Africa -China Review Africa -China Cooperation and Transformation
By Gerald Mbanda
National sovereignty is the cornerstone of international law. Standard procedure in international law requires each country to respect the sovereignty of the other and to relate with mutual respect. Despite these standards, US top diplomats Mike Pompeo (in the previous Trump administration) and Antony Blinken (in the current Biden government) have disregarded this principle. After talking to African youth in the near past to be careful with China, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, has warned Pacific leaders about “threats to the rules-based international order” and “economic coercion” in reference to China’s growing economic and diplomatic ties with Pacific countries.
The US Secretary of State mentioned that, “Economic coercion across the region is on the rise. The US is all for more development and investment in the islands, but that investment should adhere to international standards for environmentally and socially sustainable development and should be pursued transparently, with public consultation.” He further said that “And every country, no matter its size, should always be able to make choices without fear of retribution. ” Antony Blinken said this while addressing leaders and their delegates from 11 Pacific countries and territories virtually on June 1. The countries included Fiji, Solomon Islands, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, French Polynesia, Palau and Marshall Islands as part of the Pacific Islands Conference of Leaders, which was held in Hawaii.
What such attacks by the US authorities against China show is that the US is desperate after slowly but surely losing its hegemony in the global world order. It is also an indication of the US failure to re-think its foreign policy on how to re-invent its relationship with other countries amid changing tides rather than attacking its competitors. The aggressive words by US Secretary of State intended to make other countries around the world hate China and like US, do not serve the intended purpose. Instead, the US is helping to strengthen China’s engagement with the rest of the world.
What the US does not say directly why it is angered by China in the Pacific, is not different from other regions like Africa. China’s trade volume with Pacific countries in recent years has overtaken other competitors mainly the US and Australia making China number one trading partner with Pacific countries in sea food, timber and minerals to an estimated tune of $.3.3bn.
Secondly, countries in Pacific are benefiting from Chinese loans for infrastructure development, which the US always calls “unaffordable loans” but without providing an alternative. The trade partnership and loan engagements are seen as a soft power push for China that leaves the US trailing or edged out. When in 2019, the government of Papua New Guinea asked China to refinance the government debt; Pacific analysts interpreted it as turning point in the shift of politics in the Pacific region.
Jonathan Pryke, director of the Lowy Institute’s Pacific Islands Program in Australia, observes that China is the only “country that is engaging in the pacific in a big way in the past few decades that isn’t part of the traditional club.” From this point of view, it is clear that the US views China as “the new kid in town” who does not deserve dominating the Pacific region both politically and economically. It is the same view that the US holds of China in Africa and elsewhere.
On March 19, 2021, Richard N. Haass the Committee on Foreign Relations President while appearing before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs made a presentation on US Policy towards the Indo-Pacific, in which he made revealing statements on US strategies to deal with China some of which have failed. For example, he accepted that “Trying to force countries to choose between the United States and China will not work. Here as elsewhere, all-or-nothing demands will likely produce the latter.” Although US authorities know very well that the strategy has not worked, they keep on tarnishing the image of China in other countries. Richard Haass went on to advise the Committee that the US, “should stop talking about regime change in China – it is beyond our capacity to produce and it is unclear that a more liberal and restrained China would emerge.”
While reflecting on China’s capabilities under Xi Jinping, Richard Haass told the House Committee on Foreign Affairs that, “Xi Jinping’s China is qualitatively different than Deng Xiaoping’s or Hu Jintao’s. China is no longer content to assume a low profile and bide its time. It is forcefully asserting its national interests and pushing to revise the regional and international orders. Xi militarized the South China Sea, after pledging to President Obama that he would not do so.”
The US has persistently refused to face the reality and accept that other countries can also rise to compete for dominance the same way it did. History tells us that around 1890; the US surpassed the UK in terms of GDP per capita. The UK did not tarnish the image of US for economic dominance but instead continued to relate well. It is also possible for the US and China to compete for dominance in various fields while maintaining good relations devoid of back stabbing and undermining. The current age of globalization requires the two largest economies in the world to work together, for their own benefit and that of the global community.
Gerald Mbanda is a Researcher and publisher on China and Africa Cooperation.
For comments or opinion write to us on info@africachinareview.com
