Week 5 - China and Regional and Global Security (February 28)

[Crystal Hsia]

We'll focus on a) regional and global security issues and b) China's participation in international bodies and its public diplomacy/soft power impact.

Security readings (many are very long, but for most you could read the summary and then go to a section that particularly interests you). Choose at least two readings and roam about at least one of the recommended websites. Please see if you can find any materials that would be accessible for your students. Some resources are rich in maps and satellite imagery.

Readings:
PRC State Council, "China and the World in the New Era," September 2019.
PRC State Council, "China's National Defense in the New Era," July 2019.
PRC State Council, "China's Policies on Asia-Pacific Security Cooperation," January 2017.

U.S. Defense Department, "Security Developments Involving the PRC," Nov. 2021.
U.S. Army, "Chinese Tactics," 2021.

Websites:
Center for Strategic and International Studies, Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative
RAND, "An interactive look at the US-China military scorecard"

Video:
Philip Saunders, "Strategic Issues: Myths, Worries, and Choices", USC Oct. 2016.
Movies:
Wolf Warrior 2
2012

Soft Power and Public Diplomacy:
Portland Communications and the USC Center on Public Diplomacy, "The Soft Power 30", 2015-2019.
Merics, "China's Public Diplomacy," 2019 (pdf below)
College of William and Mary, "AidData: Explore Beijing's Public Diplomacy"  Includes China's public diplomacy dashboard (click on the update button to see the new metric reflected on the map or chart)
Mattingly and Sundquist, "When does public diplomacy work? Evidence from China's 'wolf warrior' diplomats," Political Science Research and Methods, 2022. (pdf below)

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Victoria Jacks]

The first document I read portions of was the U.S. Army, Chinese tactics of 8/9/2021 (ATP 7-100.3).  The second document was the “Interactive look at the U.S.-China Millitary Scorecard.  I chose the first article because I have never read a Department of Defense document before, in fact I always assumed this type of strategic analysis was top secret.  Firstly, It was really interesting to learn how similar the U.S. and China are in their military strategies. Secondly, throughout this course I’ve been asking myself “Is the USA is reacting to China’s use of soft power, economic persuasion and expansion etc.and how are they doing so”.  I understand that all nation states are well versed in the activities of other nation states, be they friend or foe, but it was fascinating to see all the scenario’s we’ve discussed in class actually on a list under “Operational Environments”. Obviously the U.S. is understands these situations (example: Expansion of Chinese influence in emerging markets, particularly in Africa and Southwest Asia), and will use them when deciding what policy to take with China, but it was fascinating to see the information presented in such a cut and dry (very military!) manner.

 

In this document, the tension between India and China was mentioned several times, and this was news to me.  The article states that … “bilateral relations between India and China are often perceived by India as aggressive” because of the border tensions. I assumed the two were strong allies. 

 

At the same time, I found the the report’s statement that “Deception plays a critical role in every part of the Chinese approach to conflict”  where “U.S. Army operational planning uses the concept of a course of action— a scheme developed to accomplish a mission” which “focuses on defeating an enemy in direct conflict” very disengenous, and indicative of the prejudice the western world holds of the Asian world.

 

After reading this Department of Defence article, I chose to look at the actual military capabilities of both the USA and China, and so I read the article ““Interactive look at the U.S.-China Millitary Scorecard”.  The article is written from a military perspective, and while militiaries are tasked with necessary defence and preparing for war, just the title of “scorecard” underscores the importance of finding strategies that support cultural understanding and cooperation rather than aggression. The article compares and contrasts the capabilities of both militaries in locations close to and far away from China.   The article highlights the preparedness of the U.S. should war arise between the U.S. and China, and this may alay fears of many here in the states, especially my students.  However, I would use this article as a jumping off point for one of our essential questions “is war inevitable?”, and then have the kids analyse the data for ways to pursue diplomacy and peace rather than war.

 

[Kirstjen Pollock]

My brother is a military intelligence contractor, so this conversation has come up before during our visits. He claims that China is a great threat (and therefore he apparently can't visit me here!), and I always wonder what the other side of the story might be.

While it is obvious that China is increasing its power in the region, my main question is why shouldn't they? It seems natural for a country to want to improve its presence in its neighborhood, miliarily, culturally, and economically, to protect its interests. In fact, is that not what the US is and has been doing this whole time? Why shouldn't China do the same? On many fronts, it is easy to see how China views the US as a threat and is therefore fighting back, though Philip Saunders rightly notes the shift from a reactive to proactive approach. 

The AIDDATA displays how China has increased its cultural hegemony, but there is the note that the US still maintains a stronger language and cultural presence in South Central Asia. According to the Rand institute, though China is improving its military in many ways (especially technological ones), the US still has an advantage in nuclear warheads. The US Department of Defense report even identifies that Beijing sees the US as a threat that is "increasingly determined to contain the PRC." Have we considered that maybe the US IS a threat?

I'm not actually trying to defend China's actions here, just trying to figure out what the other side of this argument looks like.  

[Victoria Jacks]

I agree with you Kirstjen, that it's natural for any nation state to want to improve it's economic and cultural standing both in regions close to its borders and far away.  However, it is not acceptable for any nation state to disregard or disrespect the sovereignty of another nation, especially ones that are not as  economically or militarily strong.  Countires like the U.S., China and Russia (among others) do this constantly.  In addition, it is not okay for nation states to ignore international laws, treaties, and court decisions as the U.S. and China have done repeatedly.  Two wrongs don't make a right.

At the end of tonight's lecture, Clayton made a point about the affability of the Chinese people.  I think the same can be said about citizens of any nation - unfortunately, citizens don't run the nation - politicians do - and that is why the world has always had conflict.

[Brendon McGirr]

Great example of a realist view of the world vs a liberalist view of the world. The liberal view says a rising China in a globalized world would benefit everyone. More resources, technology, trade, perhaps international cooperation through IGOS. That said, we really have had a unilateral world order since the end of the Cold War, and the US would want to preserve this position. Realism poises that every country should be trying to maintain or raise its power proejction and limit any challengers. Nye and Meshimeier argue if China can rise peacefully, as we really have not had a major county rise to the rank of superpower since the end of WWII (and the introduction of the atomic bomb to the hard power equation). 

 

I really think it comes down to how China wants to rise. An innovative industrial power that can produce, educate, and innovate could be a blessing for the world. However, a power focused on expansion and control, especially of the South China Sea which is vital to global trade, poises a problem for the SEA region, and the world in general.

[Author]

Posts