Navigating Deglobalization: Charting the Future of China-US Relations

As Donald Trump took office in 2017, a surge of de-globalization cascaded worldwide, thrusting the world into an era driven by an accelerating fondness for protectionism. Once a beacon of democracy, the U.S. — now seemingly focused on its own resurgence — has shifted from championing global democracy to prioritising domestic interests aimed at making America great again.

This strategic recalibration by the United States has gradually reverberated globally. Amid immigration issues and the pandemic, protectionism, populism, and right-wing forces have resurged, collectively steering the world toward regionalism, where smaller circles take precedence over the broader global landscape.

A Grain of Sand in the River of Time

But can history truly evolve towards deglobalization?

Since the birth of capitalism, the relentless pursuit of profit has continuously propelled globalisation forward. Despite its tumultuous journey and occasional bouts of deglobalization, the overall trend has been one of continuous progress.

Looking back in history, one can discern moments of deglobalization within the overarching trajectory of globalisation. The first occurrence transpired after the Industrial Revolution, sparked by imperialist struggles among Western nations that led to two World Wars. The second wave unfolded during the Cold War, characterised by a contest of systems and ideologies. The third wave emerged around 2000, fuelled by capitalist expansion under neoliberalism, resulting in unfair treatment of developing countries in the globalisation process, widening income gaps. The aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis saw the rise of the fourth wave, marked by significant events such as "Brexit," the adoption of "America First'' policies, the U.S.-China trade war, and the French "Yellow Vest'' movement. In this phase, developed capitalist nations actively pursued strategies to uphold their hegemonic status, address internal conflicts, and navigate the complexities of development.

Yet, when viewed through the lens of the evolution of human society, globalisation emerges as an unstoppable historical force. It stands as a monumental trend that surpasses individual will and cannot be easily changed by just one U.S. president. While there might be occasional cases of deglobalization, they are naturally destined to be temporary and not lasting (Wang, 2021).

Absurd Diplomacy

The Trump era unfolded with the dramatic launch of the "Maximum Pressure" policy against China—an ambitious initiative wielding extensive measures to exert unparalleled influence (CNBC, 2021) . Employing a comprehensive "whole-of-government" approach (Wikipedia, 2023) , it departed from the longstanding post-Cold War U.S. policy of balancing containment with engagement, instead embracing a comprehensive shift towards a competitive relationship.

Within the complex fabric of media narratives, Rust Belt workers, who constitute the core of Trump's support base, keenly experienced the repercussions of globalization, associating the perceived job losses with China. Trump's strategic deployment of protective measures, such as the Section 301 tariffs, resonated strongly with his supporters. As U.S. politics veered towards an era of entertainment and, at times, vulgarity, the China-U.S. relationship gradually deviated from its conventional trajectory, entering an unpredictable and uncontrollable phase.

Intentions Without Authority

Despite the Biden administration's claim that "America is back" (Financial Times, 2020), U.S.-China relations have yet to return to a normal track.

More than two years into office, the Biden administration has not articulated a clear foreign policy on China. The closest indication came from Secretary of State Antony Blinken, suggesting a strategy that is competitive, collaborative when possible (as seen in the global fight against climate change), and confrontational when necessary (Johnson, 2022).

Simply put, it could be anything, but we just don't know exactly what it should be.

In addition to the general lack of clarity in strategy, challenges also arise at the implementation level of policies and commitments. On one hand, the internal divisions within the Biden administration hinder the fulfilment of agreements with China. On the other hand, according to a Pew Research, a majority of Americans continue to express scepticism about Biden's ability to handle various issues, including international crises and economic policy, contributing to the difficulties (Pew research centre, 2023).

Source: Pew Research Center

Moreover, compelled by domestic pressures, Biden has had to largely persist with the sanctions against China initiated by the previous administration. Consequently, pragmatic policies beneficial to both sides have been left unimplemented.

The anti-China issue has become a political tool, with many U.S. politicians prioritising their political interests over national interests. They use the China issue to garner attention, votes, and political leverage, treating it as a remedy whenever they seek domestic nationalist support.

If Biden were to compromise with China, he would face criticism from the Republican Party. Coupled with the long-standing anti-China propaganda in the U.S., this poses significant public resistance to adjusting policies towards China.

Furthermore, in issues such as sanctions on Chinese high-tech companies, state-owned enterprises, research institutions, scholars, and matters related to Xinjiang, Taiwan, Tibet, and Hong Kong, the executive orders or measures from the previous administration have been explicitly legislated. The new administration is obligated to continue these policies due to domestic political conventions(Liang, 2022).

Therefore, even if the Biden administration intends to formulate a pragmatic China policy, it might find the desire but a lack of capability to do so.

Tariff Tango

In term of trade policy, the Biden administration wants to distance itself from Mr. Trump’s tariff pronouncement while keeping in place the trade policy it inherited from him. Biden hasn’t dismantled the tariffs on imported steel and aluminium from March 2018 or the import levies on Chinese goods later that year. According to the U.S. International Trade Commission, the steel and aluminium tariffs have cast a shadow over downstream industries. Recent figures put the cost of the tariffs on China at more than $48 billion. That’s a tax paid by U.S. consumers and firms that rely on intermediate inputs from Beijing (Wall Street Journal, 2023).

Hence, within the U.S. business leaders and among technocrats like Yellen, there exists a strong desire to reach an effective negotiation with China regarding tariff issues. This hope stems from the understanding that tariffs not only undermine China's interests but also inflict harm on American businesses, and, more crucially, on ordinary people.

The aspiration for normalisation in U.S.-China relations is shared by the majority. Stepping onto a more conventional path doesn't necessarily signify the honeymoon of the relationship; instead, it represents an approach to accurately assess the gains and losses in the relationship with China, grounded in practical and realist considerations.

Parallel Narratives

Those who regularly follow the news may observe that both China and the U.S. are entrenched in their respective discourse systems, speaking for themselves and feeling that the other side misunderstands them. The U.S. emphasises freedom, democracy, and human rights, while China has its own discourse system to justify that it has democracy, freedom, and human rights.

China has always had its own discourse system regarding U.S. relations, and the United States also has its own narrative. Both sides remain within their own circle, and there is a tendency to discredit the other. Coupled with the dominant influence of media controlled by the Democratic Party in the United States, the public is only exposed to specific portrayals of China, limiting their ability to form a comprehensive perspective. Therefore, at least at the unofficial level, effective communication between China and the United States has always been elusive.

A Vision

The new world order will no longer be characterised by a single ideology, a dominant political system. Since the last century, the United States has been promoting colour revolutions worldwide, overthrowing existing governments to establish democratic regimes, but the results have not been satisfactory. This does not necessarily imply a flaw in the American system; the issue lies in the fact that there is no universal value, no cure-all solution for all countries, the political system should be tailored to each country's own national conditions and culture.

What's crucial to recognize is that each country and ethnicity boasts its own unique cultural strengths; there's no hierarchy of high or low, superior or inferior. Every civilization is deeply embedded in the roots of its own nation and people, showcasing its distinct characteristics, strengths, and virtues. Our focus should be on bolstering dialogue and exchange among diverse civilizations, deepening mutual understanding, and fostering mutual recognition (Northwest University of Political Science and Law, 2021).

"If there were only one type of flower in the world, even if it were beautiful, it would be monotonous. One flower alone does not make spring; it is when a hundred flowers bloom that spring fills the garden."(CGTN, 2021)

At this point, people will realise that Chinese and American civilizations can coexist. The clash of civilizations theory in the post-Cold War era will no longer hold ground, giving way to mutual tolerance and understanding between civilizations.

Bibliography

CGTN. (2021). "Mirror of Words: One flower does not make spring and the only way to make spring is to have all the flowers open." Viewed 19 December 2021. Available at: https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-12-19/Mirror-of-Words-One-flower-does-not-make-spring-167dYIoOYh2/index.html

Guillén, A. & Torres, I. C. (2023) The Decline of American Hegemony: Biden’s Foreign Policy Towards China. Agrarian south : journal of political economy. [Online] 12 (3), 247–272.

Li, Y. (2019) 'China insists it is unaware of calls to Trump and says tariffs are ‘extreme pressure’ and ‘not constructive at all’'. CNBC, 27 August. Available at: URL (Accessed: 11 December 2023).

Liang, Q. (2022). The Study on U.S. Balancing Strategy towards China in the Post-Cold War Era. Jilin University, Northeast Asia College.

Manak, I. (2023) 'Biden’s Trumpist Trade Policy'. The Wall Street Journal, 30 August, 6:1. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-trumpist-trade-policy-baseline-tariffs-economy-china-market-negotiation-inflation-fae791c2 (Accessed: 11 December 2023).

Northwest University of Political Science and Law. (2021). "Exploring Forward from the Continuation of Ethnic Cultural Heritage." Available at: https://xcb.nwupl.edu.cn/llhx/hxzl/43372.htm

Pew Research Center (2023) 'Assessments of Biden and His Administration'. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/04/07/assessments-of-biden-and-his-administration/ (Accessed: 11 December 2023).

United States foreign policy toward the People's Republic of China (2023) Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_foreign_policy_toward_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China (Accessed: 11 December 2023).

Wang, S. (2021) Research on the Concept of a Community of Common Destiny for Mankind in the Perspective of "Anti-Globalization". Master's Dissertation. Hunan University of Technology. Advisor: Professor Zhang, Y. Discipline: Marxist Sinicization Studies. Research Focus: History, Process, and Development Trends of Marxist Sinicization.

Photo Credits

Biden-Xi meet: Analyst skeptical over what it means for US-China trade (cnbc.com)

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/04/07/assessments-of-biden-and-his-administration/ 

Note that opinions expressed in the article above do not necessarily represent the overall stance of Asiatic Affairs, Students' Union UCL or University College London. If you have read something you would like to respond to, please get in touch with uclasiaticaffairs@gmail.com.

Want to write for us? Don’t worry about experience - we are always looking for writers interested in Asiatic affairs. Submit your ideas at https://forms.gle/koQbsExb6XsAy1Tk6 and we’ll get in touch.