Peace Magazine , page . Some rights reserved.
Search for other articles by kgsimons here
In November, Chinese leader Xi Jinping met with Joe Biden around the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting. Economics was on the top of the agenda.
In addition to the deterioration in security relations-the U.S. shootdown of the Chinese balloon, the increasing tensions in the South China Sea-the two countries have been involved in a low-intensity trade war and a tit-for-tat brawl on advanced technology. The United States has imposed an escalating series of export controls on semiconductors, artificial intelligence technology, and the like. This summer, China retaliated by restricting exports on the two key rare earth elements of gallium and germanium, which China produces 90 percent and 60 percent respectively-thereby reducing the amount that China made available on the global market to essentially zero.
Pundits and media commentators, following the lead of the Biden administration, worked hard to lower expectations for the Biden-Xi meeting. ‘We’re not talking about a long list of outcomes or deliverables,’ a senior administration official told reporters. ‘The goals here really are about managing the competition, preventing the downside risk of conflict and ensuring channels of communication are open.’
Sounds to me like the first meeting at the office of a couples counselor. Since the Trump presidency, everyone has been talking about the ‘decoupling’ of China and the United States. It’s really too bad that Biden and Xi don’t have the services of a third-party facilitator who can help the couple sort through their problems.
I humbly offer my services as a mediator.
My clients have built a strong relationship that has lasted for nearly 50 years. China and the United States come from very different backgrounds, so it’s only to be expected that they will have some conflicts. But even while they were bickering with one another, these particular clients set a new record in trade in goods last year (though it has declined since then). Like any successful couple, they have become dependent on one another while preserving a good deal of independence.
During this first visit to my office, I will encourage Biden and Xi to start out by acknowledging what’s working well in the relationship.
My guess is, however, that the two will soon fall to griping.
Beijing is angry about the tariffs that Donald Trump imposed during his presidency and that Biden hasn’t lifted, which China pegs at an average of 19 percent compared to the 7.3 percent that China imposes on U.S. products. It’s not happy about the export controls on advanced technology that the United States and European Union have imposed. And it really doesn’t like the way that Europe and the United States have put pressure on manufacturers to stop relying on China for critical raw materials.
Washington has accused China of ripping off the intellectual property of U.S. firms. It’s beyond annoyed that China has been using advanced technology to upgrade its military, and it’s concerned as well about China’s human rights record. It puts Chinese tariffs on U.S. goods at somewhere between 15 and 25 percent.
Both countries have other complaints. The United States worries about China’s military actions in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, its military alliance with Russia, and its efforts to gobble up critical resources in the Global South. China is furious at how the United States is building alliances-such as the ‘Quad’ with India, Japan, and Australia-designed specifically to contain China’s ambitions. Another major irritant is the aggressive military actions that the United States takes near China’s borders.
Complaining is not the royal road to reconciliation. Biden and Xi have to listen to each other to make any progress. That’s certainly what administration officials mean when they say that both sides have to commit to ‘ensuring channels of communication are open.’
But let’s face it: listening isn’t enough either.
If couples have children, they have an obvious mutual interest in raising the family in a healthy environment.
Biden and Xi don’t have any children in common. But the trade between the two countries functions as a kind of offspring of the relationship. And let’s face it: my clients are really screwing up with that particular kid.
The tariffs in particular have not really benefitted either side. On the U.S. side, the tariffs have cost U.S. consumers a huge amount of money, to the tune of $1.4 billion a month (by the end of 2018). Through 2021, that added up to $48 billion that consumers shelled out in extra cash.
It’s harder to know how much China has been affected by the tariffs, though one study concluded on the basis of a reduction in the intensity of night-time lighting in China that local economic activity shrank. However, China has probably not suffered as much as the United States, since its U.S.- bound exports decreased by only 8.5 percent (compared to a decrease of 26.3 percent of China-bound exports from the United States) and its exports to the rest of the world increased by 5.5 percent (compared to an increase of only 2.2 percent for U.S. exports to the rest of the world).
Then there’s the matter of the global commons. A couple that spends less time and energy squabbling can turn their attention to improving the neighborhood. But first, they have to marshal the resources to do so.
Both China and the United States devote enormous sums to countering perceived threats from the other side. A very large chunk of the nearly $1 trillion of U.S. military spending is devoted to that goal. China spends somewhere between $225 billion (Beijing’s figures) and $300 billion (outside estimates). It’s fair to say that at least half of that combined figure-around $650 billion a year-is being poured down the drain of ‘preparedness’ for some future battle between the two superpowers.
If China and the United States engaged in threat reduction-and then proceeded to arms control-that would free up a lot of money that could go, for instance, toward addressing climate change.
The couple could team up to work on other resource questions. The United States and China are competing furiously to secure critical raw materials throughout the world. What if they cooperated instead on research on recycling and less mining-dependent alternatives? The United States and China are both guilty of over-fishing (with China the more serious culprit). What if they led a global effort to manage ocean resources more responsibly?
Of course, it’s not my job to tell clients what to think. But I can steer them toward what I think are more useful ways of working together as a couple.
One tactic is to get them to talk about the various threats that they view in common. My clients are both worried about unpredictable leaders-other than themselves, naturally-who could start a nuclear war or unleash a pandemic. My clients are worried about religious fundamentalism. They are both concerned about the collapse of the Russian government and its replacement by fratricidal chaos (some other countries fall into this category as well).
The list of common projects is immense. But how can the two sides overcome a trust deficit to re-establish a healthy working relationship?
When a couple doesn’t trust each other, someone has to make a first attempt at reconciliation, however modest. It might be an apology or the purchase of some flowers or a promise, finally, to watch a baseball game together.
As a therapist, I don’t tell my clients what to do. Instead, I ask questions.
*“With the presidential election coming up next year,’ I ask Joe Biden, ‘what are you most worried about?”
“The economy,’ he says, curtly.”
“Can you be more specific?”
“Prices shooting back up.”
“How can you best prevent that?”
He looks impatient. “Well, there’s the Federal Reserve, and the interest rates, and the”
I’m shooting meaningful glances at Xi, who is glowering in his chair. ‘And…’
‘Yes,’ Biden begrudgingly agrees. ‘The economy is still taking a hit from the tariffs.’
‘Which means?’ I prompt.
Biden glances at Xi. “I suppose we could consider a partial reduction of some of the tariffs if…”
“If…?” I ask.
“If he does something in return.”
I turn my attention to Xi. ‘What do you think?’
‘We could consider a partial reduction of some of the tariffs if…’
“If…?”
“If he does something in return,” Xi says.
‘Those rare earth element export controls have to go, “Biden says.
“And so do the controls on AI chips,” Xi says.
The horse-trading begins in earnest. In short order, the clients have drawn up a preliminary agreement on tariffs and export controls.
It’s a start.
Next week, they’ll meet again in my office and we’ll practice our affirmations. We’ll do a short exercise involving gratitude’s.
Then we’ll move on to saving the planet.
John Feffer is the director of Foreign Policy in Focus at the Institute for Policy Studies and a member of Project Save the World’s Board of Directors.