When Donald Trump found out that the White House was hosting Chinese President Xi Jinping for a state dinner, he decided he should contribute his opinion. “I would not be throwing him a dinner,” he stated, “I’d get him a McDonald’s hamburger and I’d say we gotta get down to work, because you can’t continue to devalue.” After several Republican candidates raised the prospect of canceling President Xi’s state visit during September’s GOP debate, Demetri Sevastopulo of the Financial Times cogently noted, “China has long served as the bogeyman in US presidential elections.” However, the invitation of such a supposed “bogeyman” to the White House did raise a question of diplomacy. Did the Obama administration’s invitation signify a real step toward rectifying past grievances between the US and China, or was it simply diplomatic posturing?
Leading up to his state visit, Xi Jinping’s rhetoric on the cybersecurity issues was consistent: He continually denied persistent accusations of China’s leading role in global cyberwarfare. In a rare interview with Western media published in the Wall Street Journal, Xi reaffirmed China’s status as a victim, not a perpetrator, of cyber-attacks and reaffirmed promises of cooperation with the US. Despite his assurances, it remains a divisive and complicated issue. Jonathan Pollet, the founder of Red Tiger Security, has explained that China has unambiguous cyberwarfare capability but no meaningful intention of attacking American infrastructure, quipping, “China poses a very significant threat to US critical infrastructure — but I say that with an asterisk.” Issues of cybersecurity may not have been big enough to justify the dinner’s cancellation; in fact, Xi’s state visit served as a landscape in which progress toward cybersecurity cooperation was made. Plans for sanctions against China for its unscrupulous cyber activity were revealed shortly before the visit. In sanctioning the country, the US is directly blaming Beijing for hacking, thus establishing the precedent that China can no longer deny cyberattacks are happening. But by revealing the sanctions shortly before the state visit, Obama was able to push Xi towards bilateral cybersecurity diplomacy. Two hours of meetings during the state visit led to the agreement of a cybersecurity pact, one that finally yields concrete signs of China condemning cyberattacks. And as the Brookings Institute notes, with the US agreeing to advance “bilateral investment treaty negotiation,” this pact may be more than just an empty agreement. Advancing investment treaty negotiation would give China significantly more legal avenues to acquire intellectual property and conduct merger activity. Xi displayed similar proactivity, calling for cooperation in cybersecurity from American tech companies during the beginning of his state visit in Seattle. As President Obama pointedly asked Xi Jinping, in context only made possible by the state dinner, “Are words followed by actions?” Only time will tell, but the progress that has already been made still sets a precedent for an agreement that might actually hold ground.
Driven by questions of economic motivation, the conversation around cyberwarfare inevitably shifts to China’s economy at large. Most heavily discussed are China’s rapid currency devaluation and the nation’s slowing economic growth. Xi, citing the fact that 95 percent of businesses indicate they still want to invest in China, confidently stated in his Wall Street Journal interview that “claims about a changing investment climate in China and foreign investors losing confidence in China are not backed by facts.” Xi also brought up a vibrant consumer base, which, as the Economist elaborates, has eased the industrial downturn by increasing consumption and is motivated by high income growth, particularly among the lower-middle class. Despite his assurance regarding China’s broad economic downturn, Xi has been active in addressing other aspects of the economy that he feels are problematic. Before his appointment to office, Xi held a reputation as a strong proponent of reform: a leader who wanted the market to play a more decisive role and who holistically attacked corruption by going after both the “tigers and the flies.” Fortunately, Xi’s state visit has allowed him to build upon this record. On Wednesday, he promised lower, more transparent regulations over foreign investment into China, defying preconceived concerns over China’s potential refusal to reduce meddling in financial markets and currency rates which affect foreign investment. The statement was bolstered when Boeing announced the construction of an aircraft-finishing center in the country a few hours later. Xi similarly noted China would halt its renminbi devaluation, explaining that such practices have no place in the economic downturn. The veracity of Xi’s plans for change remains to be seen, but the leader’s commitment to reform, now with a stronger influence from Washington, certainly can’t be faulted. Xi has boldly compared his reform policies to “an arrow that cannot be brought back.” From the economic dialogue accomplished at the state visit, there are clear signs that the arrow’s target is now more to the US’s liking.
While the divide between China and the US on economic issues is wide, the gulf on political issues is even wider. Xi has been obstinate regarding his country’s imprisonment of activists and his controversial choice to limit the activities of nonprofit organizations on the grounds of “lawful rights and interests.” The grimly humorous irony in this statement is that this stance, as well as the rest of Xi’s interview with the Wall Street Journal in which it was affirmed, probably hasn’t reached the ears of the Chinese public – access to the newspaper is blocked in the country. And rhetoric surrounding China’s building of “artificial islands” in the South China Sea seems to suggest that Xi is the leader of a nation that doesn’t understand the concept of protected sovereignty. The straw that nearly broke the camel’s back came a week before Xi’s state visit, with the revelation that China had arrested a Chinese-American businesswoman, Phan-Phan Gillis, on espionage charges six months ago – an action described by her husband as “the most stupid politics in the world.” And yet several actions arising from Xi’s state visit indicated that the president may yet be swayed on political issues. The first sign is the finalization of a joint US-China plan to reduce warplane collisions in areas like the South China Sea, Xi’s first recognition of the freedom to navigate in the region. The second is the leader’s re-affirmation of his country’s commitment to gender equality nearly 20 years to the day after Beijing hosted the 4th United Nations Conference on Women. While critics like Hillary Clinton, who spoke during that conference and hasn’t hesitated in calling his words hypocritical, do hold their ground, Xi has offered for the first time concrete policies to combat discrimination against women around the world. Such policies include China-supported workplace training of 30,000 women from developing African countries. The third sign came during an address to the United Nations in which Xi committed to building a permanent peacekeeping force of 8,000 UN troops, pledged $100 million to the African Union for the creation of an emergency response unit, and affirmed a $1 billion donation for a UN “peace and development fund.”
Xi Jinping’s state visit was roundly criticized because of the divisive issues between the US and China. The visit, however, has served as an effective forum to work toward achieving progress on resolving problems. The Washington Post notes that a “wounded China,” one with a fractured political base and reminded of its problems even from figures in the US, will be more likely to “resist political concessions.” But as the Post also points out, our relationship with China reveals the uncomfortable reality that neither country can be the “master of its destiny.” As the globe’s two largest superpowers, the two have inevitably interconnected futures. The question is whether we view our shared destiny as a blessing, in which we can see past differences to work toward common goals, or a curse in which we drag each other down. Xi Jinping views it as the former. “Naturally,” he said in his Wall Street Journal interview, “owing to differences in history, culture and stage of development, China, the United States and other countries may not have the exact same dream, and they pursue their dreams in different ways. But all roads lead to Rome.”
China and the US have already shown an ability to cooperate, adding to a landmark emissions agreement last year with the announcement that China will institute a national cap-and-trade program to allow the nation to drastically cut down on carbon emissions by 2017. Xi believes that the possibility for a new level of cultural and political understanding between the US and China should not be dismissed, and a state dinner serving as a beginning to that process certainly shouldn’t be either. Although the two countries still drastically differ in many arenas, Xi’s visit is a key step towards allowing the powers to work in each other’s interest rather than against it. The potential of discovering our shared “Rome” is beginning to look brighter. And with that possibility in mind, it is only for the best that Xi’s state visit resulted in more than a Big Mac.
Photo: U.S. Embassy The Hague