The Indian Panorama

Tag: Yang Jiechi

  • Biden resets ties with allies to check China

    Biden resets ties with allies to check China

    By Yogesh Gupta

    “The US and Europe have fundamental contradictions with regard to China and Russia. While the US faces an immediate threat from China, many European countries have extensive economic ties with China and no security concerns. For Europe, the more immediate threat is from Russia, a perception not fully shared by the US. Several European countries weren’t happy that the US (and NATO) resources would be drawn away from Moscow to a more distant China.”

    President Biden’s initiatives would strengthen transatlantic unity and build on resetting relations with Russia, isolating China. It may even embolden some of Xi’s critics at home to question whether his wolf warrior diplomacy had yielded any positive results for the country.

    President Biden’s first foreign visit to Europe from June 9-16 will be remembered for how he tamed dissenting and doubting allies and rejuvenated the transatlantic alliance to convey a message of strong unity and resolve to an aggressive China (and a combative Russia), which is trying to challenge the international order for unilateral gains. China was the dominant theme during his discussions with G-7 leaders at Cornwall, UK (June 11-13) and EU and NATO leaders (June 14-16) at Brussels and Geneva and the underlying theme in his discussions with President Putin on July 16. The final G-7 communiqué is dominated by the US with several paras aimed directly and indirectly against China (and some against Russia), such as eradicating the use of forced labor in global supply chains (reference to Xinjiang and Tibet), collective approaches to challenge unfair trade policies, use of technologies to promote democratic values and fundamental freedoms. The G-7 supported President Biden’s initiative of “a timely, transparent, expert-led and science-based WHO-convened phase-2 Covid-19 origins study in China”. It is going to rile China as its senior diplomat Yang Jiechi had urged the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken in his phone conversation on June 11 to “not politicize the source of the virus and focus on global cooperation in the fight against the disease”. The group’s formulation on China’s human rights abuse in Xinjiang, respect for fundamental freedoms and a high degree of autonomy for Hong Kong is a compromise as the mention of genocide which the US wanted was dropped to accommodate the concerns of Germany, France and Italy. The US and Europe have fundamental contradictions with regard to China and Russia. While the US faces an immediate threat from China, many European countries have extensive economic ties with Beijing and no security concerns. For Europe, the more immediate threat is from Russia, a perception not fully shared by the US. Several European countries were not happy that the resources of US (and NATO) would be drawn away from Moscow, their primary threat, to a more distant China. They were also worried that taking a hard line on China would make her less receptive to cooperate on more pressing multilateral issues such as climate change, control of pandemics and trade. For the first time, the G-7 took a united stand against China on an issue of core interest to her, i.e., Taiwan, and in support of the US by agreeing on the “importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and peaceful resolution of cross-strait disputes”. The G-7 unveiled a new initiative known as “Build Back Better World” (B3W) to give an alternative choice to the developing countries in building infrastructure to spare themselves from China’s debt trap projects. The group has agreed to provide one billion doses of coronavirus vaccines in 2021-22 and more later. At Cornwall G-7 meetings, India was more deeply engaged at the ministerial and PM’s level. PM Modi spoke of the need for democratic societies to strengthen each other’s hands to respond to new challenges, India’s efforts to share its development partnership with other developing countries, its readiness to work with B3W partners and its engagement with WHO, G-20 and G-7 countries for dealing with the current pandemic and preparing for future pandemics.

    NATO leaders’ 79-point statement devoted three paragraphs with 10 mentions castigating China’s behavior. It said: “China’s stated ambitions and assertive behavior present systematic challenges to the rules-based international order”. China is investing heavily in new disruptive technologies such as autonomous systems, facial recognition and artificial intelligence and putting these into new weapon systems, which are changing the nature of warfare never seen before. China should act responsibly in the international system, including in space, cyber and maritime domains, in keeping with its role as a major power. President Biden’s meeting with President Putin at Geneva (June 16) was another high point of this visit. It reflected his desire to focus on the escalating rivalry between the US and China by reducing tensions with Moscow. He improved the atmospherics by calling Russia as one of the two Great Powers (other being the US and not China) and President Putin a worthy adversary, which would have been music to Putin’s ears. Though the results of the meeting were modest (establishment of bilateral strategic stability dialogue for control of new and dangerous weapons, limitation on the use of cyber weapons and return of Ambassadors) it is expected to promote a dialogue between the two countries on other issues of mutual concern, reducing current hostility and tensions.

    China would be disappointed as it had always thought that the huge dependence of the US’s European and Asian allies on her would never allow emergence of a unified transatlantic bloc aimed against Beijing. Though some differences remain on the economic issues, President Biden has been able to rally his disparate allies together. The EU has frozen the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment hurriedly concluded by Beijing in December 2020 before President Biden’s takeover.

    President Xi Jinping had tried to forge a united front with Russia by deputing his senior diplomat Yang Jiechi to Moscow but that ploy has not worked. Chinese official media has grudgingly admitted that the “Geneva meeting shows that both sides have the will to stop the worsening US-Russia relationship. President Biden wants to ease the tensions with Russia to focus on dealing with China now”.

    President Biden’s initiatives would strengthen transatlantic unity and build on resetting relations with Russia, isolating China. It may even embolden some of Xi’s critics at home to question whether his wolf warrior diplomacy had yielded any positive results for the country. It would add increasing pressure on Xi to defend himself as he rallies the Chinese Communist Party to celebrate 100 years of its foundation in July 2021 and is likely to temper China’s aggressive behavior toward its neighbors.

    (The author is a former Ambassador)

  • H&M, Nike face boycotts in China as Xinjiang becomes wedge issue

    H&M, Nike face boycotts in China as Xinjiang becomes wedge issue

    US and European retail brands in China are suddenly facing a dilemma: Embrace cotton from Xinjiang and come under attack in the West, or reject it and risk a boycott in the world’s second-biggest economy. Hennes & Mauritz AB was blasted by the Communist Youth League and the People’s Liberation Army on Wednesday after social-media users dug out an undated company statement about accusations of forced labor in Xinjiang. Calls to boycott the Swedish retailer quickly spread to include Nike Inc., which has previously said it won’t source products from the region due to labor concerns. Brand ambassadors in China for both firms cut ties with the companies in recent days.

    “Want to make money in China while spreading false rumors and boycotting Xinjiang cotton? Wishful thinking!” the Communist Youth League said in a post on Weibo, referring to H&M. One of the PLA’s Weibo accounts called H&M’s statement “ignorant and arrogant.”

    The Communist Party’s move to target companies over Xinjiang shows President Xi Jinping’s government is seeking to impose real costs for governments and businesses that criticize China’s human-rights record as the Biden administration aims to unite allies over the issue. Bejing slapped reciprocal sanctions on European Union officials on Monday, following coordinated sanctions and statements by the EU, US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

    At a testy meeting between top diplomats of the US and China last week, Politburo member Yang Jiechi made extended remarks attacking the US’s human-rights record and calling on the world to stop interfering in China’s “internal affairs.” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying continued the pushback this week, hitting the US and Europe over everything from the slave trade and Nazism to the killing of George Floyd and alleged hoarding of coronavirus vaccines.

    Chinese firms are now rallying around Xinjiang, which produces more than 80% of the country’s cotton. Anta Sports Products Ltd. and Hongxing Erke Sports Products Co. were among companies that issued statements saying they will continue to source the material from the region. Shareholders rewarded firms that displayed patriotism, while punishing those with links to Western brands.

  • Biden spells out foreign policy but does not indicate who are ‘key partners’

    Biden spells out foreign policy but does not indicate who are ‘key partners’

    By Shyam Saran

    The Biden speech is notable for its stress on democratic values and human rights as guiding principles of American diplomacy. He declared that ‘we must start with diplomacy rooted in America’s most cherished democratic values; defending freedom, championing opportunity, upholding universal rights, respecting the rule of law, and treating every person with dignity.’

    In a major speech at the State Department on February 4, US President Biden set out his foreign policy agenda in considerable detail. The speech bears careful attention as it indicates the priorities for this administration. One may note that there is not a single mention of India. The Indo-Pacific strategy and Quad as means of dealing with the challenge of China are missing. This confirms the assessment that India may not be as key a partner for the US under Biden as it appeared to be under the Trump administration. The omission is even more telling since this administration has several top professionals who are familiar with India and have had intensive dealings with it during earlier democratic administrations. One cannot argue that there are no India hands in the administration. We may need to work harder to sustain and further develop the Indo-US partnership. Biden laid stress on reviving alliance relationships describing them as ‘our greatest asset’. He added the phrase ‘key partners’ in the next sentence but gave no indication as to which countries are covered in this generic category. In the Indo-Pacific, the US is likely to give precedence to its military allies, Japan, South Korea and Australia. There is acknowledgement of the adversarial relations with China and Russia but the early extension of the START agreement for another five years reflects the willingness to remain engaged with Russia. The same approach will likely follow with China. Biden said clearly that on issues important to US interests, it will engage with China and climate change will offer the entry point for resuming high-level engagement. But US-China confrontation will remain part of the geopolitical landscape. The subsequent phone conversation between Secretary of State Blinken and state councilor Yang Jiechi demonstrated mutual antipathy.

    There are two other themes. One, the US will play a more active role on the multilateral front. This is reflected in the return to the Paris climate agreement, the resumption of membership of the WHO and a return to the UN Human Rights Commission. One should expect activism at the WTO in concert with the EU and Japan. The US may drop its opposition to the WTO appellate process by allowing fresh appointments to the appellate mechanism. It may no longer oppose the new Director General whose appointment Trump had held up. We did not see any indication of Biden’s interest in rejoining the Trans-Pacific Partnership or reviving negotiations on a Trans-Atlantic trade agreement. There continues to be caution on this front even as the WTO emerges as the forum where trade and investment issues may be negotiated. Both on climate change and multilateral trade issues, India could come under pressure. Biden obviously expects to leverage the US return to the Paris Agreement to pressure ‘major emitters’ to come up with more ambitious emission reduction commitments. India is already identified as a major emitter and will be expected to commit to achieving carbon neutrality, at least not later than China (2060). On the WTO, there is a long-standing record of bitter divergences on several key issues. Unless both countries make a major effort to manage these points of conflict, other more positive aspects of relations may be impacted.

    The Biden speech is notable for its stress on democratic values and human rights as guiding principles of American diplomacy. He declared that ‘we must start with diplomacy rooted in America’s most cherished democratic values; defending freedom, championing opportunity, upholding universal rights, respecting the rule of law, and treating every person with dignity.’ There followed a long paragraph on the recent developments in Myanmar and the expectation that friends and allies will join the US in demanding restoration of the democratically elected government. India may not be able to oblige, given its equities in Myanmar. We should expect greater scrutiny of domestic developments in India. We are witnessing some of the likely strains on relations, thanks to comments in the US Congress on the ongoing farmers’ protests. There is an assumption that the US administration may remain muted on these issues, given the importance of India’s role in the Indo-Pacific strategy. The speech heralds a more difficult challenge on this score.

    The initial moves on India’s western flank are encouraging. The US has changed its policy on Yemen. It could well engineer its return to the Iran nuclear deal. Here its allies and its adversaries, China and Russia, have a vested interest in facilitating the revival of the agreement. They will do the heavy lifting. This would be good for India.

    One should expect the Indo-US partnership on defense and counterterrorism to remain strong. Despite Biden having neglected to mention it, India’s role in maritime security and in Quad remains indispensable.

    One is unable to see the likelihood of PM Modi and Biden developing the kind of personal chemistry that was evident with Obama and more so with Trump. Biden has announced that he would convene a summit of democracies and India would certainly be invited. The date is uncertain. Perhaps before that there would be a G-7 summit hosted by the UK Prime Minister to which PM Modi is invited. That could be an occasion for a summit with Biden and for putting in place a positive and constructive trajectory for Indo-US relations. The democratic connection had helped us in clinching the Indo-US nuclear deal. President Bush, like Biden, was invested in promoting the democratic values. India and the US had together launched the UN Fund for Democracy in 2005. Perhaps we need to revive this initiative at this juncture.

     

    The bottom line: strengthening Indo-US partnership may require more hard work than one may have anticipated.

    (The author is a Former Foreign Secretary of India, and senior fellow, Centre for Policy Research)