美中全球议题对话项目

American nationalism has risen rapidly in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, typified by the 2016 Presidential campaign, and manifesting itself in proposals that would damage the post-WWII international order from which the United States and China both benefit. Propositions to merely selectively uphold NATO mutual defense and encourage East Asian allies to acquire nuclear weapons would destabilize an already fracturing security apparatus and leave all states ultimately less safe. Likewise, threats of colossal tariffs  and mercantilist trade policy would serve to construct walls between open economies, removing economic disincentives from military calculations and making conflict more likely globally. Furthermore, anger of a substantial portion (almost 40 percent) of the U.S. population has been levied in no small part against China, with humiliation of the perceived opponent  becoming as important as resolving actual conflicting interests.

Resolving other Sino-American disputes will be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, without addressing the emblazoned “stars and stripes” nationalism that could hamstring diplomats and policy makers in future negotiations. China must also address issues of fervent nationalism before these sentiments curtail the dragon’s political options and range of action. China has actively flamed the fans of its own nationalist sentiment as a means to spur support in international disputes and to draw away from internal unrest. Yet even the Chinese Communist Party has begun to recognize this anger may be surpassing its control. Recently, as The Hague dealt a blow to China’s South China Sea claims, its internet censors abruptly reversed their nationalist roles, and shifted to deleting calls for war with the
Philippines and other extreme measures, fearing they might catch on and force the government’s diplomatic hand. Much as with its American counterpart, the ‘dragon rising’ mentality could force China’s hand diplomatically and curtail its political options in time of crisis.

The most concrete and immediate action both countries must take to combat this nationalist turn is to tone down the political and diplomatic rhetoric when regarding one another. The past few years have seen a consistent preference for escalation, rather than negotiation, with the South China Sea going from a peaceful sea route to a militarized minefield of Chinese air bases patrolled actively by the U.S. Navy. Although clear confluences exist on issues ranging from terrorism to global development and climate change, political figures in both countries choose to constantly highlight only conflicting interests, such as trade disputes and security disagreements, in the complex relationship. These leaders must make an active effort to reduce the toxicity of the other party or be forced to act upon the rage they create.  

Additionally, the United States and China must act consistently to open up their ranges of action by reducing the nationalist forces that rage through both countries. The United States and China must engage their political classes, business professionals and general populaces in consistent interaction. Although this has already begun on the small scale with the Obama administration’s initiative to teach Chinese to millions of American students and the influx of Chinese students attending American universities, much more needs be done. A good example to follow would be the European Union’s ERASMUS program, which with the proper funding, would allow travel and connection between Chinese and American students and allow conversation deeper than the scapegoating we now see. Programs such as this U.S.-China Dialogue are a good start, but do not do enough to envelop the entirety of society, and often remain the privilege of an elite few, leaving most of the country vulnerable to demagogues who seek political power.

Ultimately, the U.S.-China relationship will define the 21st Century in the history books. Whether it is a Peloponnesian repetition, an End of History cooperation or something in between, figures on both sides of the Pacific will need a great deal of diplomatic leeway to find where the two countries can agree on difficult issues like the South China Sea, cyber warfare, and a myriad other dilemmas. The forces of nationalism presently threaten that ability to negotiate effectively. Individual problems can be solved by skilled negotiators given sufficient time and space. It is when leaders’ hands are forced by public frenzy that danger becomes disaster. 

Austin Parenteau is a sophomore at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. He studies international politics and is a Carroll Fellow.