Changing Patterns of Interdependence between China and the USA - Coursework Example

Changing Patterns of Interdependence between China and the United s Globalization is rapidly and profoundly changingthe international set-up in regards to the balance of power, economic empowerment technology and social political factors. One of the major challenges that politicians and analysts have been forced to contend with in the understanding of the new international environment is the rise of China and similar developing nations. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that change is not new in the international system, over the years there have been radical shifts in global power with great powers like the Ottoman empire or even the recent disintegration of the British empire having taken place over the centuries. The question of Chinas place in the world has been recurring over the years, however its rise today poses serious question for the traditional balance of power and status quo in which western powers have been the main drivers of social political and economic influence in the world. In 2011, it became the second largest economy in the world; this posed a serious challenge to the concept of American global political ascendancy (“A short history of China/US relations” n.d). Consequently, the relationship between China and the US is a particularly difficult one to define or understand, on one hand, China is growing largely due to the influx of Westen investors and the demand for its goods. On the other hand, with this growth, it is becoming a more powerful rival to America’s claim of superpower status (Brown, n.d). The fact that its social economic systems are radically different from Americas is becoming a course for concern since it is viewed as an ideological rival. The US champions democracy and capitalism ideals, and these are principles the Communist Party is not as enthusiastic about and this has often caused friction between the two countries. Even today, there are diplomatic rows with dissidents from China being given asylum in the US for the sake of their democratic and humanist beliefs. China on the other hand sees it as a slight to its national integrity and sovereignty since by sheltering China’s “enemies” the US is acting against its political interests. The agenda for both nations has been found to be extremely complex about issue such human rights, security, democracy and many others, which has on several occasions pitted the two giants against each other. Statistics suggest that China may very well overtake the US in terms of economic and military prowess by the year 2035 (The Economist, 2012) and this is enhanced by the fact that it has already become the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. In addition, given the vulnerability of the West to impacts of financial crisis such as the one encountered in 2008 as well as the speed at which other economies such as Brazil are growing, it is estimated that by the year 2060, the developing world may have bigger economies than the developed one. Although such predictions are not a hundred percent accurate and are subject to change there is the distinct possibility of a future where the western powers particularly the US will not be dominating global politics. In future, we many expect that China will have become the world superpower and her social political and economic systems will be influenced by China in much less the way they are influenced by the US today. In the past and to a great extent even today, the relationship between China and the US has been founded on a platform of constructive engagement with the US seeming to woo China and assisting her realize her immense economic potential. At the end of the cold war, the US has managed to pull communist China to her side of the conflict and this marked the commencement of a relationship that has seen to the rapid growth of China with a sure market for its industrial goods in the West. In fact, it has been speculated on many occasions that China is the world’s workshop since a huge consignment of most of the electronic and other manufactured good consumed in the west originate from China (Brown n.d). Before the 90s, the onset of economic reform was characterized by the desire for leadership to acquire a compressive strategy for national development. However, after the cold war, china stuck to her age-old technique of working to avoid external conflict and by extension non-involvement or neutrality in affairs outside China. Today, one of the covert sources of conflict between the US and China is that the latter does not take political responsibility nor does it get involved in the internal matters of its trade partners. Consequently, the fact that the countries have so many conflicting interests in terms of strategy and ideology, there are fears that the US may in the near future be forced to actively attempt to reverse or constrain China’s development (“A short history of China/US relations” n.d). The reason the US may be suspected of potentially trying to curtail chains growth is partly because most people in the west do not believe that a rising china can do it peacefully and they fear violent struggle or even another cold war (Brown n.d). This explains why whenever policy makers in the West are discussing the issue of Chines foreign policy, they focus on the liberal theories such as democratic peace economic interdepended and institutionalism (Mearsheimer n.d). Furthermore, in the face of America’s seeming decline, questions have arisen, as whether the rise of China is coming at the cost of the US fall, which leads to the dilemma of if the US, should see China as a strategic partner or competitor. However, this is made very complicated by the high level of interdependence between the two nations, which has forced them to share myriad of economic interests more so those based in China. Most of America’s national debt is owed to China, on the other hand, the reason the Chinese economy is growing so fast is that thousands of American firms have outsourced their production to her soil. The big picture shows the US depending on China for manufacturing while China benefits from the high number of American investors who create millions of Jobs in china ironically contributing to the unemployment problem back home. This explains to some extent the paradox of a relationship founded on both mutual self-interest and common interest. The Chinese government is benefiting from the jobs while at the same time bearing the weight or increase greenhouse emission because of the thousands of industries (Brown n.d). The US on the other hand has considerably reduced its carbon footprint because of outsourcing some of its potentially pollutant production processes to China but it has to pay for it by sacrificing some of the jobs. However, the supposition that the US may eventually decline has been vehemently opposed analysts who claim that Chinas growing population makes it difficult for the country t actually get at per with the US. This is under the assumption that despite the growth of China, the US holds considerable advantage in the liberal international order in which the structure if far much more complex for it to be upset by Chinas industrial empowerment. The structure is founded in a deep and complex industrial social economic and political backdrop and China may have to do more than usurp the United States economic lead before it can expect to compete on equal terms. The fundamentals of liberal internationalism are compounded in a tradition of opponents and rule based order which is reflected in the American system more than the Chinese one. This makes it more durable and despite the numerous upheavals over the centuries, but there has never emerged ad better alternative, which leads one to concluding that China may have a long way to go before it can threaten the US (Moravscik 2014). In addition to interdepended based on trade and economic connections, the two nations also have a shared stake in each other and their own security. As aforementioned, Chinas defence budget is bound to increase to Americas level if not supersede it by the year 2035 (The Economist, 2012). The upshot of this is that both nations will be equals in terms of technical and nuclear firepower. It means that the US will have to respect China’s attitude and her actions in the global arena and when she decides perhaps to annex territory from another country, they will know they cannot intimidate her into submission, as could be the case today. In a way, security interdependence can be seen as a form of deterrent much like the nuclear standoff between the US and USSR. In conclusion, it is worth noting that, despite the difference that may result in the two nations needing to create a cold war situation with their increased military power; they have too many shared interests to be having much to gain from destroying each other. On a more complex level security interdependence can be seen as depending on each other to fight common threats such as global warming, epidemics and issue of energy security that require the collaboration of both nations. Therefore, despite Chinas efforts to increase military power, it should not be seen as a way to directly threaten the US but rather establish itself as a force to reckon with and protect itself from the vulnerability of being weaker than its competitors are. In the future, if the US and China have a conflicting interest, say should one of them wish to invade a county and the other opposes, they will be forced to come up with a way of solving the problem amicably since none will be able to intimidate the other on the basis of military or economic advantage. References Brown William. n.d. China and the United States: cooperation or conflict? Narratives of China–United States relations in international history “A short history of China/US relations”. n.d. US China Audio Slideshow SCRIPT. Mearsheimer J. n.d. Transcript: Theory bites video. Moravscik, A.  2014. International Relations. Uneven and combined development. You Tube [online] Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7D5FNrqT5dM The Economist. (April 17, 2012). China’s military rise: The dragon’s new teeth. The Economist. [Online] Available from http://www.economist.com/node/21552193 Read More