‘We Don’t Drown our Partners in a Sea of Debt’: U.S. Policy Responses to China’s Belt and Road Initiative

Edward Ashbee
{"title":"‘We Don’t Drown our Partners in a Sea of Debt’: U.S. Policy Responses to China’s Belt and Road Initiative","authors":"Edward Ashbee","doi":"10.1163/18765610-27040004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nWhereas the Obama administration had equivocated, the Trump White House declared its vehement opposition to the Belt and Road Initiative (bri). This shift went together with the Trump administration’s designation of the People’s Republic of China (prc) as a strategic competitor and a broader deterioration in bilateral relations. However, as it began to posit alternatives to the bri, the Trump administration fell back on the policy thinking of the established foreign policy community. In doing this, it tacitly accepted the importance of soft power and the adoption of strategies requiring close cooperation with allies and partners so as to develop regional infrastructural “connectivity” projects. The White House thereby stepped back from the unilateralism, “principled realism,” and reliance upon hard power that had defined Donald J. Trump’s 2015–2016 presidential campaign. Nonetheless, U.S. efforts to develop policy alternatives to the bri were limited, unstable, and variegated. The Trump administration’s actions in other policy arenas often stymied efforts to counter the prc and initiatives such as the build Act and “Prosper Africa” received scant resources. On the basis of this policy pattern, the article argues that policy communities at times can “harness” other counter-positioned, political currents, but ongoing ideational stresses and abrasion will inevitably characterize the process.","PeriodicalId":158942,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of American-East Asian Relations","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of American-East Asian Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18765610-27040004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Whereas the Obama administration had equivocated, the Trump White House declared its vehement opposition to the Belt and Road Initiative (bri). This shift went together with the Trump administration’s designation of the People’s Republic of China (prc) as a strategic competitor and a broader deterioration in bilateral relations. However, as it began to posit alternatives to the bri, the Trump administration fell back on the policy thinking of the established foreign policy community. In doing this, it tacitly accepted the importance of soft power and the adoption of strategies requiring close cooperation with allies and partners so as to develop regional infrastructural “connectivity” projects. The White House thereby stepped back from the unilateralism, “principled realism,” and reliance upon hard power that had defined Donald J. Trump’s 2015–2016 presidential campaign. Nonetheless, U.S. efforts to develop policy alternatives to the bri were limited, unstable, and variegated. The Trump administration’s actions in other policy arenas often stymied efforts to counter the prc and initiatives such as the build Act and “Prosper Africa” received scant resources. On the basis of this policy pattern, the article argues that policy communities at times can “harness” other counter-positioned, political currents, but ongoing ideational stresses and abrasion will inevitably characterize the process.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“我们不会让合作伙伴陷入债务之海”:美国对中国“一带一路”倡议的政策回应
奥巴马政府含糊其辞,而特朗普政府则宣布强烈反对“一带一路”倡议。与此同时,特朗普政府将中华人民共和国列为战略竞争对手,双边关系也出现了更广泛的恶化。然而,当特朗普政府开始提出“一带一路”的替代方案时,它又回到了既定外交政策界的政策思维上。在这样做的过程中,它默认了软实力的重要性,并采取了需要与盟友和伙伴密切合作的战略,以发展区域基础设施“互联互通”项目。因此,白宫放弃了单边主义、“有原则的现实主义”和对硬实力的依赖,而这些正是唐纳德·j·特朗普(Donald J. Trump) 2015-2016年总统竞选的特点。尽管如此,美国制定替代“一带一路”政策的努力是有限的、不稳定的和多样化的。特朗普政府在其他政策领域的行动往往阻碍了对抗中国的努力,《建设法案》和“繁荣非洲”等倡议获得的资源很少。在这种政策模式的基础上,本文认为,政策团体有时可以“驾驭”其他对立的政治潮流,但持续的观念压力和磨损将不可避免地成为这一过程的特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chen Han-seng, the Institute of Pacific Relations, and Changing Ideas About the Chinese Rural Economy The Global in the Local: A Century of War, Commerce, and Technology in China, written by Xin Zhang Imperial Gateway: Colonial Taiwan and Japan’s Expansion in South China and Southeast Asia, 1895–1945, written by Seiji Shirane Line of Advantage: Japan’s Grand Strategy in the Era of Abe Shinzō, written by Michael J. Green Chiang Kai-shek’s Politics of Shame: Leadership, Legacy, and National Identity in China, written by Grace C. Huang
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1