The Future Of Us China Relations Essay

China's record of human rights violations is long and mind-boggling. Atrocities such as purging tens of millions of people during the Cultural Revolution, its infamous one-child-per-couple Population Policy, persistent oppression of Tibet and the bloody June 4 massacre at Tienanmen Square in 1989 have given the Chinese government a reputation of having little respect for human life. And yet, despite its tarnished record, China maintains its Most Favoured Nation trade status with the US and is one of Canada's top ten recipients of bilateral trade. As supposed supporters of human rights, Canadian and US governments have developed hypocritical attitudes toward China, compromising ethical values for material gain. Instead, North American

Realism is one of the most dominant international relations theories in the academic world. But within Realism, Realists are split on a number of issues. A perfect example of which being the rise of China. Over the past 30 years China has increased not only in population and power, but has also achieved one of the strongest economies in the world. The rise of China is seen as problematic by many realists. Since the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has enjoyed a position of hegemony in the unipolar power structure of the world. Many fear that the rise of China could upset the current balance of power. One such individual is a prominent realist scholar, John Mearsheimer. He believes that war with China is inevitable and “calls for the US to do whatever it can to slow China’s rise.” Another political theorist Jonathan Kirshner wrote this paper to counter many of Mearsheimer’s claims, stating that Mearsheimer’s offensive realism “is wrong, and dangerous”. Kirshner suggests that instead of using offensive realism we should look instead to the theories roots in classical realism to analyse the rise of China.

The recent interactions of emerging and established states suggest that the existing standards of the current global economy are shifting. According to Stewart Patrick in his article “Irresponsible Stakeholders? The Difficulty of Integrating Rising Powers,” the United States must accommodate for emerging states within the global economy and refrain from enforcing their values of an open and liberal international economy in order to achieve effective cooperation. Similarly, Andrew Nathan and Andrew Scobell argue in their article “How China Sees America: The Sum of Beijingʻs Fears” that as China gains more influence within the global economy, the United States will have to respond appropriately to maintain its economic values. Both articles ultimately assert that

Well, according to constructionists, how a state acts is dependent upon its ideas, beliefs, and values. Based off of this it is safe to assume that the US and China will not both respond the same to the current political climate. With a good example of this cultural split being Roger Cohen's "Dog Days of China", which shows how even with the continuing homogenizing of the world there are still significant differences in cultures; especially between the East and West. So based off of this, if the US were to pursue cooperation, it wouldn't be illogical for China to pursue competition or vice versa. As well, going off the topic of the culture determining how a state acts, it's important to note one important part of China's culture; the century of humiliation. This century of humiliation, stirred by the two Opium Wars, in which has China suffered at the hands of the west, has been a defining motif for China's recent rise to power. Which is why they leave the ruins of Yuanmingyuan, the old imperial palaces destroyed by the West in the Second Opium War, as a constant reminder. Thus possibly being an indicator how China may see their rise at the cost of the US' fall as just retribution for past transgressions. As well, in constructionist thought international relations is also determined by the structure of interactions. And the current structure is that of a single polarity world brought about by the demise of another super power after a long period of staunch tension. So China's rise could be a precursor to this structure reproducing itself. With China becoming powerful enough to rival the US, resulting in a new Cold War type period starting, then after a time leaving only a single superpower left standing. Because of this and the fact that constructionist view states that actors are irrational, it may seem that even for a constructivist, China's rise cannot be seen as

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the Cold War was over, making the U.S. the only superpower left in the world. This has made the international system much more tranquil, and relaxed. The only country potentially powerful besides the U.S., is China. Many Americans fear China, not only because they are communist, but also because of their huge population. Their population is 1.3 billion people, which accounts 1/5th of the world’s population. As one of the only potential superpowers in the world, it would be in the best interest of all Americans if the U.S. and China became allies, instead of enemies. Peace and development, economic prosperity and social progress, are goals that both of

in the US, upper, middle, and lower. They are determined by money, the rich are

The U.S. trade deficit has risen more or less steadily since 1992. In the second quarter of 2004, the trade deficit relative to GDP surpassed the 5 percent mark for the first time. Many economists already considered trade deficits above 4 percent of GDP dangerously high. The fear is that continued growth in this external imbalance of the U.S. economy will ultimately spook overseas investors. http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2004/09/b193700.html

East and west. The relationship between the two has never been truly set in stone. Both Europe and Asia have been through many large-scale power shifts throughout the millennia. Empires have risen – and inevitably been razed. If not by conquerors, then by time itself. These empires were often led by those who yearned to increase their land and holdings, and because of this the tendrils of civilization often stretched to seek uncharted territory. This undying curiosity eventually culminated in what is now referred to as the “Age of Discovery,” which spanned from the 1500s to the 1800s. By the beginning of the 20th century, most of the world’s lands had already been discovered. Trade links between China and Europe had been around since the Hellenic Age. And in the year 1900 it had been 124 years since the founding of the United States of America. Cross the Pacific Ocean, and one would find themselves face-to-face with the United States’ distant neighbor, East Asia. In East Asia, two of the most historically significant nations are China and Japan. For a number of reasons, – which will be detailed further later on – the early 1900s were a somewhat tumultuous time for both of said nations. The 20th century was by and large a time of political and economic power consolidation for both China and Japan. It is arguable that the United States played an integral role in this consolidation. The interactions between the United States, China, and Japan highlight a time when the way that

China and U.S. relations are complex, but it is important to attribute historical context when analyzing contemporary issues. Prior to China establishing their global role as a superpower, their nation endured nearly a century of humiliation which began in the 1800s and concluded in the mid-1900s. Although they’ve redeemed their nationalism, the intrusion of Western imperialism created tension and hostility which lasted for years after. Also, the United States’ response to local Chinese events, such as the Tiananmen Square Massacre, negatively impacted their relationship because it was an example of how American media and officials utilized knowledge about particular Chinese events and disseminated various rhetorical messages in response.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become more integrated and willing to cooperate within the global political and economic systems than ever in its history. However, there is growing apprehension in the Asia-Pacific region and the U.S. in regards to the consequences of rising in economic and military power in China. Descriptions about Chinese diplomacy in the policy and scholarly are less positive lately concerning China’s obedience to regional and international rules. There was little debate in the U.S. and elsewhere in regards to whether China was or was not part “the international community.” Scholars and experts in the early 1990s have contended

The ‘rise of China’ is lauded as the determinative issue for international relations this century with China assuming a more powerful role in the international system. This essay considers the issue of China’s rise and its implications for international security from both an offensive and defensive realist approach. I will show that neither realist approach can adequately explain China’s rise and its implications because it relies on realist optimism and does not account for the determinative effect of the liberal world order. Offensive and defensive realism are strands of neo-realism, distinguished from classical realism by its focus on the international system and structures. Anarchy is the scope condition of realism under which states will pursue their own interests with the ultimate goal of maintaining security.

Realism assumes that under a balance of power, the overriding aim of all states is to maximize power and become the only hegemony in the system. States only help themselves in the anarchic international system. Therefore, China’s rise is regarded as a disconcerting threat to the U.S.’s primacy of power in the present international stage. The power shift in East Asia is creating security dilemmas; the U.S. thus demands more security to its Asian allies including Philippines, Japan and South Korea. The rapidly-rising Chinese power would inevitably challenge the current international balance of power and appear aggressively in the eyes of weaker power such as the Philippines. Therefore it seeks help to its ally, the U.S., to counterbalance the power of China. China intends to gain more resources and to transform current international order to its favor according to its national interests. The 2010 Chinese White Paper on National Defence states that: “Contradictions continue to surface between developed and developing countries and between traditional

Theories are used in many fields of science, but in no field are they more prevalent than Political Science. These theories are often used and researched upon to try and attempt to discern how states interact with one another. Offensive Realism, a new branch of realist political theory, is brought forth in John Mearsheimer’s book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. This theory focuses on the key aspects of realism, while adding a twist as to why war is an option. In his book, Mearsheimer explains the history of great powers, and predicts that China, the world’s current rising great power, will not gain hegemony in Asia peacefully. With the rise of China, he asserts the US will form coalitions with multiple states throughout Asia, to contain their growing power. This rise in power, and subsequent reactions by the US, are based on his theory Offensive Realism, which is used to predict China’s future actions. The rise of powers, and the reactions of other powers, is historically analyzed, beginning in the late 18th century, all the way to modern times. These analyzes each attempt to support his overall claim that China will rise through non-peaceful means, and shows significant support with historical examples. While the theory often meets an exception when the usual non-European power, Japan, is mentioned, Mearsheimer’s theory introduces a solid new aspect to the realm of Political Science, and presents enough evidence and information to be considered integral to

Snyder claims that realism failed to predict the Cold War. Given this, Mearsheimer states “China cannot rise peacefully.” Since realists describe the world as a self-help system, according to Posen, every country “must look to its own interests relative to those of others” and because “security is the preeminent issue in an anarchic world, the distribution of capabilities to attack and defend should matter.” Thus, because China’s strive for regional hegemony inevitably threatens the power dynamic of the global system, the U.S. will, according to Mearsheimer, take an offensive realist approach that will eventually lead to war. In addition, as seen in post-Cold War, economic stability greatly determines the distribution of power. Friedberg notes, that the projected “speed and magnitude of China’s growth in recent decades appears to be unprecedented” and as early as 2015, “China’s economy could overtake that of the United States.” Although the U.S. faces an unprecedented challenge to economic power, according to Ikenberry, China has signaled cooperation by “redoubling its participation in existing institutions, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum and the East Asia Summit or working with the other great powers in the region to build new ones.” Nevertheless, following the actions of the U.S. post WWII, China strategically makes “itself more predictable and approachable” to reduce “the incentives for other

The ongoing economic rise in China effects the US in many ways, including things that some people wouldn’t even consider. It can be seen that the Chinese are beginning to need more jobs, but can that be because some of theirs are being given to us? And, that’s not the only thing they’re giving us. China has the proven to be worst pollution in the world, and it has gotten to the point where the polluted air has travelled overseas to the US, and has begun to take a toll on us. But, they’re not only giving to us. Because of it becoming harder to find jobs, the students push themselves to the limit to become perfect, which could create competition with graduates here in America.