US and China: ‘Strategic contradiction’ between the two

US President Barack Obama’s intended visit early this month to Asia for a weeklong trip to attend two summits was called off as it coincided with the US government shutdown. When looked at in conjunction with his visit to Thailand, Cambodia and Myanmar soon after his election it reflects a strategic change in the Obama administration's policy, shifting its focus from the Middle East to Asia in an attempt to restrict China’s rise. The question here, according to John Mearsheimer, professor of politics at the University of Chicago, is, wwill politics rather than economy be the deciding factor in restructuring the future of Asia as was the case with Europe in the last century?
In the early ‘60s the Chinese economy was no more than 6 percent of that of the US, whereas it is now more than 50 percent. If the growth rates of the two countries continue the way it is, as predicted by many analysts, the Chinese economy is expected to exceed that of the US within the next decade and to become the largest in the world within the next two decades. In 2009, this prompted the Obama administration to launch strategic economic dialogue with China in an attempt to understand the economic downturn of the US and the rise of the Chinese economy, which is seen by many financial and business experts as a threat to US sovereignty over international economy. China is currently seen as a dynamic contributor to the global economy, and its continued rise may represent a significant threat to the nature of the international system, and a sign of transition to a multipolar world as indicated by prominent US analysts such as Fareed Zakaria in "The Post-American World and The Ride of the Rest".
There are two different approaches within the United States to deal with China. The first, rebalancing relations and the necessity of the “cooperative absorption” of China, is represented in the writings of former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. He asserts that Washington should accept the rise of Beijing and stresses the importance of political cooperation between the two countries and close alliances or consultative procedures to avoid conflict over control of the region. The second, confronting the rising influence of Beijing, is represented in the writings of Aaron Friedberg, professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University, who has worked as assistant minister of the US National Security and Director of Policy Planning. In particular in his book, "A Contest for Supremacy: China, America, and the Struggle for Mastery in Asia", Friedberg analyses strategies followed by the US and China in dealing with each other since the early 90s. He concludes that China has always been a control-seeking power, and that to confront the growth of China and its mounting ambition, the US has to stand firm in the areas of Chinese influence. Friedberg quotes former Prime Minister of Singapore Lee Kwan Yew as saying, “If you cannot stay steadfast in the Pacific region you can never be a world leader”. He says that if the US allows illiberal China to substitute it as a crucial player in this vital region, it will face grave danger regarding its interests and values throughout the world.
Under Obama the US has tended to adopt the confrontational approach. In early 2012, after ten years of war against Afghanistan and Iraq, he announced his new strategy which shifted US attention to Asia and the Pacific Ocean. This is highlighted in an article in ‘Foreign Policy’ by former US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, who asserted that the future of US policy will be determined in Asia and the Pacific Ocean, not in Afghanistan and Iraq. In addition, during a visit by former US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to a Vietnamese port in Cam Ranh Bay on the South China Sea, he stated that the United States was seeking to deploy its Navy fleet to Asia and the Pacific region. Panetta asserted that the US would transfer 60 percent of its warships, submarines, and coastal combatant ships to ports in the region by 2020. This was seen as confirmation of Obama’s strategy.