31 Comments Add your own

• 1. DWOLF  |  December 14th, 2008 at 11:05 pm

  First, Chris, thanks for the tip of the hat.

  Second, I want to repeat his offer - come on over and comment on the post (or any other post.) I’m happy to be questioned or taken to task - especially by OCOB students, faculty, and staff.

  Third, a question: to what extent can - or should - businesses become post-national? Are we kidding ourselves to think that companies can divorce themselves from the identity of their country of origin?

• 2. Chris Carr  |  December 15th, 2008 at 8:40 am

  Thanks for the check in, David.

  Yes, you raise an excellent point with which I agree — in a number of ways firms can no longer divorce themselves from their country of origin. This will be a tough pill for some American’s to swallow, particularly those resistant to change, but the sooner they accept and get over it the better. It’s a new world out there. That train has already left the station …

• 3. Dan N  |  December 29th, 2010 at 4:04 pm

  I enjoyed David’s post but, because it was written two years ago, it left me wondering what has transpired since then. I left a comment on David’s blog suggesting that he post his midterm assessment of the Obama administration’s interaction with China.

  From my vantage point, it doesn’t appear that the relationship between ordinary Americans and Chinese has improved in the last two years. This relationship has, if anything, eroded further because of the state of our economy. I think that Americans are guilty of projecting the anxiety that we currently feel about our job market, deficit, and economy onto the Chinese. With all of the news coming out of China regarding growth, opportunity, and optimism, it’s hard not to blame them for the domestic problems that we are facing. If they are “getting it” at the same time that we are “losing it” then they must be “taking it” from us.

  I don’t see any signs of the Obama administration attempting a “friendship with China” campaign. They must not feel that changing the public’s perception of China will solve any of our problems. I think it would. We need to continue to focus on increasing the size of the pie rather then increasing our share of it.

• 4. David Hart  |  January 9th, 2011 at 7:50 pm

  I enjoyed the post about Jon Huntsman, the Obama-appointed US Ambassador to China. He was previously the governor of my home state. In the most recent issue of Bloomberg Businessweek magazine (Jan. 10-16), there is an interesting interview with Huntsman concerning his viewpoint of China. One thing Huntsman notes in the interview is he foresees inflation in China as they try to value their currency properly. He sees them as trying to transition from an export power to a consumer-based model. He also says the US will “without question” be able to compete with the rise in Chinese consumer demand. He sees this as a positive thing for the United States.

  He notes that China has the second largest economy in the world. They are a nation transitioning from farmers to other areas. Huntsman, who is possibly considering running for US President in 2012, believes there will be an opportunity for the US and China to engage in reform, particularly in the years 2013-2016 when Xi Jinping is in office.

  I have not followed the Obama administration’s interactions with China too closely. It seems like some of the main things that have made the news have been relating to maintaining stability in the region with North Korea. I agree with the last comment that I would like to hear a mid-term evaluation from the author regarding the Obama adminsitration’s efforts in working with China.

  It is clear that US-Chinese relations will need to continue to evolve and improve as both countries rely on each other significantly from an economic standpoint. The more we can work together, the better off both countries will be.

• 5. Katie Moeller  |  January 15th, 2011 at 3:17 pm

  David Wolf made some great points about the relationship between the United States and China. China is sometimes viewed as a country who took a lot of our manufacturing from us but we also need them. For example, the US needs to rely on China to make progress on cleaning up the environment, building national security, and improving the global financial crisis. It’s a love/hate relationship. I think it’s important for the US to build this relationship but I think this can happen over time. Wolf mentions needing to open the channels of communication with the Chinese. This includes having websites in Chinese. Also, we need to be more open to listening and engaging the Chinese people to form relationships. All of these are ‘nice to have’s’ in my opinion. I think we have a lot of bigger issues to deal with right now.

  I think Obama and his administration are starting to realize the need to develop a relationship with China. One example in the “China Responds to US Election” article mentions that Americans have an issue with the economy and that is tied to China. It also goes on to say that Obama hired a Republican to be the US Ambassador to China. Obama crossed the political party lines because he knew the importance of this relationship. Huntsman will have his work cut out for him. The more we can work with China to better our economy and the global economy, the better off we all will be.

• 6. Chris Carr  |  January 16th, 2011 at 7:40 pm

  @ Dan,

  “I enjoyed David’s post but, because it was written two years ago, it left me wondering what has transpired since then.”

  Good point. Done. See some recent resources I have added in, per January 17, 2011 addendum, including two recent blog posts by David.

  - Professor Carr

• 7. Cassie Bettencourt  |  January 19th, 2011 at 2:26 pm

  I took away three main points from reading these blogs and articles. The first is that communication is key. David Wolf’s blog regarding how the Obama administration might effectively engage China was concise, interesting, and I believe made some very valid points. It is important for the Obama administration to realize they are dealing with a China that is different from previous administrations. The Internet is a much larger factor in all aspects of business, relationships, politics, etc. than it ever has been. Wolf’s four steps make a lot of sense to me. I particularly thought the first step stating that America needs to open the communication channels with simplified Chinese language versions of some U.S. websites was quite clever and would be a relatively simple thing to execute while making a world of difference.

  The second takeaway I pulled from David McKinnon’s blog about Jon Huntsman, the U.S. Ambassador to China. Although I found the blog interesting with all of its facts about ambassadors (who knew they couldn’t receive parking tickets!), what stood out to me was his comment about how interesting Obama’s choice for Huntsman was. The fact that Huntsman was never an Obama supporter and is on the opposite of politics definitely shows the importance and relevance of America’s relationship with China. It also is telling of the concern level Obama has for America’s dealings with China.

  The final point I gathered has to do with the interdependent link between the economy, business, China, government, and politics. Business people should care about politics because politics affect China, China affects our economy, and our economy affects business. It is as simple as that. This relationship had never occurred to me in this way before reading these articles.

• 8. Robbin Forsyth  |  January 29th, 2011 at 9:37 am

  David Wolf has some interesting insights into policy strategy. I haven’t read Post American World so I will give my own opinions.
  The idea that there is growing importance for governing by group consensus within various levels of the Chinese government would seem to offer both opportunities and pitfalls to the US government.
  If, as Wolf states, these government groups are taking consul from non governmental experts, the US can create opportunities to influence and learn from these experts. By building lines of communication to these influential business people and other experts important relationships can be fostered. These relationships could used to supplement direct government to government relations. This leans towards the P 2 P that Wolf discusses and the “humanization” that Huntsman is striving for. The downside to this governing by consensus is bureaucracy. The number of layers that could be involved in this kind of decision making is huge. The size of China’s population, its number of large cities and the value of monetary gains at stake in its economic development favors a more centralized approach to communication on important strategic issues. For the US to try and communicate individually to every possible group is not realistic.
  Finding this balance would seem to be a perfect application for the internet. I agree with Wolf’s ideas about the US government attempting to monitor and interact with Chinese citizens on the web. In theory this could be the most effective and efficient way to gauge and understand Chinese public opinion. But… how would the CCP feel about this type of program? It could easily be interpreted as cyber spying. What would happen if the CCP did not approve? What would happen in the US political landscape if the CCP set up the same type of communication program in US blog sites?
  Translating US government website into mandarin is a great idea that would need careful execution to be effective. Nevertheless it is a goal worth pursuing, (I’ve only seen spanish translations on any US government sites). This alone would show a huge effort of openness and humility to the Chinese people.
  I believe that the Obama administration is more coherent of the permanence and gravity of the US / China relationship than any previous administration. The appointment of Huntsman shows that the President puts more importance on having a capable ambassador on the ground in China than notching political points back home. The relationship between our countries is now so intertwined that it is impossible to separate the impact of politics on business and business on politics. If we stop buying Chinese goods the Chinese economy will slow and its investment in America will stop. If the Chinese investment in America stops our economy will collapse and we will not be able to buy Chinese goods. Business in both countries now seem to have a nationalist duty to figure out how to operate profitably and with longevity for the health of both countries. The governments in both countries have a short term responsibility to ensure that commerce continues without problems while continuing to work towards more balanced individual economies in the long term.

• 9. Brady Haug  |  February 5th, 2011 at 10:13 pm

  The differences in how Obama’s Administration, as compared to the previous four, will have to deal with China are listed as follows: the governmental decision making process has changed to more of a consensus, the government is receiving more input from scholars and experts, and the web has an increasing role in China. In order for the Obama administration to engage China, he will have to appeal to “both the Chinese government and the Chinese people.” Creating better lines of communication with the Chinese was cited as a major step towards unison. By converting some governmental sites into simplified Chinese versions, messages can easily be transmitted and information that adds value to China can be easily accessed. The fact that China’s scholars and experts are now being involved in decision making means that it’s imperative that Obama listen to the voices of the people. The article mentions that an easy way to begin is simply through blogs. I think by appointing Jon Huntsman as an ambassador to China, someone who has been connected with the common people, Obama’s Administration will be able to leverage this communication channel. “America needs to win hearts and minds through engagement, not pronouncement.” In order for the US to be fully embraced by China, the American individual will need to for a relationship with China. The article urged for this to take place immediately. Our relationship is continually changing with China and these factors are important for engaging them in the “global energy and environmental regime.”

  Given the suggestions for how the Obama Administration must engage China, the same ideas ring true for how the business community should. I believe the key is to keep open lines of communication. In addition, through communication it is crucial that the business community show their value in China. This is explained in the article, “When Diplomacy Means Abandoning the Rule Book.” “If you can’t humanize the relationship, and prove that it’s of value to the average citizen, then they’re not going to support it, in which case it’s of limited value.” I think the goals of the business community are not fully in line with the broader US geopolitical agenda. The business community is focused around leveraging costs and maintaining strong relationships with the Chinese. Environmental issues do pose a promising economic opportunity in China. This will in turn aid in the geopolitical relations. In order for incentives to align, both the US and China must create policies which place the environmental issues as a priority.

• 10. Kristine Spencer  |  February 9th, 2011 at 5:35 pm

  David Wolf’s article was very informative. I liked how he presented a problem and a detailed solution of how to work to solve it. China has evolved to the point where a new perspective and strategy must be taken for the US to improve relations. The factors contributing to these changes are clearly laid out in the article. 1. The method of reaching decisions is evolving. 2. This change has allowed non-governmental organizations and groups to have more influence on policy making. 3. The role as the internet (as a public forum) is growing in China, and the “scope of discourse” is wider than most outside of China realize. 4. The US needs to utilize the people to people relationships to further communication efforts. In order for Obama to get support for this agenda, which is mostly counter to China’s, Obama will have to win the support of the Chinese people, which I see as being extremely difficult. The solutions that are given to rectify the Chinese relations are all about communication and putting in the effort. The US government should begin to offer Chinese-language versions of agency websites that reach the public. As some of us might know, one of the hardest parts about communicating is listening, and this is exactly what the US government needs to do. They need to learn how to listen to the China’s influential public voices, which according to the article include businesspeople, academics, editors, and others. The government also needs to communicate (not try to use propaganda) through the internet in a wise manner. This means that the US will need to learn how the Chinese use the internet and what channels/sites they use and respect.

  The people to people relationships focus reminded me of Kuo’s speech about the deterioration of these relationships. The US needs to find a way to mend these relationships that Kuo described as a harsh internet battle, because they could be an effective way to engage the Chinese government and people. If these people to people relationships were mended and maintained, I have a feeling that the “America is out to contain China” sentiment would lessen quite a bit. The same goes for almost any heated debate: when you can put a face to the issue, or you personally know someone who is a decent human being on the other side, the tension lessens. I think that all of these suggestions and solutions apply to the business world. Communication is key, and being able to listen to what the other person is really saying can be especially important and difficult when the person is from another culture. Making strong personal connections through business is a great way to engage other countries such as India or China. The points of listening to the right voices and being knowledgeable about how Chinese netizens navigate the web are extremely important in business and relations with China. I don’t think that the goals and desires of the US business community are fully in line with the needs of the broader US stakeholder community and audience. The environmental problems created by overseas business where standards are lax are a problem that provides cheaper prices, but also the environmental problems that affect the entire world. The problem lies with not only different environmental standards and policies, but also different attitudes about the environment. Both countries involved need to have appropriate policies, but also education of the impacts of environmental damage should be promoted.

  I liked reading the responses of the Chinese to the recent elections. It seemed like the Chinese were just as polarized as the US is. Some were very supportive of the US, while others were on the complete opposite side, even calling us a terrorist nation. More polarized statements included someone saying Obama was “worse than Bush,” that Republicans are honest about their “Dragon Slayer” stance while Democrats are anti-Chinese behind closed doors, and that the US is trying to contain China. Even in China, with a one party system, the people have a wide range of opinions even though the perception in the US is quite the opposite.

• 11. Jessie Wilkie  |  February 11th, 2011 at 4:39 pm

  I thought it was a hard move on Obama’s part to select the ambassador to China. Those are big shoes to fill. I think he did a good job in selecting Huntsman whose whole life parallels modern Sino-US Relations (When Diplomacy Means Abandoning the Rule Book). Huntsman is a natural political rival to Obama, but he definitely has a lot of knowledge on China. However, the creeping suspicions that Huntsman might resign to run for president in 2012 are looking correct. He sent his resignation letter in at the end of January (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/01/us-amb-to-china-john-huntsman-resigns-to-pursue-possible-republican-presidential-nomination.html). It will be interesting to see how all that plays out. Just like Shirk discusses China having many domestic difficulties, the United States is also no stranger. There are obvious factions in the US (republicans and democrats, Huntsman and Obama). There are also factions in China or as stated in The Case for New Public Diplomacy “one party, many factions.” So it’s not just a one-to-one discussion when the US and China talk. It’s a many-to-many discussion because there are many interests involved. For the purpose of discussion, however, both countries must consolidate these interests. It’s interesting to see how the US and China negotiate differently. The US has the president speak on behalf of the nation and then report back to congress to get his deal approved. China has the president speak with the leading government officials (how authoritarian) to prepare a speech and talking points before heading to the US. An example of these talking points is mentioned in “China’s President Lays Groundwork for Obama Talks.”

  I feel like both countries have to tread on thin ice when dealing with one another because of the entangled nature of our economies. We must keep a good relationship despite all of troubles that currently exist in the world. The US must not let it’s paranoia of China surpassing it get in the way of it thinking clearly. But China must learn to control it’s people and stop the propaganda that is creating billions of people with strong emotions that could lead to wartime aggression. The Sino-US relations topic is a very challenging issue.

• 12. Jason Jay Sharma  |  February 13th, 2011 at 5:15 pm

  The articles and blog posts presented here offer a lot to take away. For me, I needed to read all of them, and then take a big step back and analyze what is really going on here.

  First of all, while David Wolf’s post may be outdated, it serves as a great tool to see what actions Obama could have taken when dealing with China when he entered office versus what he actually did do. Wolf points out that Obama would most likely place China on the backburner as he runs around patching up relations with our “friends” across the Atlantic (as he did). Looking back, I can’t blame Obama for making these choices–his priorities fell in line with the most pressing matters. Had Obama switched his plans and ignored Iraq while making friends with China, we can all guess the backlash he would have encountered.

  Moving onto David McKinnon’s post regarding John Huntsman, Jr. appointment as U.S. Ambassador to China… McKinnon makes an insightful point that Obama was willing to select the best candidate regardless of their political affiliation (while the accompanying WSJ article likes to mention it could be a ploy to keep Huntsman at bay for the next presidential election). Even so, given Huntsman amazing background, could anyone else really be a better candidate for China? I mean, the man carried Henry Kissinger’s briefcase before he took off on his secret visit to China! Huntsman was groomed for this ambassador seat. My favorite part of what Huntsman is doing in China is that he really is trying to make the genuine connection with the everyday Chinese. I believe this method of anti-elitism really opens up a welcoming environment for both the Chinese and Americans. It could be similarly send for bosses or managers in an office–the comfort level is raised when their willing to work with you, not above you.

  All this is quite important in the next steps for Sino-American relations. I’m shocked by the reactions of Chinese citizens in the other WSJ article. In fact, I’m shocked when they praise the U.S., but I’m also shocked when they attack the U.S. or Obama. I found it quite interesting that the Chinese have such a strong opinion on our party system and believing that having the Republicans in power is more beneficial. I believe they hold this opinion because most of the earlier relationship building occurred under Republican presidents, but if they continue to have a prejudice like this; it could halt attempts to create a relationship with our current Democratic president. Good thing Huntsman is over there…

  As for more current relations, the China Bystander blog post worries me at some level. It seems the only development we have concretely made with China is that they are now willing to openly announce warnings and threats against possible U.S. actions.

  For the U.S., it’s important that we stop tying developing China’s success and growing opportunities in economy, jobs, and business to the shaking economy, loss of jobs, and moving businesses back home. From a business and societal standpoint, this can harm relations at the most basic level–everyday citizens in both countries. While organizations such as the USCBC are great means to strengthen business relations with the Chinese, our government should be clear that we are not sending jobs for our citizens abroad. Two years in, Obama should begin moving his priorities and have a more focused approach on China. As it is, many U.S. based companies are utilizing China and its people resource–Obama should be quick to open up and make friends before his window of opportunity closes.

• 13. Ashley Ogden  |  February 19th, 2011 at 5:18 pm

  Our relationship with China is very delicate. We both need each other yet we are so different. The article, “Why Hu is not a Lame Duck” does a good job of pointing out some of those differences. Their political structure is designed in such a way that whatever relationship we develop with China now will continue to be after Hu is not around. It is unfortunate that “Hu comes to the US with a pre-approved script”. This makes for one way communication and could potentially make a weak bond with our country’s administration.

  It is important for the Obama administration to create a trusting business relationship with China so that both countries can continue to prosper. It is scary to think that a meeting with between Obama and the Dali Lama or an arms deal with Taiwan could break our China relationship. It will be very interesting to see how we are able to keep peace with China and also stand by our democratic and business roots. It is also interesting that David mentions that the Obama administration must maintain a good relationship with the government and with the people. This will also be important for business to do when dealing in China.

  The author made some interesting suggestions about how to improve our relationship with China. Most of his suggestions had to do with the internet and improving communication with the Chinese. This is very interesting to hear, since China has had a lot of criticism for their “Great Firewall”. It is important for businesses to know though. Because the World is becoming so digital these days, a company’s website could make or break their relationship with foreign customers, just like the government’s website could make or break foreign relationships.

• 14. Chris Bruns  |  February 20th, 2011 at 10:14 am

  To address the main post and how Obama might affect US-China relations, I think that ultimately he has too much on his plate to put the adequate amount of resources to nurturing that relationship. And even in a perfect world, I still don’t believe that enough time would’ve been allocated to those relations, simply because as a nation, we don’t take the time and effort to understand China and the role they will play in the future. Without backing and interest from the nation as a whole, any administration won’t find justification of spending time and money on issues not directly in the public eye. When it comes to my thoughts on diplomacy and business, I think that it originates in a mutual respect and understanding. I think this is something that needs to be cultivated on both sides, however I am starting to understand how much more the Chinese know about the US than we have learned about the Chinese.

  Some of my main takeaways from this post came from the first Silicon Hutong post, ‘The Case for a New Public Diplomacy.’ The line that stated ‘the means by which decisions are reached is evolving. China is increasingly governed through a process by which consensus is reached among groups and policy makers, or as I like to say “one party, many factions”’ was really telling and offers some understanding of why planned and well-researched actions need to be taken. And what funnels into understanding that point comes from later in the post; ‘It will be no different with the new public diplomacy with its new tools, new approaches, and new audiences’ This idea of how it will take slow and deliberate progress is what really stuck out to me. I also really enjoyed the post by David McKinnon and his description of Obama picking Huntsman because he is the right person for the right job. This is the way that it should be, and the attached WSJ article really hits that point home.

• 15. Jessica Shayler  |  February 21st, 2011 at 10:55 pm

  To be honest, I got lost in all the details of these readings… I heard a lot of whining, nit-picking, bull-headishness. I find it disheartening that there are so many opportunities because of the intertwining of our economies, but for that same reason, it makes it that much more difficult to listen to each other when things go wrong instead of pointing fingers. At a basic human interaction level, I heard the Silicon blog post saying both parties need to spend more time listening to (and understanding) each other and less time editing their own agendas. More value can be added to both economies if we choose to work together, but the details of that partnership are standing in the way. I also heard that Americans in general should drop the arrogance. This is consistent with Shirk and Mr. Sharma: “the comfort level is raised when their willing to work with you, not above you.” No one likes a suck up and no one likes an arrogant a** especially in China.

• 16. Will Moeller  |  February 24th, 2011 at 8:55 am

  This is the second to last blog post for me. It’s humbling to think about how much I didn’t know before reading all these blogs as well as the Fallows and Shirk books. It’s also humbling how much I still have to learn about Chinese culture, business, history, etc.

  That said, when I read these blogs now, I’m drawing more on what I read previously to put pieces together on what makes sense to me. As much as I didn’t care for Jacques Marquis in his TED video, he makes a great point that ties in well with this article about the U.S. engaging China. The balance of power is shifting from West to East. What makes this shift different is the vast difference in cultures. For Americans, an easy power shift comparison is the U.K. to the U.S. (At least that’s the way that some Americans view it.) Interestingly, this shift involved people who spoke the same language and learned the same history. Looking at a shift from a global culture dominated by America to one dominated by China, there will be much for Americans to catch up on in terms of Chinese language and Chinese history. That’s one point that Jacques makes.

  Here’s how that ties in with this topic of Obama engaging China: make U.S. websites also available in simple Chinese. This is the first recommendation in the Wolf article. Wolf makes four suggestions, Shirk has suggestions too. The list of possibilities of how to engage China seems limitless, but engaging them on the web seems practical. This makes sense. Chinese internet users have identified themselves as 1. interested in being connected and 2. tech savvy and interested in learning. Thus, the United States doesn’t even have to search for its broad target market, the target market has already identified itself. By making U.S. websites (starting with the U.S. Government) available in simplified Chinese, the learning process begins. Furthermore, it’s a gesture by the United States Government that we want to reach out to China in order to help them understand who we are.

  The more I read, the more I become aware that language seems to be a significant roadblock in Sino-U.S. relations. So my last thought for getting U.S. websites running in simplified Chinese runs along the same lines of another blog we had to write about - find a reliable translator.

• 17. Randy Camat  |  February 24th, 2011 at 11:29 pm

  My takeaways from David Wolf’s blog are that Obama’s administration needs to address and utilize “new tools, new approaches, and new audiences” to maintain/improve US-China relations. The “new tools, new approaches, and new audiences” refer to using online tools that the Chinese people are familiar with to effectively establish relations and more specifically to establish a people connection, or “humanize”, to rebuild America’s reputation in China. In relating to the “new approaches” statement, the WSJ article on “When Diplomacy Means Abandoning the Rule Book” talks about Obama’s decision of appointing Republican Jon Hunstman Jr. as the American ambassador to Beijing. Furthermore, Huntsman’s unusual style goes with this approach. Sometimes, it is necessary to do things out of the ordinary – even if it means a Democratic President selecting a Republican or showing up to work on a bicycle instead of the usual armored Cadillac. Considering Huntsman’s credentials, I think Obama selected the best man for the job.

  Among the other articles/posts, I found “Why Hu Jintao is not a Lame Duck” quite interesting. China seems to be the sleeping giant in this crowd of global problems. On the outside, President Hu Jintao played the passive role and has never really made any major threats to the US. Prior to reading this post, it never occurred to me that Hu Jintao could be waiting for his peak in power to take action. As China rises, Obama, his administration, and the US in general needs to make wise decisions to keep or even better relations between the US and China. It would be better for both nations to support each other than to about-face.

• 18. j hurley  |  February 26th, 2011 at 1:56 pm

  There are some interesting facts brought up in these readings that I have honestly never considered. For me, the main take away is that current relations are lacking due to poor communication.

  In the past, America has used a “talk about” type approach with China, but now needs to focus on a “listen and do” approach. It is very important that both sides try to make the relationship more valuable by not only doing what is better for their own agenda; from here on, both countries need to look at the relationship as a single unit that benefits both participants.

  Being appointed as the new ambassador to China is a very important and difficult job to fulfill. This position can play a large factor in whether China and U.S. relations are enhanced for both sides. Also, it is very important that America’s view of China in general increases as many Americans still look at China negatively for “stealing American jobs.” No matter what, transparency between the two countries must increase for the relationship to work.

• 19. Tara Millard  |  March 1st, 2011 at 11:00 am

  I found this blog post extremely interesting and eye opening. The influence the Obama administration can have on China has the potential to be great. As mentioned in the article, the Obama administration is dealing with a China that no other president has faced. While the Chinese government remains in control, the Chinese people are beginning to take on more control of their own destiny: In essence the Chinese are taking part in crucial decisions. Furthermore, widespread internet usage has made the Obama administration one of global viewing.

  The United States must forge healthy relationships with the ever-evolving and expanding China in order to remain a world power in business and economics. I personally believe the Obama administration, with its liberally driven motives, has the capability and the willingness to improve and expand the United States and China relationship. Although these possibilities are present, the liberal nature of this administration may pose threat to China’s leaders who are already struggling to maintain control of the independent mindset that is gripping their country.

  With this said, the Obama administration will without doubt engage China. Whether these results will improve Chinese and Americans relations or cause them to fault is a future I cannot predict. Only time will tell whether this political and economic relationship with flourish with open-minds or be stopped in its track due to a lack of receptiveness and a sense of apprehension on the part of the Chinese leaders. The only thing I can be sure of is that the Obama administration will not end without having an effect on the United States’ relationship with China.

• 20. Tyler Sereno  |  March 5th, 2011 at 2:47 pm

  China is changing and continuing to grow economically, and it is important for Obama and his administration to establish a strong relationship with them. As China is changing, it is increasingly governed through processes by which a consensus is reached among groups and policy makers. Groups outside of the government are beginning to exert more regular influence on policy making. The role of the web is also growing in China. Each of these areas will assist the United States in dealing with China.

  One of the challenges faced by Obama and his administration is to make their case to both the Chinese government and the Chinese people. This is improtant because China will be essential in forging a global energy and environmental regime, resolving current global financial crisis, and forming a new system to nurture and regulate international financing. Obama’s administration needs to begin to create Chinese-language versions of every public-facing U.S. website on an agency-by-agency basis, and they need to learn how to listen to China’s public voices.

  The United States needs to reconstruct its badly-damaged global reputation and use the value of the Internet to repair the U.S. image. Chines President Hu Jintao said that both the United States and China stand to gain from a strong relationship and lose from confrontation. There are several issues that need to be worked between Hu Jintao and Obama. China reacts angrily to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, and they state that the yuan should be gradually eased into a leading currency role. It was also mentioned that China is in the driver’s seat when it comes to dealing with the United States.

• 21. Sarah Weinzapfel  |  March 7th, 2011 at 3:04 pm

  As for the main topic, Obama’s administration, and administrations from here on out can engage China by accepting that we need China and using the tactics such as ones described in Wolf’s article to communicate with them. What the business community (i.e. us) can do is to accept and adapt. As the articles and some of the other posts have conveyed, we have to stop thinking of China as stealing our jobs and start thinking of our relationship in positive ways; realize that in the bigger picture we need them. I found McKinnon’s blog and Page’s coinciding article the most uplifting. Although they are a little dated, it speaks of Obama’s priorities. Obama was willing to put party lines aside and hire the right man for the job. In Page’s article, it went into more depth about Huntsman’s credentials and I have to say I was quite impressed.

  Back to Wolf’s article and his suggestions for engaging China; I think it’s important for the administration to realize there are certain ways to go about communicating with Chinese that are going to be more effective than others. In Wolf’s other article, “Why Hu Jintao is not a Lame Duck,” he shows us why using different ways of communication are necessary. Chinese government is run very different from ours and won’t change very much when Xi enters the picture. We learned in the video included in the “Red Guards Against Red Necks” post that the number of Chinese citizens online, netizens, are increasingly growing. That video and Wolf’s post both suggest using Chinese blogs. There was a lot of information that went along with this post, but the overarching theme that stood out to me was that we need to understand their government, accept the necessity of a relationship with China, and most of all communicate.

• 22. Matt Streiter  |  March 7th, 2011 at 3:05 pm

  The article reflects on the idea of creating a stronger relationship with China and increasing their quality of communication to ensure a long lasting and more qualitative relationship. With the Chinese government going through its own transformations that includes Chinese citizens gaining more power, it is even more important to gain a line of communication with the people of China. Today’s China is much different today than it was in previous presidential terms and it is time to reevaluate our foreign policy with the Chinese. Relating to the post regarding Fallows, building a strong relationship and opening communication can lower the threatening demeanor received by American from the Chinese.

  Obama’s decision of appointing a Republican Ambassador is an even greater sign of his dedication to working on his relationship with China. Apart from the political differences, Obama recognizes that he is the best man for the job and places faith in his abilities. Also by crossing party lines perhaps he is more apt to gain approval from the majority when facing future foreign issues when related to China. The four steps Wolf presents are excellent suggestions on how to build communication. Publishing U.S. information and articles in Chinese is a great way to communicate to the masses. With new strategies and the American culture that they are adopting, as we have seen in earlier blogs, this will likely help reduce barriers or reservations that were held in the past when dealing with Americans.

• 23. Tim Easton  |  March 7th, 2011 at 6:15 pm

  I found the articles, and posts, by David Wolf very interesting. He provided a lot of insight into Chinese government, as well as some very unique suggestions for the Obama administration. In the post, “Why Hu Jintao is Not a Lame Duck” I found it extremely interesting to learn about how the Chinese government works. I had no idea that the Chinese government had such a slow shift in power, and that only when a leader’s term is ending is when he has his people in office. The consensus-driven decision making was interesting as well. It was also amazing to see how much I still need to learn about China even after finishing up these blogs and reading both the books. I could not imagine a US President not picking his own staff, even if it is someone from the other party. In the first article, I was extremely impressed with the four tips that Wolf gave to the Obama Administration. With something as simple as making a Chinese version of US Agency pages, you would think that someone had already thought of that. That is a great way for Chinese people to read about US policies directly from the US, and not get lost in translation or other people’s opinions. The last tip that Wolf gives is key. We need to help rebuild or frayed reputation, because ultimately it will be the relationships between Chinese and American citizens that shape the future.

• 24. Kyle R.  |  March 8th, 2011 at 10:52 am

  I definitely agree with many of the issues that are presented in these posts. There are many issues that exist in regards to our foreign policy with China. It is important to take a proactive approach to building a long lasting relationship with such an influential country like China. The Obama administration needs to follow some of the suggestions listed by David Wolf as it is important to build their trust. I completely agree with his statement, “Given our tarnished credibility, America needs to win hearts and minds through engagement, not pronouncement.” This shows the importance of not just saying that we are going to do something, but we actively engage in building our relationship with China. I also agree that relating on a person to person basis is key. This is very similar to some of the suggestions that have been presented in earlier blogs, and I also feel it is very important to relate with the Chinese on a personal level to increase our credibility and trustworthiness.

• 25. JP Salazar  |  March 12th, 2011 at 11:36 pm

  I agree with a lot of what this article has to say. First of all, we need to remember that today’s China is not the same China that previous Presidents have had to deal with. The changing social and economic landscape provides additional opportunities as well as difficulties in dealing with the Chinese government. China no longer relies on an “iron fist” controlled by just a few people. With more groups’ interests and input taken into account there is the opportunity for influence and relationships over multiple channels. Also, Obama now has more opportunity to interact with people in China through the Internet. The web has become a more open and relied upon channel for information and Obama has the chance to take advantage and use this outlet to interact directly with the people and improve China-US relations.
  But in all honesty, I feel like Chinese-US relations cannot be that high on the President’s list of priorities. Internationally, Obama is dealing with how to conclude two different wars, maintain stability in the Middle East, as well as enhance foreign relations. Domestically, the US is going through one of its worst economic crisis. Healthcare and welfare reform are huge issues. There is so much on the President’s plate that I think he cannot hope but to maintain the status quo with China. With an upcoming election, I do not think Obama has the luxury of devoting too much time to an issue that is not at the front of most American’s minds. This lack of interest could end up being a huge boon for China. With the US concerned with other issues, China is free to continue to grow in the hopes of establishing itself as a new world power.

• 26. Amanda Podesta  |  March 13th, 2011 at 11:18 pm

  It is very interesting to see the 2-yr. snapshot of the past optimism that surrounded the Obama administration and also to evaluate with the newer posts what’s happened since then and where we stand today with Jiabao:

  A. We’re still waiting for a satisfactory hike in the yen-USD exchange rate,
  B. Human rights issues are still on the back-burner.

  I think it’s apparent to everyone that we’ll continue to see China either stonewall discussion or draw out these issues as long as it’s to their benefit.

  Interesting to note that according to their titles, ambassadors are recognized to the same level of respect as presidents and prime ministers.

• 27. J Vail  |  March 14th, 2011 at 12:40 pm

  David Wolf is a very strong writer, and after reading through his Silicon Hutong Blog I felt like his argument was pretty soundproof. I thought the phrase ‘more appropriate to a world rendered naked by the internet’ was creative, and is fitting for more reserved nations such as China. I also liked his second point under “Speaking to the Chinese People”; to tap various internet sources as a better way to determine public opinion and to stop catering to the rich.

  I do wonder though to what degree that we have increased our engagement to China as a nation. The state of our economy has become a more pressing national concern, but when it comes to foreign policy it seems like everything is more or less the same. However, once things begin to level out more (and China is even more developed than previously), things need to change more in the fashion of Wolf’s post. Most importantly, public discourse has to be as big of a part of politics in China as it is here, especially during such a turbulent economic boom as they are experiencing. If Obama has been good at anything thus far it is mediation, so the US could lend a hand in that regard.

• 28. Chris F.  |  March 16th, 2011 at 9:49 pm

  The article is a bit dated but the issues are still relevant, if not to the government, but for us as Americans. For the Obama administration, I hope he can realize that China should be viewed as a partner on the world stage and not as a foe. This will be important as policy in the 21st century cannot be dictated by America alone. As China and America become intertwined (as described in Susan Shirk’s China: Fragile Superpower) it will be necessary more than ever to resolve issues between us together instead of unilaterally. We as Americans need to wake up and realize that we can either play a victim and complain about the rise of China, or we can face the stark reality that the status quo is changing and that we have got to adapt too.

  In terms of actually engaging China and its citizens, I think it is good to open up different lines of communications. Having the simplified Chinese translation of government websites is a passive way to let Chinese know more about us. For Americans, it was suggested that the best way to reach out to China, in addition to the diplomatic channels, is through Chinese blogs. While the government and citizens alike can communicate about issues through these blogs, initially there will be clashes between ideologies and stances. But hopefully through these communication channels, there will come some mutual understanding (heck, we might learn something!) and that China and Americans will find some common ground. From there, we can build upon that and tackle the other issues. Communication is key!.

• 29. Ben Raymond  |  March 18th, 2011 at 9:02 am

  David Wolf’s blog presented a very insightful interpretation of US/Chinese relations. What interested me the most was the “four fundamental steps” he discussed, especially the idea of public diplomacy. After Obama’s campaign in the 2008 election, the grass-roots tactics he used to mobilize millions to vote in his favor astounded the world and more of the same youthful ingenuity was expected of him. Obama seems to have lost touch with what propelled him to the White House in the first place—t-shirts and music videos and speeches and stickers. Obama electrified the nation and his name was on the tip of our tongues, on the bumper of our cars, and all over our Facebook news feeds. Now that he is in office and the post-
  election “honeymoon period” has passed, he has neglected the ties he established with America during the election. Not only does he need to reinstate these ties with us, he needs to establish the same sort of accessible outreach with the citizens of China. Nobody expects to see groups of Chinese students wearing Obama T-shirts, but what we should expect from our government and our diplomats is an effort to create cross-cultural ties with the Chinese which makes them more than a country of pollution, manufacturing, and a big wall to us and makes us more than a country of McDonald’s and forks to them. There is no time left to keep telling ourselves we are a super power and China makes stuff for us—our generation has to redefine diplomacy and adapt it to our eternally changing world. David Wolf’s concept of public diplomacy will require a new sort of diplomat, one who has a deep
  understanding of Chinese culture—both where it’s been and where it’s going—as well as an understanding of American arrogance and resistance to change. Public diplomacy and Chinese translations of our websites will not be enough. Citizen diplomacy is a concept that was first formally used by Dr. Robert Fuller, a physicist who traveled to the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The idea of citizen diplomacy, a political concept in which citizens act as representatives of their country especially when there is a lack of formal communication or cooperation between two nations, is one which is ideal for the situation we face with China. Not enough
  has been done by our government to establish the relationship we need with China so when we travel to China we should go not only as business men and women, but as diplomats and as conveyors of American good-will. If Obama is not going to take the steps necessary to facilitate a new relationship with China, the American people are going to have to do it themselves, and our China trip is an excellent opportunity to begin.

• 30. Anthony Kallioinen  |  March 18th, 2011 at 12:19 pm

  David does a great job at breaking down the different China that Obama would face when he was sworn into office several years ago.

  + China’s decision making process is changing.

  + China is beginning to seek information, input, and influence from others in the public realm.

  + The role of the web is playing an increasing role in China. The way I see it is it is a magnifier of either good or bad press.

  David then offers 4 key suggestions for Obama should approach China, mainly focusing on the idea of ‘making his case’ to both the Chinese government and the Chinese people. This shows the importance the public is having on forming policies due to the speed and connectivity of the internet.

  + “First, the administration must begin the effort to create (simplified) Chinese-language versions of nearly every public-facing U.S. website on an agency-by-agency basis.” I couldn’t agree more. Things are going to have to change from this mentality we have as Americans where everyone else must adapt to us. We are soon to no longer be the biggest kid on the block and we should learn how to play nice and respect those that we need to maintain a good relationship with.

  + “Next, the administration needs to learn how to listen to China’s public voices. While this begins with engaging businesspeople, academics, editors, and other influential types, it has to delve far beyond the elites and find ways to listen to the people of China. Polling won’t work…China’s blogs and online forums are an excellent place to begin.” This is what the public truly thinks; even the government uses these channels as the most accurate rating of public opinion. If there is anything I learned from Susan Shirk’s book China: Fragile Superpower, the leaders of China (and any public appearance of a citizen) must be politically correct and the popular opinion lest they appear weak.

  + “Third, as the administration builds the capability to conduct its public diplomacy…Trying to use tactics that worked in the U.S. would miss the point. Public diplomats must learn how to use the channels frequented by China’s netizens in a way that will seem appropriate to those netizens and to China’s leaders.” This is key. We tend to try and understand China in Western terms. We can no longer do this. We have to approach the Chinese on their terms to build a good relationship and to show respect for their success and rise to power.

  + “Finally, the administration must realize that to be effective, American public diplomacy must incorporate a substantial P2P element. Obama’s efforts to enlist the help of all Americans in the changes he advocates would be well directed to an effort to rebuild our frayed reputation. In the long run, it will be the relationships between individual Americans and Chinese that will form the basis for grass-roots support for America in the homes and on the streets of China.” This is the task of every American: we must be good representatives of our country and show the world that we are not the bullies that they perceive us to me. I have made a special point to speak to foreign students and try to understand their perspective about Americans. It is obvious that Jon Huntsman Jr., the American ambassador to Beijing, agrees with me: “If you can’t humanize the relationship, and prove that it’s of value to the average citizen, then they’re not going to support it, in which case it’s of limited value.” It is our job to humanize the relationship.

  It was interesting to look at the differing viewpoints of China’s reaction to our November 2010 midterm elections:

  + “No matter whether it’s the Republicans or Democrats controlling U.S. government, neither are friendly to China! America itself is the world’s biggest terrorist, the creator of most trouble!”
  Submitted one blogger from Hefei, Anhui province.
  -Sina.com blogger from Hefei, Anhui province

  + Without America there’d be a lot more wars in the world.
  -”Elvins” from Nanjing on Sina.com

• 31. Omar Pradhan  |  March 18th, 2011 at 1:58 pm

  Could not agree more with the statement: “At the very least, China will be essential in forging a global energy and environmental regime, bringing security to Central Asia, ensuring that Russia remains integrated in the global system, midwifing North Korea’s return to that system (and perhaps its peaceful re-unification with South Korea), and, of course, resolving the current global financial crisis and forming new system to both nurture and regulate international finance.” To be sure, there is much to be done multilaterally. However, as one who has been privy to the chaos that is the UN General Assembly, barring a global attack from outer space or some new-fangled technological innovation that translates at the speed of thought and helps groups of 100+ share ideas without talking past one another, I am currently a bit less optimistic about near-term meaningful governance occurring in this body. As explored in negotiation and organizational behavior classes, the larger the group the more difficult the challenge. President Obama and the Chinese Government face mounting challenges on a variety of fronts. Carefully thought out policies and positions will help both sides arrive at a mutually beneficial arrangement. If done right (i.e. with the interests of broader stakeholders also in mind), US-China leadership will likely assist other nations in arriving at international postures that co-tackle challenges with greater efficiency and effect. I am also reminded of what we learned in Micro Economics class last quarter, namely, that all sides would be wise (and likely) to engage in sequential game analysis. That is to say that, when a given position is recognized as preferential (e.g. Carbon Limits, Nuclear Non-Proliferation, International Financial Regulatory Reform, etc.) countries who cooperate to “backcast” (think: opposite of forecast) from a desired position are likely to positively influence the outcomes of rogue actors and other non-conforming international players. Again, all of this returns to the import of a new era of public diplomacy, one that is played out both publicly (e.g. talking directly to key stakeholders throughout the global community) and privately to effectuate predetermined movement along a path toward greater global security and prosperity. I am as optimistic as I have ever been in terms of our capacity as a nation to excel with President Obama and Secretary Clinton at the foreign policy helm (i.e. nothing shatters the myth of a white male dominated western order than the Obama / Clinton team…given that our world is in fact comprised mostly of women & minorities). Moreover, given the manner in which President Obama ran his campaign and continues to mobilize the center (e.g. social networking, YouTube, twitter, other P-2-P digital technologies), we have further cause to expect continued progress toward our goals. Notwithstanding my optimism, I never pass up an opportunity to call out the tea-baggers, birthers, Jeremiads, and other blowhards (on both sides of the Pacific) who all seem to be united by their inability to think for themselves and / or have good, defensible, reasons for what they believe. These fine products of a failed / failing public education system and the media personalities who arouse them with misinformation are and will remain obstacles to progress…in my humble opinion.

Leave a Comment

Name Required

Email Required, hidden

Url

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

The posts, comments and/or views expressed on this trip blog, whether by a Cal Poly student or faculty or an outside guest to the blog, do not necessarily reflect the policies or views of Cal Poly, the Orfalea College of Business (OCOB), any of the OCOB's graduate programs and/or other students who participate in the trip.