Virginia Review of Asian Studies

CHINA’s RISING INFLUENCE: IMPACTS ON U.S.-CHINA RELATIONS AND THE ROLE OF AMERICA IN ASIA

YEN TRANMOREHEAD UNIVERSITY1

1. Literature Review

The 21st century marks a radical power shift in Asia. The United States has been occupied dealing with issues in the Middle East and the Global War on Terrorism (Yost 4). More recently economic issues such as a growing budget deficit and high rates of unemployment have been consuming the time and energy of political leaders in the United States. Consequently, the United States has neglected Asia and has lost its influence in this region i. At the same time, China’s economic, political and military powers are growing. China has been holding important positions in international organizations in addition to building relationships with many regional countries (Shambaugh 3). This has posed challenges for the United States on some key issues involving the security threat posed by North Korea’s nuclear weapons, relations with Japan, South Korea and other Asian countries, as well as human rights issues in China. As Sino – American economic interdependence continues to deepen between the two economic giants; U.S. policies toward China in these issues are likely to become more constrained.

China’s military modernization

In December 2005, China introduced a new national policy called “China’s Peaceful Development road”. It stated that China would avoid initiating quarrels with foreign countries and seek harmonious international cooperation. However, that national development policy has no relation to the Chinese military conflicts with different countries in the region. It also contradicts China’s recent actions in dealing with trends in international security. This raises the question: How harmonious are China’s foreign policies?

A rapid and continuous increase in China’s defense and military budget over the past fifteen years is strong evidence that the Chinese government is concerned for its security. Factoring purchase power parity China’s military spending in 2008 was roughly $450 billion, putting it close to what the US spent (Tkacik, 98). China’s military modernization program has been preparing for twenty-five years to be Asia’s most powerful defense force. Before the modernization, China’s forces were at best only able to frighten and intimidate Taiwan and were not able to fight any war due to a lack of air and sea power. Hence, the goal was to develop forces that are able to deter potential adversaries and carry out first strikes to take advantage on the battlefield (Sutter 180). To achieve that goal, China needed further development to strike, respond and resolve quickly in any situation. This goal was called C4ISR, which stands for Command, Control, Communication, Computer, Intelligence and Strategic Reconnaissance (Sutter 185). Chinese modernization efforts included 1 Sponsor: Dr. James Robert Masterson, Dept. of Political Science, Morehead State University.

15

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

modernizing its satellite system, its cruise and ballistic missile program, as well as the submarine and air-defense systems and their information and technology systems (Sutter 183). In 2007 China launched an anti-satellite missile demonstrating China’s growing military capabilities. China also developed intercontinental ballistic missiles. However, most of China’s modern weapons were not domestically developed, but rather were imported. Chinese leaders focus on technology and information system.

In general, China’s strong determination to deter perceived superpower aggressions, protect and recover its territory, and enhance its regional as well as global status has been the purpose of this modernization. Also, China has strong claims for territories in the region, both on land and sea. Modernizing military forces to raise its influences in international affairs, the Chinese government believes that they can now use their power to get what they want. Again, it is obvious that “China’s peaceful development road” has been an intentional diversion to draw attention away from its aggressive military policies (Sutter 186-188).

China’s military modernization first and foremost is aimed at the presence of the U.S. in Asia. The American government has claimed to be willing to sustain the stability of Asia if China has any aggressive movement. The U.S. has long supported Taiwan’s defense and has worked closely with Japan, Australia and other Asian countries. The U.S. remains uncertain of China’s peaceful route due to the unpersuasive pronouncement. Additionally, the U.S. wants to maintain its favorable power position in Asia (Sutter 183). In this context, it seems reasonable for China to pursue its military modernization, especially when there is a rising interest in unification with Taiwan. Therefore, the U.S. and China will likely be locked in an escalating arms race. Aside from the US, , China has other potential security threats and territory disputes with other Asian countries such as Japan, India and Vietnam (Gill 247-65). This military modernization has also dictated and given clear meaning to China’s foreign policies.

China is having a very aggressive expansion plan to protect and claim territory on the sea. Chinese leaders plan to deploy in the Indian Ocean, creating a sea line of communication between ports and protecting its vital flow of energy from the Middle East. At the same time, China continues to conduct military exercises in the South China Sea. Altogether, this modernization complicates China’s relationship with the U.S, Japan, India, and various Southeast Asian countries among others (Sutter 185). China has shown much of the world the extent of its aggressiveness and its increasing power in the region. China has also modernized its military force because Asia became the U.S.’s secondary concern since the terrorist attacks on Sep 11 th, 2001. Currently, no single country in Asia, with the possible exception a Japan with an amended constitution, is capable of catching up with China’s advanced and modernized military power (Pollack 329-46). However, given high levels of economic interdependence, conflict between China and economically advanced East Asian economies is unlikely. (The United States, Japan and South Korea are among China’s largest export markets and China’s exports of goods and services constitute 39.7% of its GDP)2.

2 http://www.tradingeconomics.com/china/exports

16

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

Taiwan

U.S. relations with Taiwan have always been on obstacle in Sino – American relations post WWII. Under the administrations of Presidents Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian, Taiwan was aggressive and volatile in seeking its autonomy and moving toward independence from China. Taiwan continuously sought and received U.S. military support to protect it against the PRC, both in terms of arms purchases from the U.S. and defense agreements should relations between the two China’s turn confrontational.

Since the breakdown of U.S. – Taiwan relations in 1979, Taiwanese ethnic groups in America have actively lobbied for U.S. foreign policies to support Taiwan’s autonomous status along with promoting exchanges between the two governments (Ibid 9). As a result, the U.S. committed to selling arms to Taiwan over many years. The value of arms sale that the U.S. agreed and delivered to Taiwan in the 2002-2005 period were worth between $1.1 billion and $4.0 billion ; in the 2006-2009 period, military sales grew to $5.7 billion and $3.5 billion respectively. Taiwan has also sought the recognition of its autonomy from different countries and by participating in international organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) or the United Nations (UN). These actions have raised China's concerns and have resulted in tensions in the Sino – American relationship. China has continued to subvert Taiwanese efforts to join international organizations. For example, Taiwan’s attempt to join the WHO as a “health entity” was impeded by China. China uses a combination of economic incentives, military threats and coercive diplomacy to control Taiwan (Sutter 227). Regardless of their efforts, Taiwan has won diplomatic recognition from several small Caribbean and African states. China has realized that Taiwan would not voluntarily agree to be a part of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and has shifted its focus from unifying Taiwan to preventing it from achieving further international recognition as an independent country.

In 2003 – 2004, President Chen proposed pro-independence reforms that concerned both the U.S. and China, causing them to react with alarm (Glaser 23-25). President Bush publicly criticized Taiwanese leaders and urged Taiwan to stop its provocative actions (Dumbaugh 8). This was a way to reduce the tension in the U.S. – China relationship, easing China’s offensive stance toward the U.S. while it has a preoccupation with the conflict in Iraq and North Korean nuclear issues. Yet, the U.S. continued to provide military support to Taiwan in its defense against the PRC. During this period, the U.S. had engaged in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of its Global War of Terrorism, which has been costly in terms of U.S. financial and military resources. Hence, the U.S. wanted to avoid heightened tension with China over the Taiwan issue. Equally, China did not desire to escalate the tension; it waited for the end of Chen’s administration with the aim of encouraging the election of a more amenable administration to deal with. In Taiwan, Chen faced many difficulties. He was losing his credibility, which was aggravated by a corruption scandal targeting him. Thus, Chen’s influence was weakened and he was urged to resignii.

17

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

Finally, in March 2008, the Chen administration (Pan Green party) was defeated; and Ma Ying – Jeon (Pan Blue party), the previous mayor of Taiwan, won the election and started a new period of Taiwan – U.S. – China relations with reduced tensions (Sutter 187). Ma adopted more flexible policies toward China that enhanced the economic ties between Taiwan and China (Sutter 219-221). There have been many high-level meetings since 2008, including the on-going talks between Taiwan’s Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) and China’s Association of Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) (Sutter 229). Nevertheless, both sides have always avoided talking about the sensitive sovereignty issues or any movement toward either “one China” or “one Taipei, one China”. Ma won a concession from China, which agreed to stop opposing Taiwan's participation in the World Health Organization under the name “China Taipei”. However, there are still roadblocks in the Strait Relations that remain in placeiii. For the United States, this flexible political stance of Taiwan was seen in positive light by both the Bush and Obama administrations, as America does not consume its energy in order to ease the tension over the Taiwan Strait (Sutter 233).

These positive changes brought both benefits and costs to China, Taiwan and America. China seemed to have gained the most benefits: close economic ties with Taiwan, which would pull Taiwan toward reunification; improvement in its relation with the United States; as well as avoiding any need to counteract Taiwan's pro-independence actions (Sutter 234-235). However, China has not reached its goal of “one China” unification (Sutter 236-237). Tension between the two powers may well escalate with a possible return of the Pan-Green party to the presidency in Taiwan after a future election. Although having more risky costs, Taiwan still gained recognitions from more international affairs. As China increases its export and import of goods with countries, its bilateral relations with those countries generally improve. Nevertheless, Taiwan’s economy became increasingly dependent on China more than ever. It now has to ask China's concession for greater participation in international forums (Sutter 239). At the same time, Taiwan's unwillingness to invest in its own defense has frustrated the U.S., particularly in light of China’s fast rising military capability. On the other hand, the United States’ gains seemed relatively modest compared to China’s and Taiwan’s: it did not have to exert much effort to ease tension in this region. The U.S. and China relations have also been improved as a result (Sutter 240).

U.S. - Japan Alliance

Overall, compared to U.S. relations with China or South Korea, the U.S. – Japan alliance is less controversial. This close and tight relationship acts as a “lynchpin” for U.S. interaction within East Asia and the Asia Pacific. Sharing the same democratic values, mutual interest in Asia, and in global stability and development, Japan and America work together for shared goals of mutual economic well-being (Sutter 87). They have become economically interdependent and are each other’s most important foreign trade market. Several common political interests bind the U.S – Japan relationship and their security alliance: for example, the US nuclear umbrella helps Japan deal with its neighboring countries and strengthens the U.S.’s role in dealing with Asia Pacific problems (Avery 9). This relationship had been quite strong until America invaded Iraq. This required the presence of Japanese troops in Afghanistan

18

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

and Iraq which in turn raised debates in the Japanese public (Sutter 91). Hence, the Prime Minister of Japan, Yasuo Fukuda, was forced to temporarily halt Japanese oil tankers in order to allow them to provide fuel for American naval ships in the Indian Ocean. Japan has also been concerned with greater attention given to China by the U.S. since the 1960s (Sutter 99). This has caused Japan to feel that the U.S. has neglected their relationship.

Even though they have good relations, the U.S. and Japan have faced periodic strains due to differences in trade, economic issues and stances on foreign policy. After the Cold War, American and Japanese interests were best served by strengthening their alliance with several agreements in military co-operation. China’s rising influence in Asia deeply concerned Japan because the U.S has developed a higher-level relationship with China (Avery 8). The U.S. has given China greater priority in order to better solve Taiwan and North Korean issues. In the 1998 trip to China, President Clinton did not include Tokyo in his agenda, which made Japan worry about its alliance with the U.S. Japan used to have the same objective toward the unstable situation on the Korean Peninsula as well as Taiwan Strait (Sutter 88-89). However, the flexibility of U.S. policies regarding Taiwan and North Korea surprised Japanese officials and have caused them to feel excluded from U.S. decisions. The effort to unify Korea and how it relates to Beijing’s power made Japan worried. Japan believed that the U.S. had not put enough effort to protect them if there was a problem with North Korea (U.S. Department of State). It is also worried of being involved in military matters with the U.S. if there was problem in the Taiwan Strait. At the same time, Japan’s sensitive relationship with China and South Korea has made the U.S. – Japan alliance more complicated. Even though some populations within Japan oppose the U.S.-Japan alliance, Japan still works closely and cooperates with the U.S. in the Global War on Terrorism and the its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In 2005, there was an agreement between the U.S. and Japan giving Japan a more active role in Asia.

Both the U.S. and Japan have shown great interest in each other in solving global issues. Japan had always supported the U.S. in every aspect of counter terrorism and operations in Iraq (which was one of only two out of 27 participating countries to support U.S. contention). However, Japanese economic stagnation in the 1990s has been cited as a reason for the U.S. to underrate Japan (Armitage, Nye 2). Hence, Japan did not receive US support to become a permanent member of United Nation Security Council (Sutter 90-91).

In the past, Japan has strongly opposed the Proliferation Security Initiative of North Korea. Japan restricted trade and multiple relations with North Korea. In 2006, Japan sought to take measures against North Korea’s ballistic missile tests. However, in 2007, Japan took a more flexible stance toward North Korea’s nuclear program. Still, Japanese leaders were concerned that the U.S. was too flexible with North Korea. This has caused a rift in US-Japan relations (Sutter 203).

The rivalry and shaky history between Japan and China have created difficulties for the United States. The challenge has been dealing with issues in Asia while maintaining relations with multiple countries. Although Japan and China have increasing levels of economic interdependence, there are remaining differences in

19

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

politics, nationalism, and historical and defense issues, which have prevented the two sides from furthering their collaboration (Sutter 206). Worse still, disputed territorial rights on the East China Sea as well as the controversial Yasukuni Shrine are significant obstacles in Sino – Japanese relation. Also, China and South Korea still hold strict views over Japanese behavior before and during the Second World War. Chinese and South Korean history textbooks have been written with a bias and are misleading. For example, children are incorrectly taught what Japan did pre-WWII resulting in Chinese and South Korean citizens believing in a controlled and false history. Despite the public ROC and ROK public criticism of the U.S. for not taking sides in these history disputes, the U.S. Congress recently did confront Japan for what it did in the past (Pei, Swaine).

Japan and the U.S. are military allies under the Security Treaty in 1960, which states that U.S. will assist Japan if Japan is attacked. In return, Japan grants the U.S. military base right on its territory. This alliance is strengthened by the Transformation and Realignment for the Future: significant steps that let Japan to be more active in solving regional and international problems. Yet, the US-Japan military alliance sometimes faces problems (e.g. agreement deadline missed in March 2006, or redeployment of troops, etc.). At the 2 + 2 meeting in February 2005, Japanese and U.S. leaders outlined more global visions about these problems: “common strategic objectives” for “peaceful resolution”. They have large projects of defense technology to which China has strongly opposed. Meanwhile, Japan still has its own independent defense program (Glosserman 4).

Human Rights Issues

Differences in human rights have their roots in the separate U.S. and Chinese backgrounds. The U.S. and China have always given human right issues secondary consideration so problems along with these issues have been less significant. Recently, Chinese leaders have created policies in politics, economics, and in the military that are more agreeable with the world norms supported by the U.S. However, this is not the case for issues related to its territory or one party leadership. Some critics believe that recent changes in China’s policies do not affect Chinese leadership control of political power (Sutter 243-244).

The U.S. and China have tried not to let the human right issues impede the advances in their relations. There have been domestic debates in both the U.S. and in China for giving little attention to human rights and values. Deng Xiaoping’s return to power brought remarkable demonstration of democracy, more free speech and more individual freedom. However, it ended a year after that and even made the situation worse than before. After that, Americans and foreign commentators knew more about human rights issues in China. There has since been a wide gap in Sino – American relations. Chinese conservative leaders have played key roles in making policies that have prevented other political members from reforming the economy and reaching out to the world. They saw the U.S. and Western countries as those resisting or constraining its influences in Asia (Sutter 247).

China has been diligent and effective in suppressing political dissidents and religious organizations that were sponsored by the U.S. and other Western countries

20

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

that favor changes in China’s authoritarian political system. The U.S. had always put lots of attention to China’s human right issue. However, after the 9/11 terrorist attack in 2001 and the global economic crisis, U.S. leaders have minimized the differences over human rights in order to have more stable relations with China. While President Bush held a hard line toward Chinese human rights issues, President Obama has captured the balance since talks at the annual Sino – American leadership dialogue in 2009. China highlighted cooperation with the U.S. in its economy, society and to some extent, in human rights issues. However, China has drawn the line against the U.S.’s effort to interfere in China’s internal affairs, which may affect its sovereignty and the unity of the CCP (Sutter 248-249).

Contemporary China Human Right Practices and Issues

Human right issues have always been a hot and sensitive topic in the U.S. – China relationship. Because of both foreign and domestic pressures and calls for reforms, China has finally improved some of its human rights policies (e.g. positive expansion of media freedom, widened Internet access, etc.) Better still, the boom of the Internet and improvements in technologies have made it difficult for China to control information to the public. However, China still maintains tight controls over people in Tibet and Xinjiang, and has resorted to harsh suppression to the use of the Internet in these areas. Therefore, the U.S. spends lots of money to preserve Tibetan culture and other human rights in China (Sutter 249).

China’s leaders, on one hand, passed legislation in 2006 and 2008 that allows protests against political issues, and on the other hand, permits the arrest of protest organizers and activists. This is a way to protect the unity of CCP against its fear of a “Color Revolution” since there are small but growing advocacy groups in China, which are supported by foreign countries. China’s government works hard to find the balance of flexibility and rigidity, or otherwise, there would be uncontrollable large-scale protests. There is now a mixed picture of human rights issues in China with both positive and negative facts: Chinese people are now having more human rights and freedom in a way that does not hurt the one-party rule; nevertheless, China’s government still uses inhumane killing, deception and hard legislation like birth control policy. People can easily be put into jail with inhumane conditions because of “endangering state security”. Still, Chinese leaders are vigilant, using many means to control the mass media and restrict the information on the Internet. Since the boom of the Internet, there have been more freedoms as well as information that can be found on the Internet. Hence, these restrictions really have angered the young Chinese population (Sutter 250).

American media and other foreign sources have recognized the improvements of the religious freedom in China. China allows religious group activities that do not interfere with the state education system, meaning that China will not protect other religions. In the U.S. annual report, China is annually listed by America as concerned for “particularly severe violation of religious freedom”. It has been seen in China that Christianity has played more important roles. However, many unregistered protestant churches lack legal protection. Depending on the place, Chinese protestors might be treated inhumanly; especially before the Olympic Games 2008,

21

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

many protestors were arrested and foreigners were restricted and denied visa (Sutter 252-53).

Tibet

Tibet is a lasting issue in Sino-American relations. The U.S. secretly supported Tibet’s insurgencies against China in the past. After normalization, the U.S. has continued to support Tibet as a separate country. On March 10 th, 2008, Chinese leaders had a hard and bold response to the large-scale protest. Chinese government argued that it was a way to maintain the civil order. Consequently, there was a strong call for boycotting the Beijing Olympics 2008 and for a talk to the Dalai Lama from the United States. On one hand China supports Tibet with economic assistance while at the same time it often tries to interfere in Tibetan culture and religion. China supports economic development in Tibet as a way to deter threatening intentions of Tibetan uprisings. However, it is mainly Han Chinese benefitting from this economic assistance while the Tibetan people are generally marginalized from economic assistance. Additionally, China interferes with Tibetan culture by replacing Tibetan language in schools with Mandarin Chinese, making it much easier for the children to forget its cultural heritage. China also places restrictions to religious activities in Tibet, limiting the numbers of monks and nuns.. The U.S. responds sharply and continues supporting/protecting Tibetan culture. Despite the pressure from foreign countries, there will be little changes in China’s policies toward Tibet, which could lead to a turmoil and bloody repression (Sutter 257-58).

Uighur Muslim (Xinjiang Autonomous Region)

In 2009, the clash between Uighur and Han Chinese in Urumchi (Xinjiang Capital City) created many disputes. The U.S. supported China to end the war but criticized China’s unfair treat of Uighur Muslim people. 45% of the population in Xinjiang Autonomous Region is Uighur Muslim and is one of the biggest Turkic groups. Chinese leaders worried that these groups would raise the demand for religious freedom and collaborate with terrorist groups. Thus, China has applied strident strategies focusing on Uighur leaders along with a series of strict governance on training imams, usages of languages, and public access to mosques. Uighurs are often sentenced to death for political crimes such as Uighur’s “separate activities” during the clash (Sutter 259-60).

Falun Gong

Falun Gong is a movement that combines spiritual beliefs, slow-moving exercises and mediation with moral philosophy, which was first introduced in China in 1992. This spiritual discipline has been developed widespread all over China but it was severely suppressed by the Chinese government. However, this movement, to some extent, has gradually declined the aggressive suppression toward human rights issues (Sutter 261).

22

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

US Government Efforts regarding Human Rights Issues

As human rights issues are secondary importance to Sino – American relation, U.S. contemporary policies toward these issues promote democracy and individual rights in China (Gill 6-12). Under the Bush administration, the U.S. tried to influence Chinese leaders and provided funds to help strengthen rules and the civil society as well as help the US-based NGOs and Internet provider companies. Under the Obama administration, the U.S. has continued those practices in a more balanced way. Although China now carries a low profile on human rights issues and still has aggressive and negative response to any interference from foreign countries, it has cooperated with the U.S. on some programs on human right issues. The U.S. has tried to find ways to push the human right issues in China, but little progress has been made (Sutter 261-62).

Dalai Lama

The 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, has served for 60 years. He is the most influential figure to Tibetans, both inside and outside Tibet. They believe that he is the reincarnation of his predecessoriv. The Dalai Lama always calls for greater Tibetan autonomy, democratic changes, and changes in China’s legislations. China continues its communist rule; imprisoning and suppressing ethnic groups like Tibetan followers of the Dalai Lama. Also, Chinese government wants to control the selection of the next Dalai Lama after the death of Tenzin Gyatso and all the high monks in Tibet (Economist). This course of action has been highly opposed by Tibetans and the United States. China is waiting for the 73-year-old Dalai Lama’s death, which will be followed by fractional movements of Tibetan followers (Sutter 262).

Dalai Lama and the U.S. have a strong relationship and are concerned for each other. He has had several meeting with President George W. Bush in the White House beginning in May 2001. In the past, U.S. had secretly supported Dalai Lama and his followers to escape to India from Tibet because of the threatening Chinese rules, which caused tension in Sino – American relations. Still, many Americans are attracted to the Dalai Lama, which has complicated the situation. In 2007, U.S. Congress awarded the Dalai Lama the Congressional Gold Medal. The U.S. urged China to meet with the Dalai Lama. President Obama had a meeting with the Dalai Lama after his first trip to China in November 2009. These actions have caused dispute and tension between the U.S. – China relationship (Sutter 263).

U.S. – Republic of Korea Alliance

The Republic of Korea (ROK) and the U.S. have had a close relationship that is deeply rooted in politics, cultural and personal tie. The ROK is highly dependent on the U.S. economically and it has a strong military alliance with The ROK has sent many of its own troops to support American forces in the Vietnam War as well as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (Sutter 60-61). There are also many Koreans living in the U.S. who create various non-government organizations supporting US-ROK relations. However, this relation has slowly deteriorated from the start of 21 st

23

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

century because the U.S. and the ROK differ on issues pertaining to North Korea and their advancements in nuclear weapons research (Niksch 12).

In February 1998, President Kim Dae Jung was inaugurated and began a more conciliatory approach towards North Korea with his “Sunshine Policy”. This policy aimed at softening North Korea’s attitude towards South Korea by encouraging interaction and economic assistance (Bob 8-9). However, it was strongly criticized by the conservatives in South Korea, America and Japan. Thus, in the Six-party Talks on North Korea’s nuclear program in 2003, the ROK was more in accord with China and Russia, and this had caused deterioration in the US-ROK relation.

Since 1990s, the ROK leaders’ policies toward North Korea have fluctuated. After the end of the Cold War, the fear of North Korean invasion had declined (Pritchard 101-45). Therefore, ROK leaders pushed for more moderate policies such as inter - Korean dialog, which went against the U.S. stance. Then later in 1990s, there were errant U.S. bombing exercises that damaged a South Korea village. The relationship continued to deteriorate and it a low point in 2004. A survey at the time revealed that Korean citizens believed that the U.S. was a bigger threat to stability than North Korea (Niksch 12). Starting in 2003, the Bush administration decided to re-allocate US troops all over the world and withdraw them from South Korea while still maintaining its commitment to protect South Korea in emergency situations (Sutter 77). The ROK government was so concerned about the implication of such troop reduction that it tried to slow down the reallocation. Ultimately, the U.S. and the ROK reached an agreement that the troop reduction will take place after October 2009 but before March 2012 (Sutter 76).

The U.S. strongly supported democratization in South Korea, which caused greater instability and uncertainty in ROK politics. The Bush administration prioritized the development of strong relations with South Korea. This endeavor has required the U.S. to be tolerant of some differing views. Since 2005, the U.S. was less concerned with the ROK’s focus on territorial and historical disputes with Japan. It has also accepted that South Korea will give aid to North Korea if North Korea agreed to rejoin the Six-party Negotiation. The Bush administration has given important care to South Korea by replacing the U.S. ambassador in Korea and meeting in June 2005 and September 2006. The leaders of South Korea emphasized their country’s role as a “balancer” between the U.S., Japan and China in the Six-party Negotiation without getting in dispute with any party. The ROK also refused to join the U.S. ballistic missile defense program (Sutter 77).

Despite some differences, the U.S. and the ROK have a deep relationship with each other. The economy of the ROK has even affected that of the U.S.’s. The ROK faced an economic depression in 1997 – 98, which pulled Korean currency value down as low as half the U.S. dollar value at that time. This led to a trade deficit for America (Young-Kwan 1).

UN and other institutions

China joined the United Nations as the People’s Republic of China in 1971. It became one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. China is more interested in what the UN can do for it rather than what China can

24

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

contribute to the United Nations (Sutter 206). Therefore, there is no longer the fear of China’s use of its veto to oppose international issues, besides what relates to China. Sharing the same interests with America, China works in the United Nation on peacekeeping, maintaining a predictable and rule-based international order. Moreover, China is now an important participant in many international organizations with ties to more than 100 countries in the world. All together, China is now one of the most powerful countries in international affairs (Sutter 276).

China has important roles in international organizations that have blocked Taiwan from interacting with the World Health Organization even as a “health entity” until 2003 and makes it difficult for the U.S. to deal with North Korea nuclear program. In 2001, China joined the World Trade Organization, which very quickly, boosted its economy. The role of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) was somehow reduced because of the economic uncertainties in 1997 -1998. However, after the U.S. Global War on Terrorism it took Asia as its “second front”, and began to cooperate with more Asian countries for military purposes. China’s role in ASEAN grew very fast and it is now one of the most important countries in this institution.

Global War on Terrorism

Since the terrorist attack on September 11th, 2011, the Bush administration launched the Global War on Terrorism. Along with the Iraq war, these campaigns have increased the national budget deficit, resulting in a national debt crisis for the United States (Bush and O’Hanlon). Worse still, these wars have made many people wonder if the U.S. can still be the world leader since China’s international influence is rising. The global war on terrorism is the first consideration that strongly affects the U.S. – China relationship and the United States’ role in issues in Asia (Sutter 97).

America focuses on Southeast Asia have caused some dispute and opposition from Southeast Asian countries leaders. The U.S. tried to push Southeast Asian leader to fight for terrorism in their countries, which serves America interest. Therefore, the U.S. has become largely involved in Southeast Asian issues, which raises its importance in Asia. The U.S. became Pakistan’s most important supporters. Therefore, there are large deployments of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan and smaller deployments in some nearby states. America also has closer relation and security cooperation with India (Kronstadt). However, some regional leaders want to solve problems themselves, to minimize the U.S. influences, or even exclude U.S. in their affairs. They have chosen to do this because the U.S.’s war in Iraq is unpopular and infamous in Asia countries. In addition, this war has hindered U.S. relations with South Korea because it is related to and is concerned with North Korea’s nuclear program (Gross and Oh 3).

Because of North Korea’s nuclear program and the War on Terrorism, the U.S. has shifted towards a common ground a smoother relationship with China. These moderations are welcomed by China. In the recent years, the U.S. and China have cooperated in facilitating mutually advantageous trade and investment relations, managing crisis, as well as collaborating on the Global War on Terrorism. This

25

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

cooperation has increased the economic interdependence between the U.S. and China (Sutter 152).

Taking everything into consideration, the U.S. administration is facing domestic pressure and criticism for its foreign policies and involvement in the Global War on Terrorism.

2. Research

Introduction

President Obama was inaugurated into office four years ago, facing domestic and foreign problems: a prolonged economic crisis, the U.S. preoccupation in the Middle East and Southwest Asian region and the North Korea nuclear issues. The Global War on Terrorism has been seriously criticized because of its core motive and little overall results. Along with Asia-Pacific countries, the U.S. has increased collaboration with the major economies such as Japan, China and South Korea even though there is still a large trade deficit in Asia in general and with China in particular. Also, because of high levels of economic interdependence between these countries and the U.S., the U.S. does not gain much from pushing controversial policies. The North Korean nuclear issue is a top priority of the Obama administration. The U.S. has been working closely with other Asian allies and the United Nation Security Council to control the escalating provocative move of North Korea. However, there are few optimistic views believing that the situation in North Korea will subside. Luckily, the Taiwan Strait is quite stable because of Taipei’s positive attitudes towards China. Another significant issue is China’s military modernization, which has caused hesitation and difficulties in every move of the U.S. in Asia. On the bright side, the U.S. is working more and more closely with Asian allies in both politics, military and economic areas as mutually beneficial relations. This cooperation helps the U.S. gradually gain its influence in Asia, and helps other Asian countries to work positively with the rise of China’s power, but still keeps close ties with the U.S. for national safety.

China Military Modernization

China military modernization has always been a hotly debated topic in the Sino – American relation. For more than a decade, China’s defense budget has been two digit percentages of its GDP. In 2008, its defense budget was 17.6% of the national GDP while that of 2009 was 14.6% (chart 1). China took the complex international situation and conflict of interest with Taiwan as excuses for its military modernization. While China said its military modernization is to keep peace in the region and in the world, its comprehensive transformation has been very aggressive. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the largest army in the world, was said to be able to fight in any type and front. China has developed its electro-optical and radar devices as well as satellites to carefully monitor U.S. military movements. It also developed anti-ship ballistic missiles to fight on disputed water regions (the Yellow Sea, South China Sea) and deployed the naval force to the Gulf of Aden in order to protect its commerce with Africa. Still, China has gained a lot of support from 400 companies to develop its own weapons, which mean that China wants to fully develop its defense ability. Nonetheless, that also means China still has a long way to go in

26

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

military modernization when it hasn’t been able to develop weapons it-self. Besides developing and enhancing its troops and weapons, China also expands its military ties with other Asian countries, having joint military exercise with Singapore and Thailand. During the China Communist Party 60th anniversary in 2009, there was the largest China military parade, showing the world its military power with a variety of weapons and troops. China said it displayed the image of “a might force, a civilized force, a victorious force.” China has been aggressive by continuing to modernize its military (sea trial of aircraft, developing ballistic missile and cyber warfare). In April 2011, China’s first aircraft carrier was embarked on a sea trial, proving the growing naval power. However, Western countries have had more than 70 years experiences in developing weapons while China has only 15 rapid years. Also, the spending per troop per year of the U.S. is about $420,000 and that of China is about $40,000 (ten times different). Moreover, the population per troop, which is the number of citizens that each troop protect, of China is about three times that number of the United States (table 1&2). Therefore, although China is aggressively modernizing its defense ability, it is still less capable than the United States’ military forces.

Country Spending per troop Population per troops

United States $ 420, 058 198 citizens

China $ 40, 043 585 citizens

Indeed, China’s aggressive military modernization has created tension in Sino-American relations. The U.S. has been seeking for more military contact with China, in order to avoid misunderstanding and escalation of tension, which can lead to an arms race in the world. At the same times, the U.S. has had some movements, warning China of its own military power. In December 2009, the U.S. moved the USS Oklahoma City, the most advanced attack submarine, to island of Guam, from which is the fastest spot to get to Hainan Island and the China Sea. Early 2011, The United States Secretary of Defense said that by 2050, the U.S. defense ability would be way ahead of China’s. America has also worked closely with Japan and South Korea, ensuring its Asian allies of more U.S. troops presence in Asia. The United States also worked with Southeast Asian countries (Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippine, etc.) to protect them from China’s enormous military modernization, especially when they are having dispute over the sovereignty of the Spratly and Paracel Islands in the South China Sea. In July 2011, there was a joint exercise between the U.S. and Japan, Australia and other Asian allies. Also, the U.S. has been supporting India to keep pace with China’s military modernization because India is another emerging power. v

27

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

Chart 1.

Taiwan

“As a political joke goes, the good news about relations between China and the United States is that there is only one contentious issue between them; the bad news is there is no solution to the problem.” (Zhu 180)

Since the new president of Taiwan, Ma Ying-jeou, first took office in 2008, Taiwan has been more open to China, increasing two countries economic and tourism ties. In November 2008, there was a signing of four agreements between Taiwan and China about increasing the transportation and the food safety measures. In June 2009, there were 80 representatives from the China mainland who visited Taiwan in seek of cooperation. This improvement has been welcomed by Taiwan, China and the United States because there are no significant worries about the conflict in the Cross Strait ties. Nonetheless, the Ma administration still seeks for Taiwan recognition as an independent country by bidding for spots in international organizations. Furthermore, Taiwan always shows strong interest in purchasing arms from the U.S. (e.g. the F-16 package) to increase its defense ability, especially when Chinese military forces are modernized. On one hand, Ma holds a flexible stance toward China, but on the other hand, Ma tries to seek autonomy for Taiwan.

Under the Bush administration, the United States routinely supported Taiwan and held a firm stance toward China over this issue. The U.S. has supported Taiwan to participate in the World Health Organization by joining the World Health Assembly as an observer, but not a full member. Also, the Bush administration supported Taiwan to be accepted to the United Nations, which was strongly opposed by China. From 2008 to 2011, the Obama administration has adopted a slightly different and softer approach toward issues regarding the Taiwan Strait. The U.S. still supports Taiwan with arm sales and to join international organizations. However, the Obama administration has been in favor of stabilizing the Cross Strait situation through diplomacy because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. economic crisis and plus China’s rising economy. Hence, the F-16 package that the U.S. promised to sell to Taiwan was delayed several times. Recently, in September 2011, the U.S. rejected Taiwan’s request for new Lockheed Mart Corp F-16 fighters but offered a $5.3 billion upgrade for the existing jets. In long term, the United States will continue to support Taiwan with a limitation because of the high economic interdependence with China.

28

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110%

5%

10%

15%

20%

China Defense Budget Growth Rate

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

China seldom mentioned the “One China” policy because it finds the current situation beneficial from 2008 to 2011. China tries to boost up the two-side-cooperation, especially in military contact with Taiwan because of the idea that better Cross Strait military cooperation will reduce American’s military interference. Yet, China strongly opposes any arm sales from the U.S. to Taiwan, particularly the new F-16 upgrade package, or any support from the U.S. for Taiwan to get international recognition.vi

Japan – U.S. Relations

In general, the U.S. – Japanese alliance is one of the most stable and important alliances. Japan has always been an important trade partner of the U.S. in Asia; supporting troops for the U.S. in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. However, starting from the sharp decline of the Japanese economy in the 1990s, the U.S. has lost its interest in Japan and turned its eyes from Japan to the growing power of Asia: China. The United States has been claimed to have left Japan out of the core talks and given Japan less attention. In the Six Party Talk, Japan and the U.S. both used to have strong opposition against North Korea. However, the Obama administration has been soft-pedaling with the North Korean nuclear issues, leaning toward China’s and South Korea’s political stance.

In 2009, the U.S. planned on launching a secret nuclear program in Japan, in order to transport nuclear weapons through Japan without prior consultation, which goes against the 1960 bilateral security treaty. After that, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, warned Japan not to let that probe affect the bilateral ties. There have been also disagreements between Japan and America over the relations’ equality. In January 2010, the U.S. – Japanese security treaty turned 50 years old. This was a good time to review and strengthen their relationship. Nevertheless, never before has this alliance had so much criticism because of asymmetrical commitment. The U.S. sought for more direct and indirect support from Japan, troops and increases in Japan’s defense budget respectively. Despite the frictions in trade and defense issues, the U.S. has always stressed that Japan is one of its most important allies. In 2010, Japan’s government decided to postpone the Futenma relocation of troops until May. Despite this setback, the United States sill agreed to hold consultative talks aiming at deepening their alliance. These talks would address the issue pertaining to North Korea’s nuclear power and the U.S.’s “nuclear umbrella” over Japan, China’s military expansion and review finances for U.S. forces in Japan. (This coincides with China’s sailing of a fishing vessel off the Coast of Senkaku Island where the Japanese detained the ship’s captain.)

29

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

In a different perspective, Japan should have a reform/change in its foreign affairs strategy to be “Japan bashing” again. For the time being, Japan is facing problems of “post industrialization”, such as consumption saturation, an aging population, slow economic growth, and rising fiscal expenditure and national debt balance. In short, Japan is in a structural dilemma in terms of population and finances, for which political conservatism is to blame. Japan had always used its economic power as a “political power”. However, after the economic stagnation in the 1990s, conservative views about Japan’s economy turned out to be wrong. Japan should be more open-minded, learn from the past and develop friendly relationships with other East Asian countries. Also, Japan should rethink its spending on defense, which is the fifth highest in the world while its economy is ranked in third place. Being able to overcome the defense budget issues, the Japan – U.S. alliance will surely be improved, bringing benefits to both Japan and the U.S. Also, while China’s influence in Asia and military power are increasing rapidly, it is crucial for Japan and America to continue to work closely and maintain strong international relations.

Economic Interdependence

The term economic interdependence means that two countries are mutually dependent on each other’s economy for products and services. This has been the situation between the U.S. and China. The economic ties between two countries have expanded significantly in the past decade. China is now the U.S. second largest trade partner and biggest source of imports. Most notably, the U.S. has the largest merchandise trade deficit with China, rising from $10 billions dollar in 1990 to $273 billions in 2010 (chart 2). Worse still, both the U.S. and the IMF believe that the Yuan of China has long been undervalued, creating trade unfairness in the international market. Unlike other economies (market based floating exchange rate), China applies restrictions to manipulate the Yuan and keeps its value very low against the dollar (at a range of 15% to 50%). This manipulation helps China to decrease the effects of the global crisis and increase exports. This also explains the sharp increases in China foreign exchange reserve and trade surplus. The economic interdependence largely affects the U.S. policies in Asia and toward China and makes the relation more complex. vii

30

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

Chart 2.

China Human Rights Issues

In 2008, China released its national plan on human rights, which focused on improving people’s living standards and social equality rather than any type of freedom. China stated that it is willing to follow the international norm but the U.S. must take into account the differences between the two countries. In 2008, there was a crackdown in Tibet against an anti-Chinese group. However, China did reopen Tibet for tourism in 2008 and China’s Tibet airline in 2010, which is said to be safe and stable. But in general, nothing has changed much in the human right issues even though China said it has achieved enormous progress in this area. Also, China firmly opposes any U.S. reports about its human rights, saying that the U.S. is interfering in China’s domestic affair.

Amid the serious global economic crisis, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the North Korea nuclear issue, the U.S. has treated human rights issues in China as a secondary concern. While the U.S. is the only country capable of dealing with this issue, Hilary Clinton, on her first trip to China as the Secretary of State, upset several reporters and activists when stating that human rights issues will not hinder U.S. – China relations. However, the Obama administration believes that soft line works better and they have created better results in other issues with China. Many activists worried that President Obama and Hilary Clinton have gone too far that can set a pattern in human rights issues, which they will regret later. In November 2009, Mr. Obama’s first trip to China has caused lots of activists to go to jail. However, the president took a soft line toward human right issues, which disappointed activists and was a missed opportunity. The fact that Google’s computer system in China was attacked and that the Dalai Lama visited the White House gave the activists hopes of a change in Obama’s policy toward human right issues. In May 2010, the U.S – China dialogue about human rights not only freed China of any obligation, but also allowed China criticize the U.S. about human right issues. During the talk, both sides briefly talked about their human rights progress and the U.S. saw positive changes in China. However, more or less there was almost nothing gained after the dialogue. In the talk in January 2011, the U.S. and China talked fast about their differences, especially the human rights. President Obama was happy with an agreement reached about the expected export with China, which can create 250,000 U.S. jobs. Because of the effort to boost up the economy, the president put aside the human rights issues with China

31

U.S. Trade Deficit with China0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

1985 19901995

2000

2005

20102011

USD

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

even though he reiterated that human rights are the core views of the U.S. and that they are not soft-pedaling on these issues.

North Korea Nuclear Issues

In the last four years, North Korea has been on and off about dismantling its nuclear weapons. In 2008, North Korea wanted the United States to support them with oil supplies in return for their dismantlement. However, North Korea failed to show enough information and evidence that the United States refused to take action. Thus, North Korea not only stopped the disabling process but also began reassembling its nuclear program, unaffected by the United States and international pressure. Whenever facing pressure or lack of humanitarian aid, North Korea started firing missile into seas to express its anger.

In November 2008, North Korea expressed its desire to hold conversations with the U.S. and move toward Diplomatic Normalization. North Korea said it might drop its nuclear program if there were security assurances provided, sanction lifted and no joint military exercises between South Korea and the United States. In 2009, the United Nations Security Council’s condemned North Korea’s rocket launching, which North Korea claimed to be a satellite. This action made North Korea restart its nuclear facilities and boycott the international pressure as well as refuse to rejoin the Six Party Talk. From then on, North Korea has launched many missile trials and nuclear tests, which has deeply concerned the U.S. and its Asian allies.

Despite the soft line of the U.S., North Korea remains aggressive. In May 2011, North Korea tested one short-range missile that supposed to attack the Cheonan South Korean warship. Still, it used South Korean prisoners to trade for food and humanitarian support. Because of a 2010 sanction, North Korea could not collect money, but has instead demanded food and other necessities.

China has been stubborn by ignoring requests from the U.S. and the United Nation for firmer stance against North Korea. China has refused to do so because they are North Korea’s largest trade partner (more than 80%) and food supplier (Shambaugh 153). However, China said that the situation could not be solved overnight and that North Korea is like a solid ball; the more pressure put on it, the more united it will be. (This could be explained by the different views that North Korean citizens have about their government due to the wrong propagation. The united power of Vietnamese people in the Vietnam War can be taken as a good example). Yet, that is just a minor reason. The main reason is that China wants to keep its influence in the Korean Peninsula. If North Korea collapses, either South Korea or the United States will try to influence North Korea. Moreover, base on the “lip-to-teeth” theory, Northeast China security will be threatened because of geopolitics. Also, China understands that the U.S. has been occupied with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and that a war in Korean Peninsula is unlikely. Therefore, China has been waiting for North Korea to voluntarily give up its nuclear weapons. In January 2011, China showed its impatience to North Korea by actively calling for early resumption of the Six Party Talk. In September, China blamed the U.S. and South Korean strategies toward North Korea, which led to a delay of the Six Party Talk.

In four years of holding office, President Obama has been soft-pedaling the North Korean nuclear issue. The Obama administration has tried several methods to

32

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

bring North Korea back to the Six Party Talk, but has otherwise failed so far. In 2008, the U.S. delisted Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) from the state sponsor of terrorism, which created tension in the Japan-U.S. alliance. The Obama administration has been very open and flexible towards North Korea. President Obama also made clear his policy toward nuclear power that he wants a world without nuclear weapons and that the U.S. is willing to talk/negotiate about and to discard its nuclear weapons if North Korea dismantles their nuclear weapons. However, North Korea has become aggressive and stubborn, causing the president to condemn North Korea and warn that the U.S. will be quick to counter any military action. Still, in September 2011, the U.S. appeared more at ease and provided food supplies in order to bring North Korea back to the Talk. In summary, for four years the U.S. has been flexible with North Korea, but has not gained any significant achievements, which is largely due to China’s support of North Korea.

On December 19, 2011, the supreme leader of North Korea since 1994, Kim Jong Il, died. This has caused the international community to worry about the situation in the Korean Peninsula. This could also be considered as the turning point of North Korea: many nations have hopes Kim Jong Un, Kim Jong Il’s third son, can help North Korea fully engage with the international community and improve the quality of life of its citizens. Kim Jong Un has studied in Switzerland and many people believe that this experience may make him more open-minded. South Korean security has been put on alert to help ensure its national safety. China and the U.S. are both taking advantage of Kim Jong Il’s death in order to raise their influence in North Korea. However, some observers think that Kim Jong Il’s death is not going to change much of the tension in the Korean Peninsula. They believe that because Kim Jong Un was chosen as his father’s successor prior to his death, he has prepared to continue his father’s ideas and “legacy”.

U.S - Republic of Korea (ROK)

The Korea Peninsula has been a very politically sensitive area. During the Kim Dae-Jung and Roh Moohyun administrations, the ROK followed the “Sunshine Policy”, which committed them to supply North Korea with humanitarian aid, create meetings for separated families and some business ties. But since Lee Myung-Bak took the office in 2008, the ROK abandoned that policy and has taken a more hard line stance toward North Korea. The Lee administration works closely with the U.S., having many joint military exercises as well as trade ties for mutual interest. South Koreans want to establish a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the U.S., which can help create jobs for the United Stated. South Korea is bidding to host the G20 summit in 2012. Being aware that the Korean Peninsula is now viewed as a very sensitive issue, the U.S. and the ROK launch large scale military exercises in the Yellow Sea in order to demonstrate North Korea their military strength. Also, these exercises are meant to deter North Korea from using its nuclear weapons. Due to geopolitics, Seoul, the capital city of ROK, might be easily affected if there is a war on the Korean Peninsula. Hence, North Korean issues should not be solved through war, but rather via the Six Party Talk.

Besides trade and the North Korean issues, there is a small difference in the ROK – U.S. relationship, which is that Seoul wants to enrich uranium and reprocess

33

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

spent fuel from their power plants. However, Washington is concerned and disagrees because this could be the beginning of nuclear proliferation in South Korea.

Conclusion

In four years holding office, President Obama has been largely focusing on improving the U.S. economy. The U.S has been pushing China to appreciate the Yuan (China’s currency) real value in order to reduce the deficit with China and create jobs for the U.S. citizens. Hence, the human rights issues have been given a secondary concern because there is no direct benefit from pushing China over this issue at the time being. The positive development is that the Cross Strait issues and the alliances with Japan and South Korea no longer pose major concern to the U.S. Therefore, the U.S. has held soft line toward most of the Asian countries, working closely with its allies in economic and military aspects. Although China is spending a lot of money on military modernization, the U.S. is counter-balancing with China by working with East and Southeast Asian countries, Australia and a possible relation with Myanmar. All in all, even though China’s growth poses challenges for the U.S., America is still having an increasingly important role in Asia and there is now a balance of power between the U.S. and China in this region.

34

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

Works Cited

Armitage and Nye, U.S. – Japan Alliance, 2.Bob, 107th Congress, 8-9.Bush, Richard and O’Hanlon Micheal, A War Like No Other (Hoboken, N.J: Wiley,

2007)Cha, “South Korea: Anchored or Adrift?”Chanlett-Avery, Japan – U.S. Relations, 8.Chanlett-Avery, Japan – U.S. Relations, 9.Dumbaugh, China – U.S. Relations in the 109th Congress, 8. Fan, Maureen “China’s Party Leadership Declares New Priority: ‘Harmonious

Society,” Washington Post, October 12, 2006Gill, Bates “China’s Evolving Regional Security Strategy”, in Shambaugh, Power Shift,

247-65Gill, Bates Meeting the Challenges and Opportunities of China’s Rise (Washing, D.C.:

Center for Strategic and Intenational Studies, 2006), 6-12. Glaser, Bonnie, “Mid-Air Collision Cripples Sino-U.S. Relations,” Comparative

Connection 3, no.2 (2nd Qtr 2001), 23-25Glosserman, Brad “The Alliance Transformed?” Comparative Connections 7, no. 4 Grier, Peter “Why Bush Risks China’s Ire to Honor Dalai Lama,” Christian Science

Monitor, October 17,2007Gross, Donald G. and Oh, Hannah “Agreement with North Korea, Progress with the

South,” Comparative Connections 9, no. 3 (3rd Qtr 2007)http://www.cis.org/media/csis/pubs/0102q.pdf

Kronstadt, K. Alan Terrorism in South Asia, CRS Report RL32259 (Washington, D.C: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, August 13, 2004)

Manyin, Mark “Terrorism in Southest Asia” CRS Report RL31672 (Washington, D.C: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, August 13, 2004)

Minxin Pei and Micheal Swaine, Simmering Fire in Asia: Averting Sino – Japanese Strategic Conflict (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2005)

Nam Kim, Chong “The Roh Moo Hyun Government’s Policy toward North Korea,” International Journal of Korean Studies 9, no.2.

Nanto, Dick East Asian Regional Architecture: New Economic and Security Arrangements and U.S. Policy, CRS Report RL33653 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, September 18, 2006), 18-25.

Niksch, Korea, 12.Pollack, Jonathan “The Transformation of the Asian Security Order: Assessing China’s

Impact,” in Shambaugh, Power Shift, 329-46Pritchard, Failed Diplomacy, 101-45“Religion in China: When Opium Can Be Benign”, Economist February 1, 2007, 25-28.

(4th Qtr 2005): 19-22, http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/0504q.pdf

Shambaugh, David “China Engages Asia: Reshaping the Region Order,” International Security 29, no. 3 (Winter 2004/05): 64-99;

Shambaugh, David “Power Shift”, University of California Press. Sutter, “Taiwan Problem”

35

Virginia Review of Asian Studies

Sutter, Robert G. The United States in Asia. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009. Print.

Sutter, Robert G. U.S.-Chinese Relations: Perilous Past, Pragmatic Present. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. Print.

Yoon, Young-Kwan, “South Korea in 1999: Overcoming Cold War Legancies” Asian Survey 40, no. 1

Yost, Casimir “Choices for America in the World,” Scope Paper No. 4 (Washington, D.C.: America’s Role in the World Working Group, Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Georgetown University, 2007); available at http://isd.georgetown.du/Scope_Paper_4_June_4_2007.pdf

Zhu, Zhiqun. US-China Relations in the 21st Century: Power Transition and Peace. London: Routledge, 2006. Print.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/asia/www.global.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/www.hongkong.scmp.com/ www.usatoday.com/www.washingpost.com/www.washingtontime.com/www.telegraph.co.uk/www.straitstimes.com/

36

i Agence France-Presse, “Chen’s DPP wins Taiwan Vote for National Assembly”, May 15, 2005; Keith Bradsher, “Few in Taiwan Bother to Vote on Constitutional Assembly,” New York Times, May 15, 2005.

ii These diplomatic changes are tracked by David G. Brown in the quarterly ejournal Comparative Connections. iii Dumbaugh, Kerry China – U.S. Relations, CRS Issue Brief IB98018, updated July 17,2001 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 2001)iv www.chinausfocus.comv Washington D.C.: Congressional Research Service - Taiwan: U.S. arms sale since 1990vi Washington D.C.: Congressional Research Service: China – U.S. Trade Issues 2011 vii These diplomatic changes are tracked by David G. Brown in the quarterly ejournal Comparative Connections.