Organizer: Gonzalo S. Paz, George Washington University

Chair: Quansheng Zhao, American University

Discussant: Mel Gurtov, Portland State University

The purpose of the panel is to analyze how the rising process of China affects the management of its foreign relations, particularly vis-à-vis the United States. The historical timing is unique to test IR theories of great power relations with another emergent great power. We posit that the changes must be traced directly in this bilateral level, but also empirically grounding the theoretical thinking about the issue with a mapping of American reactions to changes in China’s relations with other areas of the world. This is important not only to understand the whole process of great power accommodation but also to study how those American reactions are assessed and included as feedback in Chinese foreign policy decision making process regarding to these areas of the world.

Analytically we will firstly focus on China’s relations with the United States, and to explore the American thinking and options about "Rising China". Our second case-study is that of Chinese relations with the European Union, a case with which America’s policy makers have been particularly concerned. Next we will move to address the challenge of the recent multiple Chinese initiatives towards Latin America, a region considered by United States as its "backyard", and the American responses to them. Finally we are going to analyze the situation on Northeast Asia, using the Korean conflict in order to understand the strategic interactions between China, Japan, Russia and the United States. The papers and comments will probably be published in a special number of Asian Perspective.

Quansheng Zhao, American University

This paper examines America's response to the rise of China and its impact on Sino-US relations by putting it in the context of the overall Asia policy of the Bush administration. We will first look at the Bush administration's global strategy and the place of Asia policy in the hierarchy of US foreign policy. Then, we can have a better understanding of the changing dynamics of
American foreign policy towards China and China's response. These policy interactions have laid a foundation for the development of Sino-US relations as we enter the new century.

Jean-Pierre Cabestan, Research Institute of Paris for Comparative Law, France

The relations between the European Union and China have developed very rapidly since the end of the Cold War. Both sides have established a close economic and political partnership, spurred by both a growing trade relationship as well as China’s desire to build a more multipolar world and the EU’s ambition to play a more active and independent role in international affairs. China has turned the EU into a priority foreign policy objective while the EU has adopted an ambitious and multifaced common China policy.

However, the EU, an entity of 25 nations since May 2004 (against 15 before) is both a complex and a rather weak political body. The majority of EU member states continues to see the US more as a close strategic partner, sharing the same political values, than as a superpower that the EU should counterbalance. Moreover, deeply divided by the Iraq war and unable to agree upon a constitution, the EU will have large difficulties forging and carrying out a more powerful Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), in general, and China policy, in particular. In other words, the EU’s China policy will remain based on its member states’s China policy smaller common denominator.

In such circumstances, the EU entity’s close military relations with the US, primarily through NATO, will probably continue to affect the strategic dimension of EU-China relations (arms embargo) and prevent the EU-US-China economic, and to some extent, cultural and political triangle from becoming a genuine strategic triangle.

Gonzalo S. Paz, George Washington University

The year 2004 will be remembered as the year in which an increasingly confident China jumped into a geopolitical and geoeconomic space always considered by the United States as it "backyard": Latin America. 2005 is being witness of the continuity and sustainability of this policy, but American responses are being enacted. The central questions addressed in this paper are: Why China is executing an economic and diplomatic offensive over Latin America? Is a rising China challenging the US hegemony over the Western Hemisphere? Which were and are the US responses to these actions?

The main argument advanced here is that there is an economic rationale behind China’s new foreign policy towards Latin America, and that the theses about an ideological or a strategic rationale must be rejected. China’s goal is to secure the provision of agriculture products, minerals and specially oil (remember UNOCAL). The lack of elasticity of China’s economy to provide raw materials that requires, need to be supplied with imports. China is not trying to challenge American hegemony in Latin America, however is the first Asian country to push enough to concern American analysts. The paper will provide empirical evidence of the new level and quality of China-LA relations. It will also evaluate China’s objectives, and to analytically distinguish and assess the main potential rationales to explain this new initiatives. I am going to gauge the American reactions and responses, and finally to evaluate the possibilities and the limits of the new Chinese foreign policy towards Latin America.

North Korean Nuclear Crisis and U.S.-China Relations: A Pitfall of Geopolitics

Masako Ikegami, Stockholm University, Sweden

Historically, the Korean Peninsula has been an arena of major powers' rivalry and conflicts. The Sino-Japan War (1894-95) and the Korean War (1950-53) are typical examples of the geo-politics over the Korean Peninsula. As the six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear crisis stagnate, the hidden inheritance of the geopolitics over the Korean Peninsula reveals. China's top priority is to maintain the North Korean regime stable, a critical condition for China's economic growth and strategic interests. Thus, China dares not take any strong measures to jeopardize the North Korean regime, such as suspending its food and oil supply to North Korea, the life-line of Kim Jong-Il's regime. South Korea tends to side with China for such a soft approach to the North Korean nuclear crisis. China and North Korea, together with Russia, may well collaborate for the 'US-free Korea' in the future 6-party/regional talks. The hidden agenda in the 6-party talks is an increasing, albeit discreet, hegemonic rivalry between the United States and China. As the global reorganization of the US overseas forces proceeds, the US-Japan alliance gets strengthened. The relationship between China and the US-Japan alliance shows a sign of rising tension over Taiwan since the US-Japan 2+2 communiqué in February 2005. Thus, there is a risk that the East Asia will have a quasi Cold War with North Korea as a de facto nuclear weapon state. The paper will finally explore ways to prevent such a destructive course.