國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 7: Conclusion
This paper attempts to establish the presence of two distinct narratives in the U.S.-China relationship, determine the nature and form of their presence in the current trade war, and analyze the interaction between the two narratives. Over the course of this work I have helped establish an American narrative, referred to in this paper as the unappreciated benevolence narrative, and contributed to existing delineations of the Chinese national humiliation narrative.
Ultimately, this thesis offers a unique angle on both the trade war and the study of historical narratives. It puts forth an assessment of historical narratives in the trade war, which is not a perspective that is come across in current discussions of the conflict. This work also studies the American narrative of unappreciated benevolence and the Chinese narrative of national
humiliation concurrently in order to better understand how they interact with each other. I find that the narratives are not just things of the past; they are still present in official, high-level discussions of the trade war today. This is particularly noteworthy because trade is not the area where one would most expect to find the narratives. They are easy to spot in discussions of human rights or political systems, but I chose to look for them in discussions of trade to see if they permeate into other topics as well. The fact that they are present in the trade war, despite the basis of trade discussions being rooted in technical issues, speaks to their pervasiveness. In addition, they appear to play a role in the trade war, serving to further each side’s agenda, support conflict, and reinforce perceptions of the self and other that exist within the narratives.
Not only are narratives present in the relationship and conflicts that arise between the countries, but they also offer a different way to understand the bilateral relationship. This research finds that narratives reinforce certain tendencies in the relationship. The invocation of narratives helps push decision-makers towards certain policy options over others. Because
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
narratives are deeply-ingrained frameworks of understanding that come with plotlines, they help point to certain actions and responses. This is similar to Khong’s Analogical Framework, which states that historical analogies influence policymaking by providing set recommendations for decisions (Khong, 1992). In this case, it is historical narratives instead of historical analogies.
Because the narratives are part of deeply ingrained understandings of the U.S.-China
relationship, they inevitably guide the way policymakers think about the relationship and about how to respond to conflict. However, the findings here do not show that narratives function exactly as analogies do under Khong’s framework. While they perform a similar function, they do so to a lesser extent than analogies. Khong argues that analogies can act as cognitive devices for arriving at policy decisions. This research shows that narratives can encourage or help solidify pointing to particular policy choices, but it does not go so far as to claim they are also cognitive devices.
In the context of the U.S. and China, this finding is significant because it helps explain the cyclical nature of the relationship, as well as why certain reactions and policies are chosen over others. Because these narratives can be an intrinsic part of American and Chinese
understandings of the relationship, sensitivities trigger certain responses. For example, American statements or actions that cause China to feel infringed upon or bullied immediately invoke the national humiliation aspect of the Chinese narrative. In order to avoid a repetition of the Century of Humiliation, China is likely to gravitate towards reactive, potentially aggressive policy choices instead of conciliatory ones. Similarly, if the American narrative is invoked because it feels like its authority is going unheeded, or its benevolence unappreciated, it jumps into an aggressive, punitive mode in an attempt to regain control and discipline the misbehaving party.
The flip side of this narrative also leads to policy decisions for the U.S.: the benevolence feature
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
maintains a sense of hope that China will come around, and that the U.S. must continue engaging with it, similar to how parents do not give up on children when they behave poorly.
From this, it is easy to see how the U.S. and China might get locked into the observed cycle of relations, where the state of relations oscillates between cooperation and high
engagement to tension and conflict. The current trade war provides an interesting case study where policies and accusations are lobbied back-and-forth. It offers an opportunity to watch the narratives interact with each other, and prompts one to wonder if the U.S. and China can ever escape the cycle, because clearly, the trade war is a cycle of sorts. It may even be an
unproductive cycle; the U.S. has been heaping punitive tariffs on China for a year and yet the always forthcoming deal has yet to appear. One thing seems clear: understanding this cycle and the factors that contribute to it can only help further understandings of the U.S.-China
relationship. Perhaps with this increased understanding, ways of progressing the relationship and escaping the cycle will become clear.
This research could benefit from a wide variety of additional work. Future research could continue to examine the two narratives at the same time, perhaps more in-depth or at different points in the U.S.-China relationship. There is a lack of literature that explores both narratives at once, and there are surely many interesting ways to deepen understandings of narratives in general, and these narratives in particular. Furthermore, it would be interesting to ascertain if these narratives are consistent outside of elites and officials. Do discussions of the U.S.-China relationship in other communities also draw upon the narratives? Do the narratives change or stay consistent for different audiences? Future research could also look for the narratives in other trading relationships. For example, does the unappreciated benevolence narrative also appear in American discussions of trade with Mexico or 1980s Japan? Finally, do understandings of
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
narrative provide any positive mechanisms for handling conflict between the U.S. and China that can be extracted from historical cases? Research into these questions could contribute to the study of narratives and of U.S.-China relations.
Where does this research suggest the U.S.-China relationship is headed? What does it say about the trajectory and longevity of the trade war? As mentioned above, it appears that the cyclical nature of the relationship and the consistent invocation of narrative could keep the relationship and the current conflict rather stagnant. If current trends continue, the trade war has neither a clear resolution nor a clear end date. However, it also seems clear that there is potential for change and progress within the relationship. The narratives may perform a certain function now by reinforcing preexisting notions and tendencies, but that is surely not the only role they can play. Furthermore, the narratives could change. If and when China reaches its goal of national rejuvenation, does its national humiliation survive and continue to have purpose? Does the American narrative of unappreciated benevolence still hold if China rises to a level where it is much more difficult for the U.S. to justify its superiority and parental claim? Perhaps with an increased understanding of how the American narrative and the Chinese narrative interact with each other we can develop more effective communication within the relationship. After all, both the U.S. and China recognize the importance of maintaining a constructive relationship between the world’s two largest economies. Surely there is more to be gained from a cooperative
relationship than one based solely in competition and tit-for-tat trade wars.
‧
Alessi, C. (2012, March 14). Challenging China's Trade Practices. Retrieved from The Council on Foreign Relations: https://www.cfr.org/interview/challenging-chinas-trade-practices Allison, G. (2017). Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides's Trap? New
York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing.
Bacevich, A. J. (2008). The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.
Barrett, J. (1900). America's Duty in China. The North American Review, 171(525), 145-157.
Barthes, R. (1975). An Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative. New Literary History, 6(2), 237-272.
Bergsten, F. (2008). A Partnership of Equals: How Washington Should Respond to China's Economic Challenge. Foreign Affairs, 57-69.
Bin, Y. (2018, 11 2). Historical truth behind US Open Door policy toward China. Retrieved from China Daily:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201811/02/WS5bdc11dea310eff303286442.html Blanchard, B., & Daly, T. (2019, May 1). U.S., China reported near deal to end some tariffs;
talks 'productive'. Retrieved from Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-
china/u-s-china-reported-near-deal-to-end-some-tariffs-talks-productive-idUSKCN1S72ZO
Blanchard, E. M. (2013). Constituting China: the role of metaphor in the discourses of early Sino-American relations. Journal of International Relations and Development, 16, 177-205.
Bloomberg News. (2019, May 14). A Timeline of the U.S.-China Trade War. Retrieved from Bloomberg News: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-14/u-s-china-trade-war-timeline-what-led-up-to-the-stalemate
Bown, C. P., & McCulloch, R. (2007). U.S. Trade Policy towards China: Discrimination and its Implications. In P. A. Petri, & S. J. La Croix (Eds.), Challenges to the Global Trading System: Adjustment to Globalization in the Asia-Pacific Region. Routledge Taylor &
Francis Group.
Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Buchholz, K. (2019, May 10). U.S.-Chinese Trade War Keeps on Escalating. Retrieved from Statista: https://www.statista.com/chart/15199/us-chinese-trade-war-escalates/
Bush, G. H. (1989, June 5). George H.W. Bush, Press Conference . Retrieved from USC U.S.-China Institute: https://china.usc.edu/george-hw-bush-press-conference-june-5-1989 Bush, G. H. (1989, June 5). President Bush Statement on China. Retrieved from C-Span:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?7909-1/president-george-hw-bush-tiananmen-square-crackdown
Bush, G. H., & Scowcroft, B. (1998). A World Transformed. New York: Random House.
Retrieved from http://www.standoffattiananmen.com/2012/06/document-of-1989-president-bushs.html
‧
Bush, R. (2019, 5 29). Order from Chaos: 30 Years After Tiananmen Square, a look back on Congress' forceful response. Retrieved from The Brookings Institute:
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/05/29/30-years-after-tiananmen-square-a-look-back-on-congress-forceful-response/
Cain, F. (2008). The US-led Trade Embargo on China: The Origins of CHINCOM, 1947-52.
Journal of Strategic Studies, 18(4), 33-54.
Callahan, W. A. (2004). National Insecurities: Humiliation, Salvation, and Chinese Nationalism.
Alternatives, 29, 199-218.
Callahan, W. A. (2010). China: The Pessoptimist Nation. Oxford Scholarship online.
Campbell, C. (1941). American Business Interests and the Open Door in China. The Far Eastern Quarterly, 1(1), 43-58.
CFR Timeline. (2019). U.S. Relations with China 1949-2019. Retrieved from Council on Foreign Relations: https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-relations-china
Cheng, J. Y., & Ngok, K.-L. (2004). The 2001 "Spy" Plane Incident Revisited: the Chinese Perspective. Journal of Chinese Political Science, 9(1), 63-83.
Chin, C. C. (2003). Beneficent Imperialists: American Women Missionaries in China at the Turn of the Twentieth Century. Diplomatic History, 327-352.
Clinton, H. (2011, October 11). America's Pacific Century. Foreign Policy.
Cohen, P. (2002). Remembering and Forgetting National Humiliation in Twentieth-Century China. Twentieth-Century China(2).
Congressional Hearing. (1948, April 26). Hearing before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Foreign Relations on A Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation Between the United States of America and the Republic of China. Washington, D.C.
CSR. (2016). China: Economic Sanctions. Congressional Research Service.
Dai, B. (2016, July 5). Speech by Dai Bingguo at China-US Dialogue. Retrieved from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China:
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/zyjh_665391/t1377747.shtml
Deng, X. (1989, June 9). Deng's June 9 Speech: 'We Faced a Rebellious Clique' and "Dregs of Society'. Retrieved from The New York Times:
https://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/30/world/deng-s-june-9-speech-we-faced-a-rebellious-clique-and-dregs-of-society.html
Ding, G., & Ji, P. (2011, July 27). The U.S. Attaches Great Importance to the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Retrieved from People's Daily: http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2011-07/27/c_121725596.htm
Downs, J. (1968). American Merchants and the China Opium Trade, 1800-1840. Business History Review, 42(4), 418-442.
Downs, J. M. (1991). The Commercial Origins of American Attitudes toward China, 1784-1844.
In J. I. Jonathan Goldstein (Ed.). London: Bethlehem: Lehigh University Press.
Elliott, J. (1996). Who Seeks the Truth Should be of No Country. American Journalism, 13(3), 255-285.
Fairbank, J. K. (1970). 'American China Policy' to 1898: A Misconception. Pacific Historical Review, 39(4), 409-420.
Ford, C. (2015). China Looks at the West: Identity, Global Ambitions, and the Future of Sino-American Relations. Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky.
‧
Full text of Xi Jinping's report at 19th CPC National Congress. (2017, October 18). Retrieved from China Daily: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/19thcpcnationalcongress/2017-11/04/content_34115212.htm
Galtung, J. (2001). The Construction of National Identities for Cosmic Drama: Chosenness-Myths-Trauma (CMT) Syndromes and Cultural Pathologies. In P. Udayakumar (Ed.), Handcuffed to History. Westpoint: Praeger.
Gao, F. (2019, June 6). Regular Press Conference of the Ministry of Commerce. Retrieved from Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China:
http://english.mofcom.gov.cn/article/newsrelease/press/201906/20190602873158.shtml Gass, N. (2016, May 2). Trump: 'We can't continue to allow China to rape our country'.
Retrieved from Politico: https://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/05/trump-china-rape-america-222689
Geng, S. (2019, January 29). Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Remarks on the US Indictments of Huawei. Retrieved from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China:
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2535_665405/t163346 4.shtml
Glaser, B. S., & Billingsley, B. (2012). US Pivot to Asia Leaves China off Balance. Comparative Connections, 13(3).
Gries, P. H., & Peng, K. (2002). Culture Clash? Apologies East and West. Journal of Contemporary China, 11(30), 173-178.
Grimm, J., & Grimm, W. (1815). The Ungrateful Son. Retrieved December 2018, from University of Pittsburg: https://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm145.html
Haddad, J. (2013, June 10). Avoiding 'Cultural Arrogance' with China. Retrieved from The Chronicle of Higher Education: https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/worldwise/avoiding-cultural-arrogance-with-china/32383
Haddad, J. R. (2008). The Romance of China: Excursions to China in U.S. Culture, 1776-1876.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Harding, H. (2015, April 10). 'So Bloody Similar': The Socio-cultural Dimension of US-China Relations. Distinguished Public Lecture series, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Hay, J. (1899, September 6). The Open Door Note. Retrieved from Mount Holyoke:
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/opendoor.htm
Hay, J. (1900). Open Door Notes: Text. Retrieved from Knox College:
http://courses.knox.edu/hist245/opendoortext.html
Hopf, T. (1998). The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory. International Security, 23(1), 171-200.
Hua, C. (2018, October 5). Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying Making Clear China's Position in Response to US Leader's Groundless Accusations Against China. Retrieved from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China:
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2535_665405/t160209 5.shtml
Hua, C. (2018, October 5). Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Remarks on US Leader's Unfounded Accusations on Taiwan-related and Other Issues. Retrieved from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China:
‧
Hua, C. (2018, November 18). Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Remarks on US Vice President Mike Pence's China-related Comments. Retrieved from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China:
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2535_665405/t161412 1.shtml
Huang, Y. (1999). Sino-U.S. Relations: The Economic Dimensions. In Y. Deng, & F.-L. Wang (Eds.), In the Eyes of the Dragon: China Views the World. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman
& Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Hunt, M. H. (1983). The Making of a Special Relationship: The United States and China to 1914. New York: Columbia University Press.
Kalipci, M. (2018). Economic Effects of the Opium Wars for Imperial China: The Downfall of an Empire. AİBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18(3), 291-304.
Kammen, M. (1993). The Problem of American Exceptionalism: A Reconsideration. American Quarterly, 45(1), 1-43.
Kan, S. A., Bolkcom, C., Chapman, R., Dumbaugh, K., Goldman, S., Morrison, W., . . .
Ackerman, D. (2001). China-U.S. Aircraf Collision Incident of April 2001: Assessments and Policy Implications. CSR Report for Congress. Congressional Research Service.
Kaplan, E. (2006, April 19). The Uneasy U.S.-Chinese Trade Relationship. Retrieved from Council on Foreign Relations: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/uneasy-us-chinese-trade-relationship
Kaufman, A. A. (2010). The "Century of Humiliation," Then and Now: Chinese Perceptions of the International Order. Pacific Focus, XXV(1), 1-33.
Kaufman, A. A. (2011). The 'Century of Humiliation' and China's National Narratives. Hearing on "China's Narratives Regarding National Security Policy".
Kerry, J. (2016, September 28). Remarks on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Retrieved from U.S.
Department of State: https://2009-2017.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2016/09/262551.htm Khong, Y. F. (1992). Analogies at War: Korea, Munich, Dien Bien Phu, and the Vietnam
decisions of 1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Koh, H. (2005). America's Jekyll-and-Hyde Exceptionalism. In M. Ignatieff (Ed.), American Exceptionalism and Human Rights. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kydd, A. H. (2005). Trust and Mistrust in International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
László, J. (2014). Historical Tales and National Identity: An introduction to narrative social psychology. London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Lewis, D. L. (2012). Exceptionalism's Exceptions: The Changing American Narrative. Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, 141(1), 101-117.
Li, X. (2019, May 19). U.S. bullying cannot stop China from achieving rejuvenation. Retrieved from Xinhua Net News:
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-05/19/c_138071807.htm
Lu, K. (2018, June 15). Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lu Kang's Remarks on the US' Announcement of Trade Measures Against Chin. Retrieved from Ministr of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China:
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2535_665405/t156934
‧
Ma, Z. (2019, June 7). US trade bullying harms the world. Retrieved from China Daily:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201906/07/WS5cfa79a2a31017657723003b.html
MacMillan, M. (2003). Peacemakers: The Paris Conference of 1919 and Its Attempt to End War.
London: John Murray Publishers.
McEcoy-Levy, S. (2001). American Exceptionalism and US Foreign Policy: Public Diplomacy at the End of the Cold War. New York, NY: Palgrave.
McKinley, W. (1900, December 3). Fourth Annual Message. Retrieved May 25, 2019, from University of Virginia Miller Center, Presidential Speeches: https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/december-3-1900-fourth-annual-message
MOFA. (2015, September 1). Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Regular Press Conference. Retrieved from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China: https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/t1292984.shtml Morrison, W. M. (2018). China-U.S. Trade Issues. Congress Research Service.
Nathan, A. (2001). The Tiananmen Papers (an excerpt: "The Chinese leadership's decision to use force against their own people-in their own words"). Foreign Affairs, 80(1), pp. 2-48.
Nayak, M. V., & Christopher, M. (2009). American Orientalism and American Exceptionalism:
A Critical Rethinking of US Hegemony. International Studies Review, 11, 253-276.
Norman, A. P. (1991). Telling it Like it Was: Historical Narratives on Their Own Terms. History and Theory, 30(2), 119-135.
Obama, B. (2012, March 13). Remarks by the President on Fair Trade. Retrieved from The White House, President Barack Obama: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/photos-
and-video/video/2012/03/13/president-obama-speaks-enforcing-trade-rights-china#transcript
Obama, B. (2016, January 12). 2016 State of the Union Address. Retrieved from UVA Miller Center: https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/january-12-2016-2016-state-union-address
Onuf, P. S. (2012). American Exceptionalism and National Identity. American Political Thought, 1(1), 77-100.
Orlean, M. (1948). The Sino-American Commercial Treaty. The Far Eastern Quarterly, 7(4), 354-367.
Patterson, M., & Monroe, K. R. (1998). Narrative in Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science, 1, 315-331.
Pence, M. (2018, October 4). Remarks by Vice President Pence on the Administration's Policy Toward China. Retrieved from White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-vice-president-pence-administrations-policy-toward-china/
Pence, M. (2019, February 16). Remarks by Vice President Pence at the 2019 Munich Security Conference. Retrieved from The White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings- statements/remarks-vice-president-pence-2019-munich-security-conference-munich-germany/
Philips-Fein, K. (2018). Our Political Narratives. Modern American History, 1, 83-86.
Plante, T. K. (1999). U.S. Marines in the Boxer Rebellion. Retrieved from National Archives:
https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1999/winter/boxer-rebellion-1.html Politi, J., & Mitchell, T. (2019, May 7). US accuses China of 'reneging' on trade promises.
Retrieved from Financial Times: https://www.ft.com/content/ea07e70e-7044-11e9-bbfb-5c68069fbd15
‧
Qianlong, E. (1914). The Emperor Qianlong's "Mandates". In E. B. Bland, Annals and Memoirs of the Court of Pekin (pp. 322-334). London.
Qizhang, Q. (1987). Stages in the Development of the Boxer Movement and Their Characteristics. Chinese Studies in History, 20(3), 113-136.
Remarks by President Trump Before Marine One Departure. (2019, May 14). Retrieved from The White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-marine-one-departure-42/
Remarks by President Trump Before Marine One Departure. (2019, May 14). Retrieved from
Remarks by President Trump Before Marine One Departure. (2019, May 14). Retrieved from