Sanctions against China

A couple of weeks ago, I was interviewed by James Griffiths  at the South China Morning Post and he asked what I thought the outcome of the meeting between Xi and Obama would be.  Given the statement by the White House that they did not agree with what has been done by the Chinese in Cyberspace, I assumed there would be some kind of agreement between the two countries to give a pro forma stamp to “settle the disagreement”.  Press outlets for the government very rarely mention a point of contention unless they know they can work out something that is agreeable to both parties, and can be announced in a way that favors both.  That is politics, and generally no reflection of what countries really do to each other afterwards.  The sentiment in this government seems to be that any agreement is better than none.  

However, the discussion in the public press has not been about an agreement;  it has been about sanctions.  Sanctions talk is the perfect way to torpedo any chance of making any deal with the Chinese, just as the worthless  indictment of Chinese military officers was a couple of years ago.  That occurred right in the middle of discussions with our government on trade and other matters like the runway the Chinese were building on the Spratley Islands.  Both countries have politicians and military leaders who don’t want to have any agreement, so do things to make getting one harder.  Having the Chinese Navy running around up in Alaska this week, while the President is visiting there, is just one of those things.  Piling on the Russians in the Arctic was just added drama.  

We can argue that this doesn’t help us to a cyber agreement of any type, but it is more than just cyber in this case.  Either Xi and his central government are creating a crisis by maneuvering the economy and military around right before the meeting, or the Chinese have elements in their own country creating trouble without that central direction.  Neither of those would be good, but it is not hard to guess which one is driving events.  

Neither leader can have it both ways. They can’t say they want to have better relations and act as though they don’t.   They can smile and shake hands, passing off agreements as “good for international relations” while doing everything they can to make sure these agreements are never implemented.  Somewhere, there must be good reasons for not having better relations between the two, and those are playing out right before the meeting.  

In the case of China, it is because they know they have the upper hand.  They can poke at us though the controlled economy and military maneuvers, then smile like we will always be friends.  The U.S. has to appear “strong” by bringing on sanctions, when they are not exactly a good fit in this kind of situation.  Neither side wants any kind of agreement, which is not a good sign. China seems to think it can win in a fight, and especially in cyber, I’m not so sure they wouldn’t be right.  I don’t like the way this is going.