Abstract
U.S.-China Military-to-Military Relations:Policy Considerations in a Changing Environment Andrew S. Erickson (bio) keywords United States, China, miltary relations, National Defense Authorization Act [End Page 123] executive summary This article examines the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and argues that it is both a relevant instrument of congressional oversight and an appropriate safeguard for U.S. policy in bilateral military relations with China. main argument China's rapid military modernization and increasing assertiveness under Xi Jinping—combined with growing tensions between China and the U.S.—have created a context for bilateral military relations that is significantly worse than in previous eras. This new reality makes it important to revisit the state of U.S.-China military relations with a critical eye. Initial findings suggest that the benefits of such contacts are real but limited, and in some respects they are asymmetric in favor of China's military, with little prospect of major breakthroughs in favor of U.S., allied, or even shared bilateral interests. While a moderate degree of exchange is certainly better than little or no engagement, military relations cannot and will not improve the trajectory of U.S.-China relations. The NDAA is not preventing any activities in the U.S. interest that China would likely reciprocate fully. Transcending the current situation in bilateral military engagements without compromising U.S. interests does not require revisions of the NDAA or marginalization of congressional review, but rather demands progress in Sino-U.S. relations more broadly, which may be difficult under Xi. policy implications • U.S. policy on military relations with China should proceed from a four-fold approach that is (1) clear and cogently communicated, (2) conditional and credible, (3) comprehensive, and (4) consistent. • The U.S. approach should begin with a cautious Hippocratic oath of military engagement ("first, do no harm" to U.S. security interests), which puts the burden of proof on any advocates for changing the NDAA's provisions. • U.S. military relations with China should promote openness, transparency, and innovation in specific tangible areas, particularly those that help avoid incidents when their forces are in close proximity, such as risk avoidance, crisis communication, and deconfliction procedures, as well as those that provide public goods, such as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. • Finally, the U.S. military should emphasize equitable reciprocity and pursue a transactional approach that recognizes that progress can occur only to the extent that both sides are fully willing and able to work toward this end. [End Page 124] The U.S. government's executive and legislative branches are engaged in a sweeping re-evaluation of the United States' policy toward the People's Republic of China (PRC). This sea change is driven by perceptions that China is approaching the status of a peer competitor and threatening U.S. leadership in critical advanced industries that underwrite the United States' national security leadership and military power. Beijing is doing so through information operations, influence efforts, and espionage designed to confuse and lower resistance as it seeks to undermine U.S. strength, acquire information to emulate U.S. sources of power, and achieve dominance in critical areas essential to U.S. leadership. While concern is outpacing consensus on what strategies and actions to take, engagement is no longer the default setting for U.S. policy. Official U.S. government and other institutional interchanges with the Chinese state and society, particularly military relations, will increasingly be scrutinized to ensure that they are not undermining U.S. interests. Accordingly, for the United States, China's ongoing lack of transparency regarding both military capabilities and intentions, coupled with its rapid increases in defense spending and wide-ranging military modernization, generates great concern. Defense policy goes to the heart of a nation's vital interests and is necessarily sensitive and contested. This extends to bilateral and multilateral military relationships. Military relations cannot bolster or independently stabilize Sino-U.S. relations. Typically, they serve as an indicator of the overall relationship's broader health, one that is able to influence relations only for the worse. Chinese interlocutors frequently refer to military-to-military relations as "the short stave in the barrel" of the overall relationship...
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.