Why is the US government going to extremes in its China policy? Interpretation by well-known American scholar Shi Wen

The US government's move to rob tiktok has shocked the world, and what is even uglier is that US Secretary of State Pompeo said that more Chinese technology companies will be targeted in the future. This is reminiscent of Pompeo's recent speech at the Nixon Library in which he declared that the U.S. policy of engagement with China had "failed" and launched an all-out assault on China from domestic to diplomatic. Some analysts said that Pompeo's "article" may guide the Trump administration's actions in the next few months. At this time, in the special period before the US election, many people are worried that these US politicians will introduce more extreme policies out of political self-interest. To this end, the Global Times reporter recently video-linked Shi Wen, a senior researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in the United States and a well-known expert on China issues. Last July, out of concern about U.S. policy toward China, he and four other scholars led an open letter titled "Making Enemies of China Backfire."

Global Times: China-US relations have fallen sharply in the past few weeks, what do you think will happen in the next 3 months?

Sven: Between now and the November election, U.S.-China tensions are likely to continue to escalate, and it is likely that the U.S. will have facilitated it. I think the Trump administration is desperately trying to increase its likelihood of re-election, and is therefore likely deliberately provocative and conflict-inducing in order to rally the American public around his already embattled president, divert attention from his administration's inability to govern the United States at all, and ignore his poor handling of domestic issues such as the pandemic, race, the economy, and so on.

It's hard to guess what these provocations will be right now, but they could involve further U.S. action in the South China Sea, the East China Sea, Hong Kong, Xinjiang, and other issues. The United States may take some legal action, and China may issue a statement of opposition to this, or it may make tit-for-tat countermeasures.

The worst will be for the United States to act on issues that China considers a core interest , such as Taiwan and other territorial sovereignty issues. I hope that the U.S. government will not be stupid enough to make major provocations against China in these areas, because China will not have much room to maneuver and it will not tolerate the United States doing so.

For ideological and domestic political reasons, Trump may want to push the relationship between the two countries to some cold war-like level. However, I think between now and November, Beijing would do well not to bite Washington's "fishing hook." It should be as restrained and accountable as possible, in contrast to the constantly provocative and reckless U.S. government. I think China is doing exactly that in some ways, but it needs to stick with it.

Global Times: Why are there so many extreme measures against China? Just because the election is unfavorable?

Sven: I think there are several reasons, partly political, and partly partly because [the Trump administration] is trying to create the idea that China is terrible, a deadly threat to the United States.

This is clearly a wrong, excessive, and ideological interpretation of China's relationship with the United States and China. There is a view within the Trump administration that the only way to deal with China is to constantly pressure, contain and restrain China, disclose what the United States sees as China's "evil behavior," and try to unite other countries against China. This view is not only inaccurate, it is also misleading — it wants to incite Chinese people against the Chinese government; it tries to limit China's options and force China to behave the way the United States wants.

There is no doubt that China needs to change some of its own behavior, but the Trump administration's approach, those sanctions, attacks and ideological criticisms will not be effective, but will make China more hostile to the United States. And it would alienate many U.S. allies from the United States, and they would feel like the U.S. was out of control. It would also weaken the world's ability to work together on many issues, such as COVID-19 and climate change.

GLOBAL TIMES: Will America's allies come together against China as the Trump administration wants?

Sven: U.S. allies will share some of the Trump administration's criticisms of China, and they will find it difficult to accept some of China's trade, investment, and economic behavior, including some of the Trump administration's criticisms of China in the political and other fields. But on the whole, they will consider Trump's China approach and strategy to be excessive and one-sided, and fail to recognize China's position in the world. Moreover, Trump ignores the reality that many countries do benefit from trade and investment with China.

They will not identify with this simple,one-sided demonization of China. These countries still want to maintain good relations with China, but they also want to push China to make some changes, such as taking on greater responsibilities in certain areas. They want to do this in a more coordinated and balanced way, but the United States has not seen that hope, and what the United States offers is a unilateral, belligerent means. Germany, France, Japan and even Britain would not agree to deal with China in such an "excessive" way.

Pompeo, who is playing a political and ideological game, is one of the worst U.S. secretaries of state ever

Global Times: So before the election, it is difficult for China-US relations to turn around?

Sven: Between now and November, it will be difficult to have a truly meaningful dialogue between the two countries. Pompeo and Yang Jiechi met in Hawaii in June this year, and I think China hopes to express its willingness for good dialogue and reconciliation through this meeting, but Pompeo does not seem to be interested in this.

Pompeo is the worst candidate to negotiate with China, he is playing a game of politics and ideology, which is only in his personal interests, definitely not in the interests of the United States, and extremely unprofessional. He is one of the worst secretaries of state the United States has ever seen, and he himself proves it with words and deeds every day.

Global Times: Many people are worried about the possibility of armed conflict between China and the United States in the coming months. How likely do you think this is?

Sven: Although I just mentioned the risk of escalating tensions between the United States and China in the coming months, I don't think there is a big possibility of a real military conflict between the two countries. While the Trump administration is vocal, I don't feel like it wants to push the current brinkmanship to the point of actual conflict. I think China's leadership is smart enough not to allow itself to be pushed into danger or to take the initiative to trigger such behavior in the United States.

A crisis is possible, it could happen in the South China Sea, the East China Sea or the Taiwan Strait. This would be the result of both sides grossly misjudging each other. In general, I am not predicting war, I just think that the risk of military conflict is rising, and the difficulty of managing crises is increasing, and we need to be very cautious about this, because no one wants to see a real political and military crisis in the United States and China.

Global Times: Do you feel "sudden" about the sudden closure of the Chinese Consulate General in Houston by the United States not long ago?

Sven: This kind of reckless and stupid behavior, no one could have predicted. In particular, just a few days' notice is too unprofessional and irresponsible. This act shows that the Trump administration will do all kinds of extreme things to convince the American public that China is a mortal threat to the United States. The espionage allegations made by the U.S. State Department are ridiculous, and virtually all consulates or diplomatic missions have intelligence missions, and the evidence they give is not convincing. This is actually a political act.

China retaliated by closing the U.S. Consulate General in Chengdu. Previously, some people thought that China's retaliation would be more intense, such as the closure of the US consulate general in Hong Kong, which would be very bad if it did happen. I very much hope that China will not continue to for tat, because this will only turn into a vicious competition that is not in anyone's interest, and only Pompeo may benefit.

Of course, we are not surprised by China's countermeasures, but I just want to say that I hope that the incident will not continue to develop in this way. As I said earlier, China should avoid biting the "fishing hook" of the United States. Because to some extent, some people within the U.S. government just want to escalate the U.S.-China confrontation to justify their larger political and strategic goals.

GLOBAL TIMES: Pompeo's July 23 speech at the Nixon Library was seen by many as "the beginning of a new Cold War.", what do you think?

Sven: Some people would say that, but I think the cold war analogy to the current U.S.-China relationship is quite misleading. I don't think the two countries will replicate the bitter confrontations of the Cold War, the proxy wars, or the manipulation of third countries to try to gain a greater advantage, as happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the United States and China will not benefit from replicating these actions.

Pompeo's remarks at the Nixon Library were a form of political opportunism and ideological fanaticism. By all accounts, he knew very little about China, but he tried like a missionary to define what China was and what we should do with China. It's not a real policy statement, it's not a speech by a professional politician, it's almost meaningless.

Pompeo said that "the blind policy of engagement with China has failed", which is a huge distortion of history. First of all, contact with China is not blind. Second, it didn't fail. Whether it is for China, the U.S.-China relationship, or the world, the engagement policy has been a huge success in many ways.

China has created a great miracle in improving people's living standards, but also created huge global wealth, and many countries have benefited from trade and investment relations with China. China has provided a lot of assistance to other countries on the international stage and in different international organizations. It is increasingly embracing international norms and regimes in a growing number of areas, even if they have not been done in some areas, but in many areas promoting global peace and prosperity.

Although China is not seen as a democracy, and although in my view and many other scholars, the Chinese government has become increasingly tough and even aggressive in some respects, this does not mean that the policy of engagement with China has failed. In fact, for decades, China-related professionals never assumed that China would become a democracy, and the main goal of the China Engagement Policy was not this, but the interests of the United States, the geopolitical and economic interests of the United States.

Even Nixon himself initially did not pay attention to changes in China, he wanted to see changes in Chinese diplomacy, he wanted to change the way China interacted with the West, and this change did happen. Many later U.S. officials, while they would like to see China become more liberal in more ways, were not the main goal of the engagement policy toward China.

I think a lot of people have realized that we don't have a second option other than engagement with China. Engagement with China is not "because China is doing well, so the United States gives China a reward", but the basic way of great power interaction, that is, not blind hostility or containment, but to avoid conflict, change bad behavior and build a basis for cooperation. The United States has no choice in this regard.

If Trump is re-elected or Biden takes office, what will happen to Sino-US relations?

Global Times: So, is there a consensus in Washington to negate the policy of engagement with China?

Sven: I don't think there's such a hysterical consensus in Washington, and while there are people who agree with Trump's policies, that doesn't mean there's a broad, unified consensus among all sectors of the U.S. political system.

To a large extent, the United States is still debating what constitutes the right and balanced China policy. Indeed, the United States competes with China in many areas. It needs to improve its competitiveness, it needs to be tougher in dealing with China in some areas, and it needs to be clear about what the United States supports and does not support. The United States also needs to compete with China in a more realistic way and build a basis for dialogue and genuine cooperation to address serious problems that cannot be solved without working with China.

So what the United States needs is a realistic policy of engagement with China, a policy that balances U.S.-China interests, a policy that recognizes America's own strengths and limitations and influences China in a positive way, rather than separating ourselves from Chinese — something Pompeo did when he foolishly tried to stir up relations between the CCP and Chinese.

I think most Chinese would see Pompeo's attack on China as an attack on China. The simplistic remarks that "Chinese people are eager to get rid of the CCP" only show how little he knows about China. He doesn't understand the complexity of China and the many different voices within China, and chinese society does have dissatisfaction with the government, but there is also dissatisfaction and opposition to the United States, which they think is an arrogant bully in many ways.

Global Times: If Trump is re-elected, will the United States follow the route claimed by Pompeo? What if Biden wins?

Sven: If Trump is re-elected, the United States will continue to decline and become a country that rejects reform internally, puts its own narrow interests above the interests of other countries externally, and provokes confrontation and polarization at home and abroad. His administration will almost certainly continue to try to sever ties with China, especially economically and people-to-people exchanges, which will lead to the isolation and impoverishment of the United States without changing China's behavior. I hope that at a critical juncture before a serious confrontation or conflict between the United States and China, there will be practical factors that will interrupt this process. Much may depend on Beijing. If Beijing abandons its long-standing judgment that peace and development are the two main themes of today's world, the likelihood of serious confrontation will rise sharply.

If Biden wins, he and his advisers say they want to adopt a policy that is both fiercely competitive and highly cooperative with China, but what exactly that means in practice remains to be seen. Some of Biden's advisers sometimes hesitate to assess the need for an engagement policy and a policy, and they don't know exactly how to manage U.S.-China competition. I'm sure the Biden administration will be much better than the Trump administration, but that's a very low standard, and the current administration has pulled the bottom line too low.