From September 4-5, China hosted this year’s G-20 Summit in Hangzhou, a city known for beautiful scenery and its historical West Lake. Launched in response to the 2008 global recession, the forum was an opportunity for the world’s 20 largest economies to convene and discuss major challenges. Although commentary in China and Russia was quite positive about the Summit’s results, others in India, Japan, and South Korea were less enthusiastic. The gathering was also part of Barack Obama’s last trip to Asia as president and was closely watched by rising powers for signs of what the future might have in store for the international political and economic order. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, Russia, India, Brazil, Japan, and South Korea on the G-20 Summit.
China’s theme for the Summit was “Toward an Innovative, Invigorated, Interconnected and Inclusive World Economy.” As the host leader, Chinese President Xi Jinping urged leaders to avoid “empty talk” and instead seek “concrete actions to implement joint plans on sustainable development, green financing, and anti-corruption.” At a business focused event on the sidelines of the Summit, Xi promised China does “not seek to rewrite the international rulebooks” but instead wanted to “refine the existing mechanisms to facilitate global win-win cooperation.”
Most commentary in China hailed the Summit as a success and a clear sign of China’s rising economic and political strength on the world stage.
- Wang Peng, associate researcher at Fudan University, identified a “Hangzhou Consensus” emerge from the Summit with leaders recognizing the need to “revitalize globalization” in a “more comprehensive, innovative, and inclusive manner.”
- China Daily thought the host country left “its stamp on the G-20” by demonstrating “unswerving commitment to globalization,” expanding the existing global market system, fighting off protectionism, and aligning the G-20 agenda with UN development goals.
- Global Times declared “multiple victories” for China at the Summit, including recognition of Chinese soft power in spite of Western criticisms.
- Global Times blamed Western media outlets for making a “fuss over trifling issues” such as an awkward confrontation between Chinese officials and U.S. journalists/White House staff as Air Force One arrived in China.
- China Daily praised Hangzhou’s tour as host city and proving “how China has become a leader of growth, as the city is home to many new businesses and new management models.”
The 2016 American presidential race has been a source of much discussion and debate. It has been an interesting year so far with an unconventional candidate, business tycoon Donald Trump, officially securing the Republican Party nomination. It is not only Americans, however, who are thinking about what a Trump presidency might mean for the world.
The Chinese are pondering this question as well. A brief survey of various views and concerns demonstrates that China watchers in the United States are concerned about how Mr. Trump will approach China. With regard to the Chinese side, however, the views seem to be more mixed. Is the prospect of a Trump presidency really all that dire?
What China Watchers in the United States Think
On July 20, 2016, ChinaFile asked a number of China analysts and thinkers how the Republican Party should approach China in the wake of Mr. Trump’s nomination. The analysis begins with Peter Navarro, one of Mr. Trump’s policy advisers. In his view, Mr. Trump should not support free trade with China that is not also fair. By “fair,” he means that China must stop using what he terms “weapons of job destruction” such as currency manipulation, intellectual property theft, and pollution havens. Mr. Trump has not started a trade war, as some have contended, but should rather be fighting back in the war China and the United States are already in. Mr. Trump, in Navarro’s view, will be a strong leader that China will respect. As one of his top advisers, this positive assessment is not surprising. (more…)Continue Reading →
From July 25-28 in Philadelphia, the Democratic National Committee held its convention to nominate Hillary Clinton as their party’s candidate for president. One week after the Republican Convention, rising powers tuned in to watch how the other major U.S. political party responded and outlined its policy platform. China remained largely skeptical of Clinton’s campaign. Observers in Brazil, India, Japan, and South Korea applauded her nomination, but worried about her recent shift toward free trade protectionism. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, India, Brazil, Japan, and South Korea on the DNC Convention and the prospects of a Hillary Clinton presidency. Our previous Policy Alert covered the Republican Convention.
As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s “pivot to Asia” strategy incensed China as a means to contain the country. Her prioritization on human rights – especially gender equality – and her more hawkish views on the South China Sea have left Chinese leaders uneasy about her candidacy. Tao Xie, professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University, suspected “many Chinese have a very unfavorable view of her.” One online poll conducted in March 2016 by Global Times showed a preference for Trump over Clinton with 54 percent in support of the GOP candidate.
Given this view of Clinton, several China media voices and commentators explored her candidacy and the prospects for her campaign in the general election.
- The hacking of thousands of emails from the servers at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) – showing the preferences of ostensibly neutral staffers for Clinton as the nominee – and their leak just before the convention “ruins U.S. democracy myths,” according to Global Times. The paper also said the “scandal is devastating enough to bury Clinton’s presidential dream and political career,” though it expected less than severe actual consequences.
- In a 2013 report, Global Times declared Hillary Clinton the “most hated” American political figure in China dating back to her 1995 speech on women’s rights as human rights at the World Conference on Women in Beijing.
- In contrast, Shi Yinhong, professor of international relations at Renmin University and adviser to the Chinese cabinet, insisted Chinese leaders would still prefer Clinton in the White House to a “volatile” Trump. “The worst situation is instability,” he argued, especially as China’s economy – heavily linked to the United States – continues its slow growth rates.
- Xinhua writer Zhu Lei saw the imprint of the campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders — the runner-up in the primary — on the Democratic Party’s policy platform, which was described by party officials as “the most progressive” in history.
- Chen Weilhua, reporter for China Daily, highlighted thousands of Sanders and Green Party supporters who protested at the Democratic Convention against Clinton’s nomination. Likewise, Qiu Zhibo, consultant at the UN and Global Times columnist, questioned whether “disappointed Bernie supporters” will vote for either Clinton or Trump.
From July 18-21 in Cleveland, the Republican National Committee held its convention to nominate Donald Trump as their party’s candidate for president. With the U.S election season now in full swing, rising powers are closely watching to see how the Trump campaign’s foreign and economic policies might shape the future direction of the United States. While some in China have welcomed his willingness to disengage America from the Indo-Pacific, others in India, Japan, Brazil, and South Korea are anxious to reevaluate the fundamentals of their relationships with Washington. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, India, Brazil, Japan, and South Korea on the RNC Convention and the prospects of a Trump presidency. In the next Policy Alert, we will cover reactions to the Democratic Party’ convention in Philadelphia.
What does the trade of nuclear materials have to do with reducing greenhouse gas emissions? The connection between the two may be more complex than you might think. India’s recent failed candidacy to earn membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) has discouraged New Delhi’s commitment to the Paris Agreement.
The Paris Agreement was drawn up at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change last year and sought, among other things, to reduce global greenhouse emissions around the world in an effort to protect the environment and stop global warming. On April 22, 2016, India and 177 other countries signed the treaty with an understanding that the accord would take effect once 55 countries that account for 55 percent of the world’s emissions ratified it. Prior to India’s rejection from the NSG, 18 countries had already ratified it and a ratification by India would have meant that countries accounting for 55.49 percent of the emissions would have been committed to the agreement. This would have meant that only the remaining countries accounting for a meager .51 percent would have needed to ratify the agreement to finally make it binding on all signatories. (more…)Continue Reading →
On June 23, the United Kingdom voted in favor of a referendum for the country to leave the European Union (EU). The 52-48 split vote in support of “Leave” panicked global financial markets and prompted a wave of largely negative reactions from world leaders who had previously urged British voters to “Remain.” Once the British Parliament ratifies the referendum, the country would exit the EU in two years. With U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron resigning in October after leading the effort to stay in the EU, the world watches how these events unfold and whether others, including Scotland and Northern Ireland, now pursue their own independence from Britain.
In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from India, China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia (who reveled in the vote’s outcome) examining what the vote means for the future of Britain and the EU.
Given the historical linkages between India and the United Kingdom, the “Brexit” – or British Exit – referendum vote was closely followed by leaders in New Delhi and the Indian public. There are 800 Indian companies across multiple sectors like pharmaceuticals, financial services, and IT operating in the U.K. and employing over a million people. (more…)Continue Reading →
Brazil’s Senate voted earlier this month to suspend President Dilma Rousseff while she awaits a trial to determine if corruption charges will result in her impeachment. Rousseff called the move a “coup” and vowed to fight the charges. Interim President Michel Temer now has to weather this political turmoil amid the on-going Zika virus outbreak, an economic recession, and preparations for the Summer Olympics just months away. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from Brazil, India, China, Russia, and Japan on the South America powerhouse’s future.
On May 12, the Brazilian Senate voted 55-22 in favor of trying President Dilma Rousseff for impeachment for using accounting tricks to improve the 2014 budget outlook (pedaladas, in Portuguese) in violation of budgetary laws. This followed a 367-137 vote in the Chamber of Deputies on April 17. As a result, Rousseff is suspended from office for 180 days while she is tried in the Senate. An interim government will take her place either until she returns to office in the unlikely event she is not convicted in the Senate, or until the end of her term in 2018.Continue Reading →
In a landslide victory on May 9, Davao City mayor Rodrigo Duterte was elected to be the next president of the Philippines. The 71-year-old Duterte – who has been called the “Donald Trump of the Philippines” for his propensity to spark controversy – pledged to reverse the current government’s foreign policy by engaging China in talks to resolve escalating maritime disputes in the South China Sea. Both China and the Philippines claim ownership over parts of the Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly Islands.
Duterte also promised to ride a jet ski to China-administrated islands and personally stake his country’s claims should negotiations fail to produce a resolution, so the world is closely watching to see how this potential flashpoint develops. In this Policy Alert, which is part of a series under the Sigur Center’s Energy and Maritime Security project, we explore the reactions of China, the Philippines, Japan, India, and Vietnam to Duterte’s electoral victory and its implications for U.S. policy toward Asia.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lu Kang hoped the new government would “meet China halfway, taking concrete measures to properly deal with [maritime] disputes so as to put the ties of the two countries back on the track of sound development.” Lu touted a historical friendship between Beijing and Manila that has been “hit by major setbacks in recent years, due to reasons known to all,” an indirect reference to U.S. support for the Philippines challenge to China’s maritime claims.
During the campaign, Duterte advocated multilateral talks with China to settle these claims. Lu said China continued to reject this approach in favor of bilateral negotiations with the relevant parties. Should those multilateral talks fail to produce an outcome within two years, Duterte promised he would consider bilateral talks directly with Beijing. He also signaled he was open to joint oil and gas exploration with China if Beijing agrees to treat the disputed waters as a “mutual corridor.”
Several commentators traced today’s strained relations between the Philippines and China to the U.S. foreign policy and the outgoing administration of President Benigno Aquino III. (more…)Continue Reading →
With Britain’s June 23 referendum on whether to remain in the European Union (EU) fast approaching, debates about the future of the United Kingdom and Europe have gained attention across the world. Many observers worry about the potential economic and political consequences of Britain’s decision to exit – or “Brexit” – the EU. With polls showing the public split nearly 50-50 on the referendum, President Barack Obama traveled to Britain and urged British voters to stay in the EU. In this Policy Alert, we examine commentary from China, India, Russia, and Japan on the U.K. referendum.
Chinese President Xi Jinping urged the British public to vote in favor of a strong and united European Union. With over $61 billion in trade deals announced during Xi’s recent visit to the United Kingdom, he hoped “Britain, as an important member of the EU, can play an even more positive and constructive role in promoting the deepening development of China-EU ties.” At risk is a deal between Beijing and London in October 2015 where China would build a nuclear energy plant at Hinkley Point, the “largest inward investment in” U.K. history.
Commentators debated whether the Brexit decision could have a negative impact on growing economic ties between the United Kingdom and China. (more…)Continue Reading →
On April 3, an international coalition of journalists released information on thousands of tax shelters created by the Panama-based firm Mossack Fonseca. Global reactions to the leak of over 11 million documents, also known as the Panama Papers, have been swift with condemnations directed at individuals named as shareholders and directors of the shell companies, including politicians, business leaders, athletes, and celebrities in more than 200 countries. Among them are 12 national leaders, such as the prime ministers of Iceland, the United Kingdom, and Pakistan, the presidents of Argentina and Ukraine, and the king of Saudi Arabia. The list also links to individuals with connections to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping.
While the use of these offshore companies to avoid taxes at home is not illegal, they remain controversial to many who consider the practice as cheating taxpayers and creating opportunities for fraud, money laundering, and drug trafficking. Several countries in Eurasia were identified as hubs for this type of financial activity or saw their political leadership included in the allegations. This Policy Alert highlights reactions in China, India, Russia, Japan, and South Korea to the emerging global shell game.
After the Panama Papers cited at least eight current and former Chinese top-ranking officials of having links to Mossack Fonseca, the Communist party ordered the country’s media outlets to censor all references to the story. Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei refused to comment on “groundless accusations” when pressed by journalists. Chinese law does not prohibit its citizens from creating overseas entities, but according to Chun Han Wong in the Wall Street Journal, party leaders are sensitive to allegations, including some directed at relatives of President Xi Jingping, that may “add fuel to perceptions of double standards in Beijing’s efforts to fight graft.”
Hong Kong was said to be home to the most active and highest number – over 2,000 – of the shell corporations set up through Mossack Fonseca. Zhang Xiaodong, named as the firm’s primary contact on the island, pushed his clients to set up offshore accounts to purchase stocks abroad due to “overseas countries’ hostility to the rising Chinese economic power.” When a media outlet did cover the leaks, its criticism was directed at foreign powers. The Global Times questioned the real motives behind the leak, which the paper said has “basic political targets,” and how the information is being spun by “the Western media” to minimize information negative to the United States and give “extra spin” to the “exposure of non-Western leaders, such as Putin.” (more…)Continue Reading →