George W. Bush’s attitude toward China was rather tough during the presidential election. He viewed China as a rival. He said that his new governmentwould strengthen the alliance with Japan and the Republic of Korea,...George W. Bush’s attitude toward China was rather tough during the presidential election. He viewed China as a rival. He said that his new governmentwould strengthen the alliance with Japan and the Republic of Korea, improved relations with India and China’s other neighbors in Southeast Asia, Central Asia while formulating its Asian policy. All this reveals an intention to“encircle China”. No wonder Chinese strategists are justified to heighten their vigilence. But in fact, Bush’s stance was part of Clinton’s “engagement” policy. He cannot possibly find a better alternative. He only intended to show his difference from Clinton by highlighting the “containment and vigilance”element so as to retain more options for his China policy when necessary. Washington will not seek a drastic change of course. The duality of its China policy will remain in the foreseeable future. Anyway, it would be impossible to understand the new US administration’s China policy in its entity with attention focused on “containment" to the neglect of the “engagement" element.Sino-U.S. relations will gain in prominence at the beginning of the new century. With U.S. national interests in mind, Bush’s foreign policy team has enough reason to attach importance to China. Over time, “engagement”will once again at the core of US policy toward China.展开更多
文摘George W. Bush’s attitude toward China was rather tough during the presidential election. He viewed China as a rival. He said that his new governmentwould strengthen the alliance with Japan and the Republic of Korea, improved relations with India and China’s other neighbors in Southeast Asia, Central Asia while formulating its Asian policy. All this reveals an intention to“encircle China”. No wonder Chinese strategists are justified to heighten their vigilence. But in fact, Bush’s stance was part of Clinton’s “engagement” policy. He cannot possibly find a better alternative. He only intended to show his difference from Clinton by highlighting the “containment and vigilance”element so as to retain more options for his China policy when necessary. Washington will not seek a drastic change of course. The duality of its China policy will remain in the foreseeable future. Anyway, it would be impossible to understand the new US administration’s China policy in its entity with attention focused on “containment" to the neglect of the “engagement" element.Sino-U.S. relations will gain in prominence at the beginning of the new century. With U.S. national interests in mind, Bush’s foreign policy team has enough reason to attach importance to China. Over time, “engagement”will once again at the core of US policy toward China.
