China’s Thanksgiving Snub
November 26th, 2007
I assume you saw and read this WSJ article over the Thanksgiving holiday (click here).
Why do you think China did this?
1. Payback for President Bush’s recent meeting with the Dali Lama in October and Congress’ giving the Dali Lama its highest award?
2. It’s part of modern day “kowtowing” game that China likes to play, and that Dr. Morris spoke extensively about when he talked to us about China’s history (FYI — hours later, after China changed its mind and said the carrier fleet could dock in Hong Kong, Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao told reporters, “It is a decision out of humanitarian consideration only”)?
3. The person in charge of China’s governmental PR strategy is either 200 years old, or, he/she was smoking a crack pipe the day his/her boss came to him/her asking, “what should we do?”
4. Retaliation for the Pentagon’s recent approval of a $940 million upgrade to Taiwan’s Patriot antimissile shield?
5. The Chinese don’t like turkey and all fixins’ that American servicemen would bring to Hong Kong.
6. The port call coincided with a large-scale naval and air operation by the People’s Liberation Army along coastal China, and would have put the U.S. ships in easy monitoring distance of the exercises?
7. Hong Kong is so darn rich that China does not need tourist dollars from American servicemen.
8. Other?
Discuss.
Further, assume you are a member of a high level panel of advisors that regularly meets with President Bush to provide him with feedback and ideas on foreign policy matters. You are the only business person and business voice on that panel. The rest of the panel consists of people with lifelong careers in government, several 4 star generals looking to test their troops’ battle readiness and/or probe and test some of China’s military soft spots, high level religious leaders, journalists, academics, and an assortment of do-gooders with humanitarian agendas.
President Bush asks for ideas re: what the American response to this snub should be, if any. The discussion around the table comes to you; again, the only person in the room with extensive experience in business and private industry.
It’s your turn to step up to the plate and give the President your frank advice. He looks at you and says, “I have always valued your input, as you are in tune with the practicalities of the real world. I feel strongly that we can’t act like a significant snub like this never happened. Our carrier fleet has been coming to and docking in Hong Kong for years around Thanksgiving, and the Chinese damn well know that. What does the business community have to say about this recent event and how should we respond? Won’t ‘turning the other cheek’ just give the Chinese a ‘get out of jail free card’ to do something like this again in the future?”
What will you tell him, and why?
January 3, 2008 update: Nice op-ed piece in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal on this topic, China Flexes Its Muscles.
Entry Filed under: Pre-Departure, Beijing, China
9 Comments Add your own
1. Jesse Dundon | November 26th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
I think that it definitely has some relationship to the award given to the Dali Lama last month. If anybody watched the press conference with Bush before the award was granted, he made it pretty obvious that he didn’t really care about what China thought about the Dali Lama. I am not criticizing Bush’s reasoning, because the Dali Lama is certainly a great man, and America has a tradition of backing up smaller countries like Tibet that are abused by tyrants.
However, Bush just looked so stupid in his explanation that I am not surprised that China would retaliate. And that they did, but in a way that could be easily “explained away” and minor enough not to cause a huge uproar. China could not take the insult of honoring the Dali Lama, and had to do something about it to retaliate. Petty, yes. Explainable, most certainly.
2. Dena Malloy | November 26th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
I agree. I would bet that this episode was in retaliation for the US hosting the Dali Lama. China is extremely adept at diplomacy and also extremely sensitive. I guess that they felt they lost face over the Dali Lama standoff and now they did something to make us angry and equally hurt. Maybe they now think that we are even, and can resume normal diplomatic relations.
3. Witold Sadowski | November 26th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
“Press reports from Hong Kong linked the blocking of the port call to recent air-travel limits imposed by Chinese authorities in the region near Hong Kong that may be related to ongoing or planned military exercises” according to the Washington Times. The article also states that two other U.S. ships were denied entry to Hong Kong, when they were seeking to refuel, several days before the Kitty Hawk was turned down. Maybe they want a few days of privacy in the area?
4. Catriona Banks-Orosco | November 26th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Mr. President,
I believe China is trying to send a message that they will not do our bidding. Their economic power is gaining strength at an incredible pace. Our economies are closely tied and the dollar is weakening. The government is making it clear that they will stand up to the US if needed. I do not believe China can be relied upon as a military partner.
We have many business ties with China. Therefore, diplomacy is necessary and expected. It is clear that Beijing waited to grant permission. It would appear that this is mainly tied to your visit with the Dalai Lama. I don’t believe apologies are necessary from the US and I would not expect any from China. It is in our country’s best interest to maintain a friendly stance and focus on shared business and environmental interests. We can not underestimate China’s power, economically or militarily. I know our military families want an answer, but I suggest you take the high road and not turn this into a battle over pride. Do not plan on docking in Hong Kong next year. Look for ways to strength our ties in those areas where we are in agreement.
5. Nic Marlin | November 27th, 2007 at 7:45 am
I would tell President Bush that he should consider what a brash response might do to our business relationship with China. The Dali Lama’s recent visit and the Pentagon’s decision surely have the Chinese government upset and this may have been the reason for their actions. They know very well the importance of our trade relationships, and perhaps this is why they later gave the ships authority to enter. The reason for the Chinese denial of the ship is relatively unimportant, as we would not know if they were telling the truth anyway. Threatening China’s government to give a reason for the inconvenience is a bad economical decision because it could exacerbate governmental tension, thereby potentially harming both of our economies if trade was temporarily hindered. Carefully requesting that they apologize to the crewmembers of those ships for ruining their Thanksgiving plans may be appropriate, but we should be sure not to add any tension to the current situation.
6. Witold Sadowski | November 29th, 2007 at 9:34 am
China Explains Decision to Block U.S. Ships… “because of the Bush administration’s proposal to sell upgrades to Patriot antimissile batteries to Taiwan” Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/30/world/asia/30ship.html?ref=world
7. Chris Carr | November 29th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Good find, Witold.
Yep, it highlights the need for modern day kowtowing (”bow to our sovereignty over Taiwan”) if you want to do business with China, just like Dr. Morris highlighted for us ….
8. Witold Sadowski | November 30th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
China blocked another U.S. ship today, 11/30/07:
http://www.reuters.com/article/wtMostRead/idUSN3026469320071130
9. Eric Kvilhaug | December 7th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
I’m going to choose all of the above, if we as the United States of America bared a Chinese ship from entering our ports “just because”, we would probably have a war on our hands, with China and Wal-Mart. We have been snubbed and have taken it, TWICE. Why because we do not want to get on the bad side of China even though it is apparent they are just testing us to see our true character. We have shown it, submission, they can keep on blocking our ships and there is not a thing we are going to do about it. Is it payback, probably not, but the can so they will, school yard mentality. But I guess we have used it in the past and present when we did not like certain actions of certain countries.
-End Rant-
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed