WALL STREET JOURNAL

1-11-16

After U.S. Election, Expect Hardening on China

Stage is set for more intense rivalry with Beijing no matter who wins on Nov. 8

By Andrew Browne

SHANGHAI—Chinese leaders have learned to block their ears to China-bashing from U.S. presidential candidates, ignoring it as an ultimately harmless quirk of American election politics. Once voting is over, they figure, it will be business as usual.

They’ve been right time after time; ever since Richard Nixon’s opening to China in 1972, incoming Republican and Democrat administrations have picked up China policy more or less where it left off.

This election, though, promises a different outcome—not a wholesale reworking of Nixon’s policy of engagement, an approach that still commands staunch support in U.S. policy circles and boardrooms, but a recalibration. U.S. attitudes toward China are hardening across the political spectrum. Whoever wins— Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump—is likely to pursue a tougher line on a mix of issues from trade and investment to the South China Sea.

Meanwhile, ahead of next week’s vote, President Xi Jinping, whose administration has revived Mao-era anti-American attitudes and slogans, has enhanced his power. At a Communist Party meeting last week, he gained a new title: the leadership’s “core.” Nationalism fuels his ambition. As China’s economic and military capabilities advance—and America declines against China in relative terms—the stage is set for a more intense round of strategic rivalry.

To his critics, President Barack Obama has been feckless on China, outsmarted and outplayed as a result of his eagerness not to let wrangles over specific issues—cyberattacks, intellectual-property theft, trade deficits—derail efforts to jointly manage global problems like climate change.

Mrs. Clinton has taken a harder line on trade than Mr. Obama and has pledged to take on Beijing over unfair trade practices: “If I’m your president [China’s leaders] are going to have to toe the line,” she said in April. Mr. Trump told an election rally earlier this year in reference to China, “If President Obama’s goal had been to weaken America, he could not have done a better job,” a refrain he’s repeated endlessly.

Inevitably, Mr. Obama’s successor will be forced into new trade-offs. Both candidates have indicated the relationship with China is too important to let fail and that it needn’t be adversarial. Only the problems are growing more intractable, and America’s choices starker.

Tensions are building in East Asia. Chinese intrusions into waters disputed with Japan are getting bolder. We don’t know whether Mr. Xi’s construction of seven fake islands in the South China Sea, fit for military purpose, has satisfied his revanchist desires or merely whetted his appetite for further adventures.

Some issues, such as North Korea, are building to a crisis. At some point, U.S. intelligence services are likely to inform the next president that Pyongyang has acquired the ability to strike American cities with nuclear missiles.

When that day arrives, the White House will have to weigh all options, from a more impregnable missile shield on China’s doorstep to the almost unthinkable move of pre-emptive attack.

North Korea is Beijing’s client, a wayward one to be sure, but ultimately enabled by Chinese flows of food and energy. Unless China has a change of heart and throttles its neighbor with sanctions before it can threaten America with a nuclear doomsday—or, even more unlikely, decides to try to bring down the regime—this nuclear scenario could precipitate a full-blown U.S.-China confrontation.

On trade, the trends are similarly worrying. American direct investment in China has sputtered amid growing complaints about issues like forced technology transfers, while Chinese companies are marching into the U.S. in record numbers. Negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty have dragged on for years. Many American business executives, once optimistic advocates for engagement with China, have turned into skeptics.

Chinese leaders have avoided commenting directly on the election. Mr. Trump has threatened sweeping trade sanctions against China. At one point he suggested Japan should acquire nuclear weapons—a Chinese nightmare. If war between Japan and North Korea broke out, “Good luck,” he said, “enjoy yourselves, folks.” Still, Beijing likely would rather take its chances with an erratic Mr. Trump than Mrs. Clinton, a proven hawk.

As secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton fronted for the U.S. “pivot” to Asia, and early on gave it a military flavor. She challenged Chinese officials publicly over the South China Sea, infuriating them. Behind closed doors she warned them to rein in North Korea or else “we’re going to ring China with missile defense,” according to hacked emails released by WikiLeaks. The Clinton campaign has neither confirmed nor denied the authenticity of the emails.

The nationalist-leaning Global Times called the campaign mudslinging between the two candidates a “race to the bottom.” The U.S.-China relationship will survive the messy democratic process. But a remarkable consensus on the need for China policy to stay stable between administrations seems to have been supplanted by an equally broad conviction: It’s time for change.