美中全球议题对话项目

The United States and China have to take more proactive steps in seeking measures aimed at conflict avoidance in order to sustain peace and security around the world. One major issue in assessing the prospects for world peace is miscommunication and misperception that fuels the hawks and hardliners within both camps; a potent combination which can lead to war in the long term. An example can be drawn from the South China Sea dispute. Whether it be the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy Rear Admiral Yang Yi’s comments in 2015 regarding quickening the pace of land reclamation in response to U.S. freedom of navigation operations, or Ely Ratner’s more recent
suggestion that the United States arm China’s neighbors with U.S weapons and station U.S troops as tripwires in response to China’s rapid land reclamation. In either case, misperception of the other side’s aims weigh heavily in eliciting ever more extreme responses that can lead to conflict. These misperceptions and miscommunications can be mitigated by increasing high-level exchanges between military or civilian counterparts because they can lead to greater transparency, the development of trust through the building of relationships (关系), and cooperation.

An example of this is the signing of the Army-to-Army Dialogue Mechanism, which began in 2015. This high-level exchange between the PLA Ground Force and the U.S. Army has begun the process of greater exchanges between both nations' militaries and aims to deepen cooperation by planning joint military exercises. A short time thereafter, the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Rules of Behavior for Safety of Air and Maritime Encounters was signed as a way to prevent an unexpected showdown between U.S. and Chinese forces. This demonstrates exchanges are effective and more can be done by both civilian and military officials from both sides to cooperate for the betterment of the global community.

The United States and China should also initiate joint peacekeeping and humanitarian operations to combat global instability and provide another means of cooperation. Detractors will claim that this view is unrealistic due to a whole host of national security issues that this step will present. Yet, there are already organizations within the U.S. and Chinese governments that specialize and hold annual summits with regards to peacekeeping and stability operations. The Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute at the United States Army War College hosts an annual conference with the Chinese Ministry of National Defense’s Center for Security Cooperation. One step that can be taken is to write a joint doctrine that delineates specific ways that U.S. and Chinese forces can complement one another during humanitarian or peacekeeping operations. Such a doctrine can be similar in scope to the Center for Army Lessons Learned handbook regarding unified action partners but with a more directed focus on plans for implementation with U.S.-Chinese partnership.

Through the development of doctrine, fears regarding national security threats from both sides can be assuaged, and a framework for implementation can be put into effect. Stability operations around the world, for example in Mali and Somalia, can benefit greatly from an UN-endorsed bilateral peacekeeping proposal between the United States and China. The last hurdle would be to set aside ideological differences that serve as the root of distrust between both nations.

The United States and China need to observe ideological prudence to facilitate greater cooperation in the pursuit of world peace and security. The United States has, in the past, been critical of China’s rise because of the view that China is not a democracy. Some analysts and policymakers in the United States have hoped that ever since Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping began open market reforms in China, liberalization of the markets would lead to liberalization of the Chinese government. Others look at China’s governmental structure and hold it as the antithesis of all the values held in the United States. As a result, some continue to hold on to the belief that China is ripe for a change in governance. This type of view sets China up as an existential threat to the core beliefs of the United States. This perspective is dangerous because it places the United States on a trajectory to clash with China ideologically, thereby limiting the extent of cooperation.

Similarly, in China, the rise of nationalism based on the historiographic construction of the “century of humiliation” by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has helped build underlying tension between the West and China. Furthermore, a ban on what is termed “historical nihilism,” or narratives counter to the party’s own, has stunted alternative views that may appear to threaten the party’s legitimacy. It has allowed the CCP to push the teleological idea that without the party (没有共产党) there can be no new China (没有新中国). These views, supplemented by propaganda posters which warn of “hostile foreign agents,” only serve to create an atmosphere of xenophobia and limit the desire for cooperation. Both the United States and China need to approach this issue with more moderation in order to cooperate towards a more peaceful and secure world.

Without a doubt, U.S.-China relations will be most significant in the coming century to shaping peace and security among the global community. The United States and China can better serve the global community in the domain of peace and security by taking measured steps to avoid conflict, seeking ways to implement join peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts, and to set aside alarmingly divergent ideological views. By taking these first steps, peace between the United States and China will guarantee global security; while cooperation will serve to elevate global prosperity.

Ulysses McGuinness is a senior at the U.S. Military Academy with a double major in international history and Chinese. (His views are his own and do not represent those of the U.S. government.)