How should the U.S. treat a rising China?
This is a bit old, but nevertheless still relevant. It's historian Niall Ferguson discussing the shift of economic power toward the East (you can watch the full interview here). At the eight minute mark he raises a good point. The U.S. is facing, in Ferguson's words, "a genuine superpower, a real economic rival" in China, and yet we're so distracted by our "colonial wars" (his words) in Iraq and Afghanistan that we're not seriously grappling with the implications of this.
He goes on to say that there is a clear dilemma facing the U.S. - should we treat China as the British treated the rise of the United States as a world power, by accommodating it. Or do we try to balance against China, as the British balanced against the rise of Germany, through a series of alliances in Asia.
It's a good question, but I don't think the choices are that stark. I think there is a clear danger in embarking decisively down either path, in part because it's not clear what kind of "great power" the Chinese are going to be. Military power is a lot less useful to the Chinese in the 21st century than it was to the Germans in the 20th. Nevertheless, if we are overly accommodating, we could wake up to find the world a much less hospitable place for the U.S. and our economic interests. On the other hand, if we're consumed with checking Chinese power, we put ourselves on a potentially destructive collision course.
I think this is why U.S. policy towards China has been something of a muddle - some parts balancing (such as the effort to forge closer ties to India), some parts accommodation (see the relatively muted executive branch response to China's currency manipulations). I think as China becomes more powerful and more assertive, it will be increasingly harder for Washington to strike this balance, in part because there is an influential swath of opinion in U.S. foreign policy circles that views any potential strategic challenger as an inherent and intolerable security threat.
