The next United States president must make clear that Washington does not seek Beijing’s collapse and should not encourage efforts for Taiwanese independence, a recent think tank report suggested.
The suggestions were made in a report published last week by the Brussels-based International Crisis Group, which warned that the strategic rivalry between the world’s two largest economies was set to intensify, no matter who takes office.
The report suggested that while the candidates – Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump – might differ in their approach towards China, both shared a view that it is a “chief strategic competitor” for the US, and that the next US leader must act to minimise “escalation risks”.
The report described the existing “dual deterrence” strategy on Taiwan as “the only viable basis for preserving peace across the Taiwan Strait”.
Under that strategy, the US seeks to not only deter mainland China from attacking on Taiwan but also to deter Taiwan from declaring independence in case that triggers an attack.
“The US should continue working to persuade China that it would incur devastating military and economic consequences were it to attempt to invade Taiwan,” the report said, adding that part of that effort should involve bolstering Taiwan’s capabilities.
At the same time, the US should also tell Taiwanese leader William Lai Ching-te that taking a harder line than his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen, “could complicate Washington’s efforts to be supportive of Taipei and play into Beijing’s coercion”.
The US should also “exercise greater discipline” by showing it remains committed to the dual deterrence strategy and “avoid seeming displays of support for Taiwan that actually undercut the island’s security”.
This means senior officials should not encourage Taiwan to make moves towards independence, the report said, adding that Washington should also invest more effort in assuring Beijing that a peaceful settlement is possible.
Beijing views Taiwan as a breakaway province, to be brought under mainland control by force, if necessary. Most countries, including the US, do not recognise the island as an independent state but Washington is opposed to a unilateral change to the status quo.China has made clear to the US on multiple occasions that Taiwan is the “number one red line” that must not be crossed.
The report argued, the next US administration should avoid stating that it aims to achieve a “cold war-style defeat of China” which “would risk turning a manageable competition into an existential struggle against a challenger … that is far more economically capable and deeply integrated into the international order than the Soviet Union ever was”.
While Washington’s allies and partners may share its apprehensions about China, the report said few, if any, would join hands with the US to “depose the Chinese Communist Party or relegate China to the periphery of the international order”.
The report proposed that the US adopt a more nuanced assessment of China’s trajectory, although it pointed out that discourse in Washington alternates between “analytical extremes” where Beijing is “either on a march toward global hegemony or on the precipice of systemic decline”.
“The more prosaic likelihood is that China will endure as a pillar of the international order, most obviously in Asia. The US no more expect to contain it within the continent than China can expect to displace the US from there,” it said.
“Competitive coexistence between the two countries is far likelier than a power transition.”
The report also said the future US leader should seek to deepen communications between the two countries’ militaries and more frequently employ bilateral strategic channels to advance discussion on issues such as artificial intelligence.
“Regardless of who wins November’s election, the next US administration should pursue a tenable cohabitation that enables Washington and Beijing to compete responsibly, reduce the risk of armed conflict and protect space for bilateral cooperation,” it said.
The 42-page report outlined the “markedly different” approaches towards China that Harris and Trump might adopt based on their past statements and interviews the think tank conducted.
Trump was seen as most likely view US-China relations through a lens of trade, with the report suggesting he appears committed to accelerating an economic decoupling.
During his presidency, Trump adopted an “antagonistic” approach to China, imposing tariffs in 2018. Trump has now pledged to impose a tariff of at least 60 per cent on Chinese exports.
Quoting former officials, the report said that in a second term Trump might revoke permanent normal trade relations with China and accelerate efforts to reduce reliance on China for rare earths that are vital to manufacture electronic devices.
“One former official said a major impetus for a more aggressive economic agenda would be Trump’s desire to ‘make China pay’ for the havoc that the coronavirus wreaked in the US, which he attributes in significant part to China and believes cost him re-election in 2020,” it added.
The report said Trump’s administration and campaign statements indicated a “fundamentally transactional” mindset, meaning he may be willing to downplay other long-standing objectives – including stronger alliances in Asia – if he believes Washington could gain economic leverage from Beijing.
“Trump would likely take a highly personalistic approach to China policy, framing his relationship with Xi as the decisive dynamic in US-China relations,” it said.
“He would also be likely to think bilaterally. Rather than envisioning an Asia strategy that would inform and encompass an approach to China, he seems to conceptualise China strategy as self-contained.”
As for Harris, the report said her China policy might draw from her upbringing as the daughter of civil rights activists – informing her focus on human rights – and her career as a prosecutor, which has given her a keen interest in international law.
“Yet she does not view China exclusively through those two lenses, maintaining that even as the US calls out China for what it perceives as violations of the norms and laws that Washington says should anchor the international order, the world’s two foremost powers should pursue opportunities to cooperate,” it said.
Citing a former official, the report said the vice-president had been “very invested” in Joe Biden’s policies and was likely build upon them, which means a focus on economic competitiveness and deepening Washington’s network of alliances in Asia.
“She would likely approach China policy with a sense of realism concerning both relative US decline and the growing complexity of the international order,” it said.
According to the report, one of her key tasks would be to refine economic policy towards China, and place a greater emphasise ties with developing economies.
Tim Walz, Harris’ running mate who once worked as a teacher in China and later organised trips to the country for high schoolchildren, could shape China policy too, with the report saying he may advocate for more US-China student exchanges.
“Much as the candidates may differ in style and approach, whoever wins should start with a realistic assessment of Washington’s competitor. Beijing is neither gliding toward hegemony nor staring down decline … instead, it is likely to prove an enduring competitor on several fronts,” the report said.
“The complex and often difficult relationship between the US and China will likely test leaders in both Washington and Beijing for decades to come.”
