latitude and to encourage Beijing to the view that the United States is not trying to contain a rising China.

Nevertheless, even in this relatively co-operative context, there are still potential icebergs on the horizon that could see a freeze in relations. Firstly, China’s animus toward US sea and air manoeuvres near its borders is growing. As with the 2013 and 2014 naval and air incidents around the South China Sea, further (potentially more serious) spats cannot be ruled out in 2015.

Perhaps the biggest source of risk, however, lies in relation to Japan where nationalist Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was re-elected in a landslide victory in December. A key part of his conservative agenda of emphasising Japanese pride in its past, is overturning the remaining legal and political underpinning of the country's post-war pacifist security identity, so that it can become more actively engaged internationally. This includes building up the country’s military capabilities.

This is perceived as a threat in Beijing, exacerbated by Washington’s close security ties with Tokyo. And while no country desires conflict, serious misjudgement by one or more sides cannot be ruled out.

Overall, the short-term outlook for China-US relations is relatively positive. Significant risks remain, but both Beijing and China appear resolved to manage tensions better, while co-operating more in those areas, such as tackling climate change, were there are potentially significant overlapping interests.