Brett Daniel Shehadey
Special Contributor for In Homeland Security
US-China military-to-military relations are as rocky as they have been and even more so as the US applies pressure in the Pacific and builds an armada through proxy allies and arms sales. China is contained, balanced, and “temporarily” defeated. So why does the US continue to make the diplomatic effort?
It is an attempt at long-term reality- a strategy of the ‘better neighbor’ relations. The US and its Pacific allies must coordinate military leadership and clear benign intentions, even after apparent gunboat diplomacy. Now is the time for a belated gentle diplomacy between the two as hostilities have died down since last Summer between China, Japan and others.
It won’t always be this way, with the US on top. US commanders like Admiral Jonathan Greenert, Chief of Naval Operations, recognize the importance of keeping an open channel, establishing joint acceptable procedures before such a mishap or spark turn into a larger conflict. “We must have a dialogue,” the Admiral said.
Admiral Greenert gave Commander in Chief of the People’s Liberation Army Navy Admiral Wu Shengli a tour of a Los Angeles Class Attack Submarine USS Jefferson City and discussed other issues for the upcoming joint-naval exercises in San Diego and D.C.
China has frozen military exchanges in the past when the US had done something it did not approve and China continues to perceive that these exchanges are more for the benefit of America’s need to reassure other states through an attaché structure than it feels China has any need. Right now, their primary objective is playing catch-up. Still, even though they are unwilling to compromise on sovereignty claims they do have an interest in reassuring the immediate states and international community that they are on a ‘peaceful rise.’ Here in lies the weakness of China- image control- almost to a narcissistic level. This is also highly rational as they first must acquire trust before they gain the funds and freedom to construct and operate a next generation navy. Hence the US has a lot of leeway in tempering them, achieving greater transparency, cooperation and coordination.
The significance of this latest visit in San Diego, by Chinese Admiral Shengli will be taken by China as a symbolic gesture of joining some prestigious military superpower club; even though they do not have even one fully operational aircraft carrier. Moreover, a modern Japanese Navy, might single-handedly deal them a heavy blow in any strict bilateral naval scrimmage.
US Rear Admiral Richard Breckenridge, the Director of Undersea Warfare Division, cites a 30 percent decrease in submarine programs that endangers a clear advantage over Russia and China- both appear to have many strategic objectives in deflecting key US national interests. While the US invites China down the submarine hatch, US Admiral Breckenridge further says that Chin is “growing towards more of a global strategic undersea force.” So what is really at issue is “the ability to control the seas” in the future.
The US has two opposing strategies: hold the one hand out for a handshake and the other hand ready to fire MRBMs. According to the “Annual Report to Congress 2012: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China,” the purpose of any US-China military diplomacy includes: “shaping China’s choices by encouraging it to cooperate with the United States and its allies and partners in the delivery of international public goods, including in such endeavors as counter-piracy, international peacekeeping, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations.”
Yet as the tide turns, the utility of such efforts will reverse into more of China shaping US choices. The symbolism of any courtesy to China now is unfortunately that of China rise/America decline. China is receiving the respect it has demanded for decades from the American hosts. The two states are also on tract to participate in joint naval exercises in the Pacific for 2014 (RimPac) in which China will take further notes of how their ‘frenemies’ maneuver.
The biggest dilemma to cooperation remains one of maritime control. China wants to be blue water navy and an international military presence like the US. So long as it continues to grow at or above three times the pace of the US economy, it will inevitably do so. Resistance to this process has been the regional states that will continue to protect and defend their maritime claims- including fisheries, underwater petroleum reserves and security interests.
The US has been the paper weight to China’s expanse in the region let alone beyond it. As diplomacy takes shape out of America’s present position of strength through partnerships, China will continue to see this diplomacy as a sign of weakness and or trickery; and asking questions like: why would the US show us their sacred naval vessels like the submarines we would be facing in war and participate in exercises with allies that contain us? Do they arrogantly seek to intimidate us? Do they think they can deceive us, and withhold the real weapons? They must be putting up a smoke-screen of some kind- that’s what we would do? And why should we trust their intentions- look at Muammar Gaddafi who gave up nuclear weapons and then got sacked by NATO? They have just used their force to deny us [China] what is rightfully ours since the Japanese stole it from us in the First Sino-Japanese War; or was it the Qing Dynasty- no it was even going back to the Tang and Song Dynasties. We will not forget how they treated China during the Second Great War.
Trust is naturally a luxury that no parties have, but during this cooling period, all parties can the brief moment find entertainment through discussion. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said “Our goal is to build trust.” Trust over time might work if decades are factored into any US diplomacy calculations.
Will the military diplomacy between the US and China change the course of Beijing? Not this way. Not through show and tell alone. RimPac and other major joint military multilateral exercises that include China show a genuine trust, which many American officers and officials understand.
China still needs to give something back to please the US. Participation is a good start. Right now, they feel entitled to walk aboard the USS Jefferson City or the USS Carl Vinson or the USS Fort Worth deservedly, because in their mind, the US had no right to intervene in their respective regional disputed territories, anchor and port in the Pacific and contain it this last year. The gesture is treated as a small token of remorse. Even the US acknowledges a slight overuse of force, which did the job in stabilizing the waters but severed ties more than it wanted. It also emboldened US allies to make riskier moves they would not have felt comfortable doing without the added feeling of support.
Image wise, the US continues to look weaker on the grand international stage- not just to China. Participating in diplomacy now looks and almost feels admittedly one out of necessity, rather than free choice. This may not be wholly true but that is the general consensus.
Also, the Chinese are much more patient and they plan to wear the US and allies down over time. They are already stealing many of these same technologies that are being shown as courtesies aboard our warships. Why invite a thief or a vandal to a display the items in your house?
Washington might do better to set up a rotating flag naval officer exchange program with Beijing in order to establish a fraternity of professionals with a common code. These gestures are better if reciprocated and even more successful if permanent. While they do help slow down or mitigate potential conflict, they do not alter the balance of power. China could invite Admiral Greenert to tour the PLAN Liaoning among others before the 2014 exercises.
At some point, the Chinese military build-up [which is constantly condemned by the US, while at the same time the US holds a build-up presence in the Pacific] will have to be discussed. The time table for Chinese domination of its seas is on or before 2050. It would be nice if such a prelude to regional power shifts was already under way through some tangible framework that allows China the freedom of the seas, openness and adherence to international law. Programming the Chinese military leaders early on is a wise move only if it can be done. More likely, it can be feared that the Chinese are programing us.
The best line to remember for military diplomacy is to: ‘keep one’s friends close and one’s enemies even closer.’ The purpose of this is not just to reduce potential threats but to potentially resolve them all over generations.