Summit in San Francisco

By Miljan Vešović

Last week in San Francisco there was a meeting between US President Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping. Since the previous meeting, a year ago in Bali, there has been an additional deterioration in relations between the US and China. Both because of this and because of the generally accepted point of view that the rivalry between the West (primarily the USA) and China will determine the state of international relations in the coming decades, the summit in San Francisco was followed with special attention.

Expectations from the meeting, however, were low. Probably also deliberately downplayed - neither Xi nor Biden wanted a foreign – policy failure. Especially Biden, who is facing declining popularity in the US and an uncertain presidential race (probably) with Donald Trump next year. The results of the summit were in line with expectations.

The two sides agreed to resume military-to-military communication, which was interrupted after the US detected and shot down a Chinese spy air balloon at the beginning of this year. Xi also promised that China would crack down on the production of substances used to make the synthetic drug fentanyl. This narcotic is the main cause of the increase in overdose deaths in the US in recent years. China and the US also agreed to control the use of artificial intelligence for military purposes and committed to triple the production of renewable energy.

On the other hand, the USA, as a concession to China, loosened part of the trade sanctions against companies from that country. There was also a meeting between X and representatives of the US private sector - which is a departure from the practice of the US politicians to discourage investment in China. In addition, a "1-on-1" meeting with the "leader of the free world" brings diplomatic prestige to Xi and China, as a "rising great power". The summit supports the image that China wants to create - that depending on the circumstances, it can be both an equal partner and a rival to the United States.

Xi's statements during and after the meeting were precisely an attempt to reinforce such an image. Xi called the US a "partner and friend" and the relationship between the countries "the most important bilateral relationship in the world." However, he also assessed that "Planet Earth is big enough for both countries to succeed." It can be interpreted as a call for a return to bipolarism, "spheres of interest" and respect/equal treatment of the "Chinese model" - not only in international politics, but also related to the economy and social (autocratic) order.

At this moment, Biden may have needed the meeting with Xi mostly because of domestic politics and the upcoming elections. On the one hand, Biden needs to present himself to the US electorate as capable of participating in the summits at all (bearing in mind that he turned 81 2 days ago). In addition, it is also important for him to present himself as an experienced old hand in foreign policy- and to try to present his opponent (Trump) as the complete opposite.

Biden and his administration need talks with China for another reason. In the world full of international crises, of which the Middle Eastern and Ukrainian ones are of course the most serious and complex, the American president wants to avoid even the slightest destabilization in the Indo-Pacific.

However, the root of the problem in the relationship between the USA (and the West in general, although some European countries are still hesitant to understand this) and China is the same one that led to “deep freeze” with Putin's Russia - the Chinese Communist Party needs the destabilization of the existing world order in order to achieve its goals. The main goal is to stay in power as long as possible and to control the Chinese society as tightly as possible.

Authoritarian regimes need an external enemy and chaos in international relations because they need a reason for authoritarianism. If they don’t have the reason, the people governed by an authoritarian regime become more and more receptive to the ideas of freedom, democracy, human rights and the free market, which (practice has shown) lead to the best quality of life. Therefore, China (led by the current regime) and the US (the West) cannot be friends.

The survival of the CCP in power depends precisely on the deepening of the rivalry with the West. Soviet communism and the USSR survived the intervention of Western countries after the First World War, they survived the Second World War, and the Cold War confrontations. However, they did not survive the thawing of relations and the opening towards the West. Xi and the Chinese Communists, who, like all Marxist leaders, are very careful students of history, are probably aware of this.

Of course, "tactical breaks" and temporary thawing of relations are possible. At this moment, a temporary stabilization of relations might be useful for China. This is primarily due to the problems that the Chinese economy is facing as a result of years of draconian measures to combat the Covid-19 pandemic. In the short term, a certain improvement in relations and the eventual arrival/return of American companies to the Chinese market may bring benefits to Beijing. In the long run, however, the CCP has much more to gain from confrontation than rapprochement.

Therefore, short-term stabilization is probably all that the current US administration can hope for. What is not entirely clear, however, is whether the administration, or parts of it, still harbor illusions that a long-term and substantial improvement in relations with China can occur. Such illusions are dangerous - the example of relations with Russia and the inadequate reaction to Putin's regime in the first 15 years of his rule show this best.

In the long term, the best the West can hope for in its relations with China is a new incarnation of the Cold War. Possibly with a slightly better starting position compared to the previous one - because China still has not reached the superpower status and the amount of power that the Soviet Union had after the Second World War. Unfortunately, however, the long-term Cold War-like rivalry is inevitable, and probably the best solution - the alternative is a “shooting” war. The firm, strong, determined position of not only the US, but also NATO towards China is of crucial importance to avoid a possible war, especially regarding Taiwan.

China wants such a rivalry and is ready for it. This is shown by Xi's comment that "Planet Earth is big enough" for the success of both countries - charting the planet as a space for geopolitical rivalry, because for the Chinese Communist Party, rivalry is success. The only adequate answer to that is uncompromising faith and the promotion of precisely those values: freedom of speech, market, media and religion, democracy and human rights, which gave the US president the title of "Leader of the Free World" and made NATO the most powerful alliance in the history of mankind.

Extremists on both sides of the political spectrum in the US who question the values on which the country was built need to have this uncompromising faith. It should also be possessed by certain European states that still believe that China (or Russia) can be partners again, or that Europe doesn’t have to spend too much on defense, because when excrement hits the fan, the United States will defend them.

Last but not least, it would be really nice if the current president of Montenegro, Milatović, whose nauseatingly sycophantic behavior towards Serbian President Vučić (an autocrat and a main Chinese and Russian partner in the region) was unfortunately witnessed by everyone in Montenegro, develops that faith.