US-China Ties Hit by Growing Distrust
Obama's Asia Trip Conspicuously Excludes China Visit
With President Obama in India right now as part of his first official Asian trip, the focus is on whether or not he will be able to carry out a planned visit to Indonesia. But conspicuously absent in the high profile Asia tour is China, which was not a planned stop off.
But this is no accident, rather it is a function of a US-China relationship that is increasingly tense, with both sides seeing a number of minor slights and policy differences snowballing into major distrust.
US anger over Chinese trade policy has been a serious driving force on the American side, though there is also the endless stream of over-dramatic policy papers warning of China’s increased military spending (which is still dwarfed by the US own military spending).
China, meanwhile, sees US pressure over its currency as unwelcome meddling, and sees Obama’s meeting with the Dalai Lama as de facto support for a separatist movement. One can only assume the administration’s Asia trip, and its lack of a Chinese stop-off, will be yet another source of concern.
In the end the growing tensions are not about anything in particular, but are also about everything in general. Both nations view the outside world in very different ways, and while the US is forever waiting on China to develop a taste for overseas adventurism they look askance as the Chinese government allows seemingly minor diplomatic slights with Japan to snowball into major crises, complete with vigorous public protests.
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- No Deal: US Restarted Pakistan Drone Strikes Despite Objections - February 22nd, 2012
- Syrian National Council Demands Foreign Invasion - February 22nd, 2012
- State Dept.: Pakistani Taliban 'Not Welcome' at Truce Talks - February 22nd, 2012
- Israeli FM: Our Decision to Attack Iran None of US, Russia's Business - February 22nd, 2012
- Hunger Strike Ends, but Adnan's Detention Without Charges Doesn't - February 22nd, 2012
drosera
November 8th, 2010 at 6:49 am
As an infrequent visitor to this site, I read this piece and wonder what new thing I have learned. The answer is: not much. Is it too much to ask to have an author do some serious research (occasionally giving sources) and to write–1200 words or so–on the subject? Opinions are not worth much unless they are backed up with examples, evidence, arguments, and responses to other interpretations. We should set the bar higher.
bozh
November 8th, 2010 at 7:42 am
china to u.n. [disunited nations;aka, u.s.] is a big cuba. A very bad exemplum. as such, it daily threatens plutocrats and not only in u.n. but the other u.n. tnx
Bianca
November 8th, 2010 at 2:05 pm
In a defense to Jason Ditz — not that I always agree with him — his reporting style is a valuable lesson on how to make most with what you are given. With the public generally having a short attention span, a foreign policy in a disarray, political forces focused only on narrow interests, the best one can do is to convey the essence of an event within a certain context. In that, Jason Ditz is very good. I would actully in his case avoid repeating the mantra of "details" from the generally available sources. They are heavily contaminated and polluted by invented and misrepresented "facts", that avoiding much of that is a real talent.