BEIJING - The United States will take to heart the bitter lesson of exclusion from the United Nations Human Rights Committee in a vote which gave the impression of an isolated superpower, a US spokesman said on Friday.
"The United States, whether through inadequate lobbying or because of unpopular global policies, on Thursday failed to win a seat on the commission for the first time since it helped found the human rights body in 1947."
Such was the introduction to the lead story of the Internet edition of the China Daily, Beijing's official newspaper, on May 6. The headline announced that the US was isolated, but this sounded like wishful thinking after weeks of US pressure on China after the incident of the EP-3 surveillance plane.
Yet, many of the other headlines on the same China Daily provided a different impression of what was going on. Another story said that Japan's emergency restrictions on imports of onions, mushrooms and tatami from China were politically motivated and thus likely to come to an end soon. Another report warned about the global ambition of the US media company AOL Time Warner was "to seek international dominance through acquisitions". This ambition is something that Beijing feels as a new pressure on the sensitive ideological front.
And finally, even its northern neighbor, Russia, China's main provider of weapons, appeared to break ranks with Beijing on the sensitive issue of opposition to the American National Missile Defense (NMD) system. In fact the China Daily explained: "The United States wants to move away from a relationship with Moscow that is based on Cold War threats of mutual annihilation and is prepared to defend Russia against ballistic missiles, a presidential envoy on missile defense said Friday."
Therefore, the outline is one of Chinese isolation, at least from the three main players around Beijing's borders, the United States, Japan and Russia. Indeed, since the EP-3 incident, pressure has been mounting from the US on China, through either calculated design or unfortunate coincidences, and this week's trip by the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual leader, to the US will provide an occasion for new friction.
Even further ahead, all major international developments appear to be new traps to put China on trial. The renewal of the clause for Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) is most likely, since raising tariffs on Chinese imports would have a negative effect on US inflation. And the US administration can't import inflation, especially since the cutting of interest rates, and a proposed future tax cut could already have a significant impact on increased spending - and European bankers suspect that the overall American economic strategy could rekindle global inflation.
Moreover, the issue of the Summer Olympics, for which Beijing has bid for the second time, is more controversial. Differently from the 2000 bid where it backed Australia, this time the US has not taken a clear stand, but many in Beijing feel that America won't throw its weight behind China on the 2008 bid. A second loss of the bid would be a major blow for Chinese national pride. Eight years ago, when America campaigned against Beijing's 2000 bid, many common Chinese, who had been fervently pro-American during the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations, turned anti-American. They felt the US was attacking the Chinese people and not just the Chinese government as it claimed.
In fact, many people in China share the feeling that American allegations against Chinese military prowess are a false pretense. They feel the US is not concerned about China's present military might, which is still far below American potential, but is actually uneasy about Chinese economic growth, which might outstage American economic predominance in the 21st Century.
The Central Intelligence Agency report on the year 2015 presents four possible future scenarios, and in all of them America's power is waning while China's is rising. Thus, despite some officials' concern about the state of Chinese economy and its economic reforms, the US is bullish on China's future and therefore worried about losing its sole superpower status. China feels that Washington's real objective is to check its growth. In this scenario, China should thus further develop to prevent a possible collapse of the country's political system, which would send millions fleeing over its borders, but it should not prosper too much so as to preempt a possible challenge to American power.
Some Chinese feel that to American politicians and companies the Chinese challenge could appear somewhat like a combination of the Russian plus the Japanese threat of the 1980s. In those years, despite a lingering fear for the Soviet threat, the major concern in Washington was the rise of the Japanese economy, which was about to surpass America's economy and impose a whole new set of values onto the United States.
Similarly, the Chinese economy in 20 (more likely 40) years could overcome that of the United States. Furthermore, as Japanese multinational companies did in the 1980s, in 10 or 20 years Chinese multinationals could challenge American multinationals' market shares. Plus there is the political challenge of a non-Western system, similar to that of the Soviet Union's. In 10 years it could be too late to check these developments, and thus Chinese officials feel the anti-Chinese Blue Team now dominating Washington wants to enforce a new containment around China.
It is not clear whether they are right. Certainly, the mounting American pressure reinforces anti-American forces in China, those hostile to the process of fast modernization and opening-up, and who put on the spot the leadership which fought hard to get Beijing into the World Trade Organization. Even for the progressive wing inside the Communist Party, the American pressure also reinforces the belief that in a way the US was best served when China was under the rule of the tough, more orthodox communists who checked China's growth and that Washington is therefore now really trying to reinforce its clout on the country.
It may sound too conspiratorial, and far-fetched, but the reality is that the more progressive elements in the country have their backs against the wall as any forward move could be branded as "pro-American". Thus, the more cautious wing of the Communist Party could become the driving force behind the necessary political and economic reforms.
It thus appears interesting that on May 6, the People's Daily, the party leadership's mouthpiece, reported that Li Peng, chairman of the National People's Congress and cautious reformer, encouraged democratic and legal reforms at the grass-roots level. It could be safer for the more progressive elements to have Li Peng leading the democratic reforms because it doesn't expose them to criticism.
But then again, all this could be a sign that Chinese internal politics have gone into a phase of great tension and uncertainty about the future of the country, much to the pleasure of the American Blue Team. (2001-05-10 Asia Times)
