The last US-China summit meeting was the one between Joe Biden and Xi Jinping in November last year in the margins of the G20 meeting in Bali. The conversation was cordial enough; but important issues were raised as well. Biden for example raised concerns of China’s practices in Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong and human rights more broadly. On Taiwan, Biden stuck to the party line saying that US opposes any unilateral changes to the status quo by either side, and the world has an interest in the maintenance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. A Chinese readout of the same meeting stated that current state of ties between US and China are neither in the interest of the two countries nor the world at large. Both Biden and Xi agreed that US Secretary of State Tony Blinken will undertake a visit to China in the near future.
The visit by Blinken proposed above never happened for a variety of reasons. But the main reason was perhaps the “affaire spy balloon” in February, when the US shot the alleged Chinese spy balloon with a lot of fanfare. In April, the Taiwanese President visited California to meet with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. This was a case of if the mountain does not come to Mohamed, then Mohamed will go to the mountain! It is bizarre, to put it mildly, that at a time like when the world is going through severe disorder, the two Great Powers were not even on talking terms. It is worth recalling that the Chinese side declined to take the call of the US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin in February this year.
This hiatus in dialogue has now ended. On 10 and 11 of May, in Vienna, the US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and top Chinese diplomat Wang Yi met for eight hours! The choice of venue was practical since the recent bad blood between the two countries may have prevented either man from making the visit to the other side. But the choice of Jake Sullivan is interesting because both Biden and Xi had earlier agreed last year that it is Tony Blinken who would make the trip to China. It is possible that the Chinese side expressed a preference for Sullivan over Blinken, given the latter’s hawkish remarks on issues including possible weapons supply by China to Russia. Sullivan may have to play good cop for now; it is not clear who will play bad cop for the US vis a vis China.
Eight hours is a lot of time for diplomatic conversations and this cannot be spent on repeating each others’ country positions, even allowing for translation. So, it must be assumed that talks were not just substantive but also included a discussion on putting in place “guard rails” to prevent Sino-American relations from nosediving as they did following the spy balloon incident. The choice of subjects was unsurprising: Taiwan, Ukraine, Indo-Pacific and of course bilateral ties. A Chinese readout said: The two sides held candid, in-depth, substantive, and constructive discussions on removing obstacles and stabilising the China-US relations. This Chinese approbation (describing talks as constructive) for the eight-hour talks may be interpreted as a sign of flexibility, especially compared to the sulk into which they went following the spy incident. The most important, concrete outcome was perhaps the willingness of the two sides to maintain “strategic communication” (like the one in Vienna) at all times.
On Ukraine, the key question is how the US views Chinese attempts at mediation. There is serious re-think in the US about giving diplomacy a chance sometime after the so-called counter-offensive by Ukraine. Regardless of the outcome of Ukraine’s counter-offensive, diplomacy is expected to gain traction by the end of the year. This is also because the Europeans know that a lot can change if the occupant of the White House changes next year. The window between now and the end of the year is therefore crucial for the future of Ukraine and thus for Europe itself.
On Taiwan, the best that can be expected is avoidance of unilateral action by either side that could worsen the security scenario. Contrary to common perception, China is not in the best possible position to act unilaterally on Taiwan now. There are simply too many political and economic headwinds facing China. So, China may wait it out by taking the long-term view on this matter.
The Chinese side appears to have made a pitch for removal of tech restrictions, easing visa restrictions and generally promoting people-to-people ties. The Global Times, considered the propaganda arm of the CCP, let it be known that it was US which was eager to have this dialogue and mend ties with China. That said, it is clear both sides wished for a resumption of bilateral dialogue for different reasons.
Other bilateral talks have also begun. The US Ambassador to China, Nicholas Burns, appears to have had good meetings with both the Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang and Commerce Minister Wang Wentao. It has also been reported that USTR Katherine Tai will meet Wang Wentao in the margins of the APEC meeting of Trade Ministers in Detroit next month.
It will be interesting to see if Biden meets with Xi at the Delhi G20 Summit meeting in September. And of course, Biden plays host to APEC summit in California in November of this year, which will be another opportunity for Biden and Xi to meet and continue serious discussions. The good news is that the US and China have started talking again. The less good news is that they are still far apart on a range of issues, both global and bilateral.
Diplomacy and Geopolitics 