{"id":37080,"date":"2018-02-05T06:00:21","date_gmt":"2018-02-04T19:00:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=37080"},"modified":"2018-02-04T12:16:57","modified_gmt":"2018-02-04T01:16:57","slug":"us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/","title":{"rendered":"The US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/figure>\n

The US is the essential status quo power, led by a revisionist president. China loves the current status quo, while liking how the tide of change flows its way.<\/p>\n

The labels \u2018status quo\u2019 and \u2018revisionist\u2019 suddenly matter in relations between the top two nations.<\/p>\n

The US has branded China a revisionist power and announced that conflict with China is a bigger threat than terrorism.<\/p>\n

In politics and diplomacy, words are bullets. In strategy and defence, bullets are bullets\u2014but the words mount the arguments, set the plans and define the targets. Word salvos are flying.<\/p>\n

The US national security strategy<\/a> issued in December uses the word \u2018revisionist\u2019 just once, in describing three sets of challenges: \u2018the revisionist powers of China and Russia, the rogue states of Iran and North Korea, and transnational threat organizations, particularly jihadist terrorist groups\u2019.<\/p>\n

The charges against China are that it challenges \u2018American power, in\ufb02uence, and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity\u2019, wants \u2018to shape a world antithetical to US values and interests\u2019, and seeks \u2018to displace the United States in the Indo-Paci\ufb01c region, expand the reaches of its state-driven economic model, and reorder the region in its favor\u2019.<\/p>\n

The strategy trashes \u2018engagement\u2019 as the failed policy of trying to turn rivals \u2018into benign actors and trustworthy partners\u2019.<\/p>\n

The companion national defence strategy<\/a> issued in January launches from the revisionist proposition: \u2018The central challenge to US prosperity and security is the reemergence of long-term, strategic competition by what the National Security Strategy classifies as revisionist powers.\u2019<\/p>\n

The defence strategy stunner is that \u2018inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in US national security\u2019. America ranks a clash with China ahead of the threat from jihadists. The next war looms as great-power conflict<\/a>.<\/p>\n

War with China caused a Canberra flurry\u2014that\u2019s what happens when ministers muse before the talking points are agreed. Defence Minister Marise Payne said Australia shared US concerns, while Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce was typically forthright in saying that China is a bigger threat to Australia than terrorists: \u2018It’s a statement of the bleeding obvious<\/a> that any nation that does have the capacity to basically overrun you is always a greater threat.\u2019<\/p>\n

Because words are bullets, stating the bleeding obvious can cost blood. The prime minister and foreign minister jumped in to avoid wounds and rework the words. A new talking point became the order of the day: China is not a threat. Not. A. Threat. Repeat as needed. It\u2019s a standard talking-point tactic. When dealing with a tough topic, go for denial, say what it ain\u2019t, define it away.<\/p>\n

Joyce was guilty of stating a strategy truism: capacity builds slowly while intent can change quickly. On capacity and intent, see the ASPI paper on a new era of risk<\/a> by Canberra wise owls<\/a> Paul Dibb and Richard Brabin-Smith: \u2018Australia\u2019s strategic outlook is deteriorating and, for the first time since World War II, we face an increased prospect of threat from a major power.\u2019<\/p>\n

Since the 1970s, Canberra\u2019s defence plans stated that it\u2019d take a decade for any Asian power to develop the capability to assault Australia. Dibb and Brabin-Smith see the 10-year rule shrinking.<\/p>\n

The issue of intent returns us to whether China is a revisionist or status quo power\u2014an academic<\/a> argument<\/a> that\u2019s been bubbling<\/a> for two decades. The trouble with power-transition theory in international relations is that it\u2019s a binary categorisation: states are either status quo or revisionist. Revisionist exemplars are revolutionary France, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and Maoist China.<\/p>\n

The revisionist case is well put by Walter Russell Mead<\/a>. (The Foreign Affairs <\/em>editors gave his discussion of China, Iran and Russia extra colour with the heading \u2018An axis of weevils?\u2019, an uncomfortable reminder of a previous US crusade against an axis of evil<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

I prefer John Ikenberry\u2019s<\/a> counter to Mead that China is a part-time spoiler that\u2019s deeply integrated into the world economy and institutions. My twist is calling China a status quo\u2013tidal power<\/a>\u2014a conservative state that loves both its current status and how the tide is running away from the US towards China.<\/p>\n

The revisionist conclusion declares engagement and diplomacy a dead end, while zooming onto the military highway. Washington\u2019s embrace of the revisionist label as policy ignores the relative decline of US influence as the great global story of our age<\/a>. We aren\u2019t going back to the bipolar status quo (1945\u20131989) or the unipolar status quo (1989\u20132008). The age of globalisation<\/a> keeps moving the game.<\/p>\n

One of the age\u2019s arch-realists, Henry Kissinger, captured the trend in World order<\/em><\/a>, describing the US and China as \u2018indispensable pillars of world order\u2019, even though both have a history of ambivalence about the international system they now anchor.<\/p>\n

Dr K. argues that America and China must achieve an unprecedented blend of partnership and military balance in Asia\u2019s modern system:<\/p>\n

The combination of balance-of-power strategy with partnership diplomacy will not be able to remove all adversarial aspects, but it can mitigate their impact. Above all, it can give Chinese and American leaders experiences in constructive cooperation, and convey to their two societies a way of building toward a more peaceful future. Order always requires a subtle balance of restraint, force, and legitimacy. In Asia, it must combine a balance of power with a concept of partnership. A purely military definition of the balance will shade into confrontation. A purely psychological approach to partnership will raise fears of hegemony. Wise statesmanship must try to find that balance. For outside it, disaster beckons.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Yes, Henry! Engagement works. Mix partnership with power politics, as the tide of the status quo shifts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The US is the essential status quo power, led by a revisionist president. China loves the current status quo, while liking how the tide of change flows its way. The labels \u2018status quo\u2019 and \u2018revisionist\u2019 …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":79,"featured_media":37081,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[52,338,31],"class_list":["post-37080","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-china","tag-defence-policy","tag-united-states"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nThe US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times | The Strategist<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times | The Strategist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The US is the essential status quo power, led by a revisionist president. China loves the current status quo, while liking how the tide of change flows its way. The labels \u2018status quo\u2019 and \u2018revisionist\u2019 ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Strategist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ASPI.org\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-02-04T19:00:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-04T01:16:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/6184003234_44c89fa682_z-1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"640\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"426\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Graeme Dobell\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@ASPI_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@ASPI_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Graeme Dobell\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/\",\"name\":\"The Strategist\",\"description\":\"ASPI's analysis and commentary site\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/6184003234_44c89fa682_z-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/6184003234_44c89fa682_z-1.jpg\",\"width\":640,\"height\":426},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/\",\"name\":\"The US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times | The Strategist\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-02-04T19:00:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-04T01:16:57+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/ed3342cd61abc65c1532f3cc46bdf96f\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/ed3342cd61abc65c1532f3cc46bdf96f\",\"name\":\"Graeme Dobell\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/dff56734d4df784248f63058b7b6900a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/dff56734d4df784248f63058b7b6900a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Graeme Dobell\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author\/graeme-dobell\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times | The Strategist","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times | The Strategist","og_description":"The US is the essential status quo power, led by a revisionist president. China loves the current status quo, while liking how the tide of change flows its way. The labels \u2018status quo\u2019 and \u2018revisionist\u2019 ...","og_url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/","og_site_name":"The Strategist","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ASPI.org","article_published_time":"2018-02-04T19:00:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-04T01:16:57+00:00","og_image":[{"width":640,"height":426,"url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/6184003234_44c89fa682_z-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Graeme Dobell","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@ASPI_org","twitter_site":"@ASPI_org","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Graeme Dobell","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/","name":"The Strategist","description":"ASPI's analysis and commentary site","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-AU"},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/6184003234_44c89fa682_z-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/6184003234_44c89fa682_z-1.jpg","width":640,"height":426},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/","name":"The US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times | The Strategist","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2018-02-04T19:00:21+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-04T01:16:57+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/ed3342cd61abc65c1532f3cc46bdf96f"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-AU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/us-china-status-quo-powers-revisionist-times\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The US and China: status quo powers in revisionist times"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/ed3342cd61abc65c1532f3cc46bdf96f","name":"Graeme Dobell","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/dff56734d4df784248f63058b7b6900a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/dff56734d4df784248f63058b7b6900a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Graeme Dobell"},"url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author\/graeme-dobell\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37080"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/79"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=37080"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37080\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":37082,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37080\/revisions\/37082"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/37081"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37080"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=37080"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=37080"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}