Why China s Thirst for Energy does not Trigger Resource Wars
The realistic notion of great power competition over shrinking oil reserves seems to fit in the patterns of China s oil diplomacy. Indeed, many pundits and politicians in Washington and elsewhere are stoking fears about the worldwide implications of China s insatiable demand for energy . In this paper, it will be argued that this view is not able to grasp the complexity of the international energy economy. It cannot provide sufficient explanations why cooperation and confrontation among China and its potential great power rivals exists in parallel. Rather the perception of the other nation s intentions and the world energy economy seems to cause both conflict and cooperation. Furthermore, the analysis shows that China s international energy policy clearly follows cooperative and market oriented lines. In order to further understand and explain China s international energy policy, alternative theoretical frameworks, beyond realism, need to be applied.
How to Improve U.S.-China Relations in the Wake of CNOOC
The increasingly confrontational approach the U.S. Congress is taking toward China, as witnessed by the surge of anti-China legislation and by the excessive politicization of the proposed merger between CNOOC Ltd., a subsidiary of state-owned China National Offshore Oil Company, and Unocal is leading to “creeping protectionism,” often in the guise of protecting U.S. national security. Although it is proper to criticize China for its human rights violations and its lack of a transparent legal system, we should not ignore the substantial progress China has made since it embarked on economic liberalization in 1978. A policy of engagement—or what Hu Jintao, president of the People’s Republic of China, calls “peaceful development”—is a necessary condition for constructive U.S.-China relations. Although China’s competitiveness does pose a threat to certain U.S. economic interests, it also benefits American consumers and exporters. Protectionism would harm both the United States and China and would increase the likelihood of conflict. Hardliners would gain at the expense of more reasonable voices. To avert the risk of conflict, the United States needs to treat China as a normal great power, not as an adversary, and ensure that only those commercial transactions that genuinely threaten national security are
Chinese nationalism, US policy and Asian security
The eruption of nationalist demonstrations in China after the May 1999 bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade suggested a changing relationship between government and ordinary citizens that could have long-term implications for the conduct of the country's foreign and security policies. Confronted by enormous public anger over the NATO attack, the Chinese government felt it had no choice but to risk its foreign policy goals by allowing demonstrators to assault Western diplomatic missions. As Communist Party control over the behaviour of Chinese citizens weakens - a result of quickening economic reforms there is a growing danger that the leadership's efforts to prevent aggressive nationalist sentiment from affecting policy will be undermined.