THE SCALE and range of inter-governmental relations between the United States and China was clearly revealed in their second strategic and economic dialogue held in Beijing last week. Sometimes process is more important then event in international relations.
Media headlines highlighted the meeting’s failure to resolve any major dispute, whether on revaluation of the yuan, sanctions on Iran or a common attitude to the recent sinking of a South Korean warship presumably by a North Korean mini-submarine. But that is to miss the real significance of a meeting which brought 200 senior US officials to the Chinese capital, four of them cabinet secretaries.
Both sides talked up the importance of their mutual pledge to make the process work. According to one Chinese participant this is a peaceful coexistence between co-operative partners rather than rivals or enemies. Mrs Hillary Clinton spoke of replacing uncertainty in relations between the world’s most important developed and developing states by a form of collective leadership. Both sides were careful to say this would not rule out tensions and disagreements over differing policies and interests. But they are committed to handle them together.
Considering fears of an escalating protectionist conflict when pressure mounted on the Obama administration during the spring to sanction China for not revaluing its currency, this much more measured outcome is preferable. The pressure is still there, but Washington now understands better that whatever measures the Chinese take will be announced in a multilateral setting like the forthcoming Group of 20 summit rather than be seen as a result of direct US intervention. Besides, the US is not the only aggrieved party, since the European Union and several large emerging states have expressed concern about the yuan’s current value.
In case that does not happen China’s neighbours and regional partners need to recalculate their alignments in compensation. The Korean incident is a sharp reminder to them that a good bilateral US-China relationship does not necessarily guarantee regional order. Japanese prime minister Yukio Hatoyama justified his decision to keep the controversial US base in Okinawa because he sees the need to deter threats as regional tensions rise. This reduces his domestic popularity further as elections for the legislature’s upper house loom.
But the complexity of the issues involved is illustrated by Mr Hatoyama’s participation in the weekend summit of Chinese, South Korean and Japanese leaders. There, Chinese prime minister Wen Jiabao said “the pressing task for the moment is to handle the serious impact caused by the Cheonan incident properly, defuse tensions in the region, and most importantly of all, avoid possible conflicts”. The summit committed the three powers to work together in the region. Ambitious plans for a free trade area between them by 2012 were announced, along with a reinforced commitments for political consultation and closer cooperation on investment and innovation. US-China relations are being recast in a setting of closer intra-Asian co-operation.