by Iberk
I was watching Olympics coverage Monday night when George W. Bush came on for an interview. An interesting point came when Costas asked how much leverage the U.S. had over China. [Full transcript]
The response that Bush gave, I believe, is the epitome of the problems that we have faced over the last eight years. Bush stated "First of all, I don't see America having problems. I see America as a nation that is a world leader that has got great values and leverage". To paraphrase the rest of the quote, he said that our relationship with China is 'constructive'. We can find common ground (in North Korea and Iran), and the Chinese have enough respect for us that they listen to us on religious freedom and political liberty.
Continued: Click "Read More"
This comes at a point when international respect for the United States is at an all-time low. It is true that American dollars fuel the booming Chinese economy, however, the Chinese know that we depend on their cheap imports too much to even consider implementing sanctions. In short, the relationship that we have maintained with China over the past two decades has been, in the long term, seriously detrimental to the United States. Now debt to China is of an astronomical magnitude, as is the trade deficit.
In conclusion, the US is just about out of leverage. We lost all of our respect in Iraq, and economically, we are lagging behind the rest of the world. Until we have a leader who realizes, this, we cannot begin to fix anything.
Obama '08
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
What Problems?
Labels: iberk, International, olympics
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I was also rather amused by that interview; it's a sad day for politics when a sports reporter is more in the know about international goings-on than a country's president. One element to Bush's comments that I noticed in particular was his repetition of the word "engaged"—as in "we need to stay engaged with China". He used it in several contexts, up to the point where I wasn't sure what he was saying at all.
Actually, the impression I got from the interview was that Bush is trying to in his limited fashion acknowledge that the United States can no longer dictate terms to China from on high, and that we must now treat them as equals. I do agree that he overused "engaged" though.
As for the OP, I have two points of disagreement. The first is that you're confusing the respect that Western Europe and other liberalized democracies have for us with "international respect". The respect that authoritarian regimes such as Russia and China have for the United States is based on power, and completely different from the more moralistic respect that we lost from Western Europe when we invaded Iraq.
To countries like Russia and China for whom regime change is a bit of a hobby, our invasion of Iraq on false pretenses doesn't matter. They don't respect us as friends who were hurt and insulted when we ignored them, they respect us as adversaries, and in that sense our continued presence in Iraq may even have helped us by showing that we have the dedication to fight the long war. It is this kind of respect, respect for out accomplishments and power that we call on when we negotiate with China.
The second point I'd disagree with is your statement that "the relationship that we have maintained with China over the past two decades has been, in the long term, seriously detrimental to the United States.", First off, our increasing debt is not a symptom of our relationship with China - we sold US government bonds on the international market, and the Chinese bought them, and second cheap Chinese imports have vastly increased the quality of life for both Americans and Chinese.
There is a deep nostalgia among the American people for the day when a man with only a high school education could get a solid, middle class job with benefits doing factory work. This nostalgia is held most strongly by white men, the target of any political campaign, and so it has permeated our political system to the point where both candidates have gone out of their way to bash China as the perceived villain in this story.
However, the "villain" is not China, but simple economic reality. The conditions that created the golden age of American manufacturing were an anomaly, brought about by the supremacy of American industry after World War 2, and the economic mismanagement in much of the developing world as a result of Communism.
Now we must realize that we cannot just crawl back into our shells and try to cut ourselves off from the world in order to save a few factory jobs. We must look forward, not back as a nation and the sooner we realize this the better.
Undecided '08
It is naïve to suggest that the rest of the world (especially Western Europe) respect us just because their leaders don't openly insult us.
Venezuela and Iran are countries that can afford to go without US business. Therefore, their leaderships are more likely to speak their minds on the Bush administration. Longtime allies in Western Europe (Sarkozy, for instance) are patiently waiting until Bush is out of office. They don't respect him, they just are too tactful to say so.
You misunderstood me. Bush lost us a lot of respect in Western Europe, but it was a different kind of respect from that China and Russia have for us.
The people of Western Europe look on us as allies, and friends, not necessarily competitors. Because of this they have different expectations of us than Russia and China who look upon us as adversaries.
It's the difference between the respect you have for someone as a "good person", and the respect you have for someone's power and skill, two completely different entities.
Rishubhav: I accept your first point, however, the invasion of Iraq and subsequent loss of respect from "librilized democracies" has had international reprecutions. Among these is the decreased power of the US to deal with regimes such as that in China. In addition, Iraq has exposed our millitary weeknesses.
As for your second point, I agree with your conclusion that we cannot "crawl back into our shells and try to cut ourselves off from the world". However, it must be considered that cheap Chinese imports have had both positive and negative reprecutions. For instance, Americans have gotten used to a higher quality of life than they will be able to afford in the future, perhaps than they can afford even now. As the price of Chinese goods rises, the debt of the American people will also rise. Hence, this culture of living above our means will eventually come crashing down.
Iberk speaks wisdom.
Post a Comment