FENG SHAOLEI

Professor and Supervisor of PhD Candidates, Director of Center for Russian Studies and Director of Center for Neighborhood Studies, East China Normal University

INTERACTIONS AMONG CHINA, US AND RUSSIA AROUND XI-TRUMP MEETING

FENG SHAOLEI

Professor and Supervisor of PhD Candidates, Director of Center for Russian Studies and Director of Center for Neighborhood Studies, East China Normal University

President Xi Jinping of China and President Donald Trump of the United States, held the summit meeting in the latter's Florida resort of Mar-a-Lago in the United States, April 7, 2017. (Photo / xinhua)

Between April 6 and 7, 2017, President Xi Jinping of China and President Donald Trump of the United States held a summit meeting at the Mar-a-Lago Estate in Palm Beach, Florida. Around the summit, the trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia became the focus of the world’s public opinions. Rarely has such a scene of rapid and dramatic change been seen in the world history as the one between the three major powers of global influence.

I.CURRENT INTERACTION BETWEEN CHINA, THE US AND RUSSIA CHALLENGED BY UNCERTAINTIES

Let us begin our observation of the trilateral interaction from both the side of US-Russia relations and that of China-US relations.

In the course of US Presidential Elections 2016, the Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump was set to readjust US relations with Russia, a traditional adversary. However, the im-provement on US-Russia relations was not materialized after his election as US President. Nay, Russia-Gate has become the greatest political threat to the Trump Administration. It was against this backdrop that President Trump personally ordered an air strike on a Syrian airbase with 59 missiles to retaliate the alleged use of chemical weapons by Syrian government troops. It has left US-Russia relations all of a sudden in tension, returning to a historical low since the end of the Cold War.

Now, let us look at the other side of the trilateral interaction, China-US relations. During his campaign and for a period of time right after his election, President Trump moved from accusing China of being a “currency manipulator” to threatening to breach the bottom line of “one China policy”, posturing a reversal of present state of affairs of China-US cooperation since the 1970s. It was quite a bit like the position of“ultra-realism” as proposed by John Mearsheimer, an American political scholar that the United States joins with Russia in containing China.

However, in sharp contrast to deteriorating US-Russia relations is the fact that since President Trump took office, through efforts made by both sides, China-US relations have, to the contrary, gradually improved. At the same time as President Trump and his team put pressures on China, they have continued to send signals for improving relations with the country.

It would be worth noting that at their first meeting at the Mar-a-Lago Estate on April 6, President Trump in a surprising and improvised way informed President Xi Jinping of the US air strike on Syria, which had already taken place. To the summit that caught the world’s attention, this added dramatic effects and provided food for thought.

Though interaction between major countries is changeable like wave and cloud, China’s diplomatic stance remains unchanged. In regard to the Korean Peninsula affairs that are of greatest concerns, China has persevered with promoting the double tracked negotiation process between the United States and the DPRK and among the six concerned parties. It insists on parallel stoppage of nuclear tests of the DPRK and military maneuvers of the United States and the ROK and on resolving the matters of the Peninsula through peaceful means. At least, in face of the touch-and-go situation in April, 2017, China’s position provided a ray of hope for appropriate solution of the Korean Peninsula issue. Against the backdrop of the “case of chemical weapons” on the battle ground of Syria, confusing the eye, China stood firmly against the use of chemical weapons and supported an independent and thorough investigation by the UN in search of a conclusion that was based on hard facts and could stand the test of time. On the UN Security Council, China voted abstention on draft resolutions concerning the Syrian issue, aiming to providing necessary political space for relaxing the tensed atmosphere all set for a showdown and promoting a just and equitable solution to the Syrian issue.

II.HISTORICAL FEATURES AND CURRENT LIMITATIONS OF TRILATERAL RELATIONS BETWEEN CHINA, THE US AND RUSSIA

In general, trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia is conditioned by special features of the development of internal and external relations of the said countries.

First of all, China, the United States and Russia are the three major countries of the world today with relatively most powerful comprehensive national strength and also ones that can be relatively independent on deciding upon internal and external affairs. Therefore, it is a weathervane of contemporary international politics to watch if they get close or get away from one another and the tide and ebb of trilateral relations between China, the United States and Russia, which also put in display profound changes in balance of international forces and basic orientation of international development into the future. With unyielding efforts over the years, in the trilateral relations there is a degree of mutual respect and improvement through timely communications. However, in terms of differences in fundamental strategic interest among China, the United States and Russia, it is next to impossibility to coordinate and make them live together without long, arduous and effective work.

Secondly, from historical point of view, the rising significance of the trilateral relations between China, the United States and Russia once again reflects the long-term trend of development of pluralism in the international community. From the Westphalian System of 1648 to the Vienna System between 1814 and 1815, to the Yalta System of 1945 and to the ongoing post-Cold War world pattern, each time when an international order of relatively lasting stability comes about, it is almost always a historical process towards increasing pluralized international principal bodies. In February 2017, the Munich Security Summit aptly taking the “post-Western” theme in a way illustrates the world perception of development of such pluralism, which is gradually accepted by the international opinions, including some of the strategists in the West. The development of such a perception does not deny the fact that the US-led West remains in the leading position of the world affairs but rather it only highlights the fact that the world moves increasingly toward pluralism, especially China and Russia each in their own right and in collaboration exerting great influence. In sum, the world is moving towards pluralism but the transformation of the international system will continue to be a very long process, a process full of twists and turns.

Thirdly, in the process of a new wave of trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia, though there are various challenges and tests, more willingness for cooperation has been on display. China and Russia have maintained a stable partnership of strategic coordination, and just like China’s former State Councilor Dai Bingguo specially emphasized it at the Moscow Conference of May 2016, “the limit for such a partnership is the sky”, which indeed has become a new fact of China-Russia relations. From the Russian pointof view, the reaction of Putin himself, from Russian political elite and general public to Trump’s once pro-Russia posture was overall prudent and moderate. In late October 2016, at the 13th annual conference of Russia’s Valdai International Discussion Club (the Valdai Forum), this author was privileged to ask President Vladimir Putin to comment on the relations between China, Russia and the United States that was under heated debate. In reply, President Putin remarked that “the relations between Russia, China and the United States should be relations of mutual respect and mutual benefit”. Meanwhile, he was explicit in saying that “under the circumstances of today, we should much cherish Russia-China relations”. Such a statement by the Russian President on public occasion was concise, clear and to the point, throwing a guiding light. This author believes that the statement described a consistent position he had held for a decade and more. This shows that even at the moment when one could be optimistic about an improvement on Russia-US relations, President Putin himself and other Russian statesmen remained very firm on maintaining and promoting the development of China-Russia relations. This is a valued point in the process of developing major country relations in the new era that should be cherished. On the other hand, in face of a series of pressures put on China by President Trump before and immediately after taking office, China was unmoved, being neither in a temper nor in a haste but rather, calm, magnanimous and active in communication, which deeply impressed the world. This includes President Trump himself, who speaks highly of it after his “Mar-a-Lago Estate talks” with President Xi Jinping, which indicates the effects of the Chinese leader’s active communication and sincerity for cooperation, making the host entertain more hope for cooperation between major countries.

Chinese and Russian naval forces concluded their joint military exercise in the waters off the southern province of Guangdong, pledging to enhance practical cooperation, September 12,2016.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov(R) shakes hands with U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Moscow, Russia, on April 12,2017.

While emphasizing the significance of the trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia, one should bear in mind that itis difficult for a framework to come about for such an interaction between the three sides and neither is there an exclusive platform for trilateral cooperation between them. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the three countries have displayed differences between them in orientation and interest in terms of ideology, system model, level of social economic development, historical and cultural background, foreign relations, alignment and international influence. Although they face common challenges like terrorism, regional conflicts and development bottlenecks, the three countries are less than motivated to forge close cooperation in face of “common enemies”. Such a state of affair will for a fairly long time to come stand in the way for China, the United States and Russia to come up with a framework of major country relations where three of them can work together in synchronization. It is difficult for a long period of time to come for a so called “new Yalta model” on global scale to emerge once more between China, the United States and Russia. Owing to the gaping differences between them, it is even unlikely for the three countries to have between them something like “trilateral forum”like the one between the United States, Japan and Europe that once appeared within the Western bloc in the 1970s, the twilight years of the Cold War. In view of such historical and objective conditions, some of the people believe that there is no so called “trilateral relationship between China, the United States and Russia”.

What is at issue is another important fact that a “trilateral relationship between China, the United States and Russia” is understood within the paradigm of geopolitics, which is not groundless. Geopolitics, as the definition goes, is “allotment and rivalry for space between major powers”. Unlike all of the international shifts in the past, the Cold War came to an end not by means of war but by means of peace. The good news about it is that a war was averted. The bad news is that it has left behind a not so clear model of distribution of space between the major powers, and hence a huge space for rivalry between them, not only in Eurasia and Europe but also in the Asia-Pacific. Since the 9/11, besides an ephemeral cooperation for common war on terror, in general the fundamentals of the trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia are as follows. First, China and Russia get closer, while both focusing on building a framework for cooperation between them, they are often in collaboration in dealing with pressures from the West. Secondly, there have been sporadic “resets” of US-Russia relations, each one however ended up in stoppage or even reversal by the effects of internal and external interferences. Third, China-US relations have continued to move forward against various challenges, and be it measured by the scale and quantity supported by a series statistic figures or by depth of perception or conception of such a relationship, things are beyond simple comparison to 30 years ago.

From a long-term point of view, owing to continuity of geographical conditions, continental geopolitics sets store by stability in the neighborhood of the major country whereas oceanic geopolitics, due to blockage to geographical space, sets greater store by seeking advantage through balancing adversaries.Such laws governing geopolitics have obviously left deep imprints on the trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia. President Putin remarked at the Valdai Conference 2016 that “a contest in geopolitics is more profound than a rivalry in ideology”, a point he had learned the hard way through several crises. Evidently, it is also the core issue in the relations between China, the United States and Russia. Never before in human history, has there been a precedent for three major countries of global influence in close contact with one another in the field of geopolitics to achieve mutual benefit in a win-win situation. Therefore, it is hopeful for a relationship of benign cooperation to be established between the three countries in a more or less synchronized manner but it will take time.

All in all, the great attention attracted by the trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia indicates the fact that the pattern of world pluralism stimulated by the process of globalization has reached a certain height and brought about a power structure of interplay and interaction in primary shape. However, even though such a situation is accelerated, it cannot radically change the fundamentals for the West to lead the world affairs. As such, important conflicts of interest, differences in institutions and concepts and even the possibilities of strategic conflicts will exist between China, the United States and Russia for a long period to come and in a large number.

III.FUTURE POSTURE OF TRILATERAL INTERACTION BETWEEN CHINA, THE US AND RUSSIA

In the future, the trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia will take the following posture.

First of all, the trilateral interaction between China, the United States and Russia will be a learning process lasting for a long time. For either an ancient country of lasting civilization or a relatively young country on the rise as a late comer, or for either an experienced veteran politician or a political novice who has just switched from another trade, it is by no means a cakewalk to command the relationship between the three major countries of China, the United States and Russia under the brave new historical circumstances of today. Attempting to referred to the trilateral relationship as a “learning process” is to emphasize that it will not do to make improper response or overreaction to a rash move by any one of the trilateration not being well thought out or under complicated circumstances; that it will even less advisable to seek advantageous position in the trilateration by taking the beaten track of “uniting two parties” to flank a third one. In fact, there are few precedents in the history of international relations for one of the parties to win and for the rest to lose all the time.

Secondly, the positions of strength will get close gradually and between China, the United States and Russia that are most likely to have interplay, asymmetry will all along be the mainstay in years to come. Either in terms of position of strength or latent influence, it is difficult to bridge the gap and divide between China, the United States and Russia in various areas. Though a balance between the three is worth seeking, the situation is always difficult to come about or to be kept. Not only does the trilateration become sensitive when any two of the parties are in cooperation but also objectively, the three major countries will also be checked by other centers of power like Europe and Japan, and meanwhile, they will be affected by rent seeking and influence of many external force, big and small. Under such a situation, it is necessary not only to enhance mutual political trust but also even more so to enhance one’s conviction and courage: to firmly believe that there are possibilities of compatibility and coordination between the development of pluralism and the universal pursuit of an progressive vision and to search for, to the maximum, complementarity and balance between various new and old political forces.

Thirdly, although there are many problems between the three countries of China, the United States and Russia, because of the important positions of the three major countries and the broad spectrum of their cooperation potentials, it can always be the objective of the trilateral interaction to work together in paving the way for building a future international order. It is necessary for such an objective to be linked with the solution to the most urgent regional issues. First, though there are piling difficulties for making a move on the Korean Peninsula issue, once opportunity arises to rid the stalemate and to enter into dialogue, China, the United States and Russia with a special status as major nuclear powers can and need to logically provide security guarantee for the whole peninsula. Looking in a longer term perspective, during the Cold War, there were “neutral zones” between the East and West (for example Austria and Finland) that provided protective screen for relaxation between major countries, which can serve as precedents for the reference of resolving the peninsula affairs. Second, the fact that China voted abstention on April 12 in the UN Security Council on draft resolution on Syria only indicates that China wishes to first of all seek the truth about who used chemical weapons through verification and that China is far from agreeing with a replay of the Iraq War of 2003, that is, to take military actions before verifying if the Saddam regime possessed weapons of mass destruction. On the Syrian conflict, the United States and Russia are the first to bear the brunt. In spite of this, China is ready to make its efforts, including to take coordinated action to strengthen the input of peacekeeping forces in adjacent areas, to take up more responsibility in restoring and helping build regional economy and, if conditions permit, to assume more function in persuading for peace and negotiations and in coordination and mediation. Looking forward to a longer time frame, the Chinese have the capability and duty not only to gradually provide more public goods for regional security but also make contributions to the healthy development of trilateral relations between China, the United States and Russia and to the rational restructuring of the international order for the future.

10.19422/j.cnki.cn10-1398/d.2017.03.009