My view on Obama and China-US relationship

[zyyyuan]

Barack Obama, the president of United States, is visiting China in the mid-November, which arouses the attention to this president again. In the meantime, he does not look good recently, for the reason that his approval rate among Americans was declined to 51% from the peak 70%. Having been in the administration for a year, everyone wants to see what he has done in the past year and how much he has fulfilled his “change-dream” promised to his citizen, yet in my opinion one year is too short for anyone to make too big change.

Maybe most of the Chinese either know or care little about what he has done to Americans and the world say Mid East World except his movement to China, therefore when they hear that he is the first president in American histroy whose approval rate fell that much during the first year of administration, and the news that he was awarded Nobel Peace Prize, they feel aversion to him. Together with the previous Chinese tyres tariff event, image of Obama fell to the bottom within certain Chinese. Even voices came that his trip to China would be nothing more than inviting Chinese people to buy American bonds. However, my view varies.

Firstly, I don’t agree that Obama’s actual approval rate fell that much. After all, 51% is around his rate to be elected as the president, while 70% is boosted afterward, probably under huge heat of Obama at that time. However, after a year’s cool down, and now his is in the war with FOX, one of the TV stations suspected to serve as a tool of Republican Party therefore often against him officially, his popularity is no doubt affected. There is difference between United States and China, in that the former is under a two-party system and huge freedom of speech for Journalism. Considering the huge competion and the power of Journalism in terms of subjective agatition, I believe 51% of approval rate is not low and is understandable.

Secondly, speaking for his Nobel Peace Prize, I think we should see it in two ways. In the first place, we should not take it too seriously. In retrospect, Dalailama, a Tibet separatist, received this prize at 1989, a politically sensitive year for China, so you can see how ironic the prize is in terms of peace. In the second place, the prize does have its own reason and will function to some degree. After all, during the past year Obama, notably unlike Bush, has devoted himself in promoting the relationship between America and the Mid Easten World, including withdrawing troops from Afghanistan and taking certain actual measures to eave the situation with Arabic World. Though these might be certain temporary diplomatic strategies for United States, the prize will more or less exert burden to him not to further any unpeaceful actions to the world. What’s more, the prize especially identifies, which I think is justificable, the hope he has brought not only to Americans but also the world, as the president of the most powerful country.

Thirdly, I don’t see it pessimistic in our relaitonship with United States. Recognized, Unitied States has been the head of the world for many years, and his strategies to other countries, in either polity or economy, are always two-sided. On one side, it needs your help, while on the other side, it prevents you a chance to become stronger than it, by maintaining its interest while harming others. Obama, as the president of United States, will of course serve for the interest of his country, so does president of any country. In the world of economy, trades are made out of both interests, but when the positions of the both sides are not equal, there would not be fairness. I think trades are more complex for individuals to see. One may argue that we should not buy American bonds for US dollars are depreciating, however, he fails to see if we do not buy it, dollars will depreciate faster by printing money! China and United States both act for their own interests, for they know clearly that their economy depends on each other. But these two are not pure friends, they will maitain its interest when being impair.

At least we can see China’s international status has greatly improved in terms of economy, to the degree that poses a threat to United States. It is understandatble America will exert its effort to prevent us from taking its place, and it is clearly that China is able to counterattack.

As to Obama’s trip to China, I believe it will be a trip that promotes China and US relationship in many aspects, and strategic political negotiations are indispensable in striving for each interests. Anyway, we should have faith in Chinese government in this complicated world.

[only]

After U.S. President Barack Obama's first 100 days in office, Foreign Policy invited some of its favorite bloggers, pundits, and political experts to analyze his foreign policy and help us create a report card for the young administration. The bulk of our respondents gave Bs, with a final score in the B+ range.

FP has grouped the responses by grade.

The As

"In the next year, Obama's final grade will depend on such issues as his decisions on Afghanistan and how he handles an Iran that refuses to live up to its commitments. But if the past is prologue, he should do well."

The Bs

"Progress has been evolutionary, not revolutionary, because U.S. policy is rooted in national interests that do not change dramatically with a change in the occupant of the White House."
"While the administration cannot be blamed for the mess it inherited, it as of yet offers no real strategy for the future."

The Cs

"The Obama appeal? It is fading fast."
"On AfPak and Iran, he is a better Hamlet than Jude Law on Broadway"

The Ds

"It seems almost a cheap shot to give the president low marks on a foreign policy that is so obviously failing."
"The president's UN general assembly speech presented the problem: Obama positioned himself above the nation, mediating between us and the world, his job to restrain America's ugly aggressive instincts and apologize for past crimes. No wonder friends and allies wonder where this all leads."

[only]

Originally Posted by only

FP has grouped the responses by grade.

The As

"In the next year, Obama's final grade will depend on such issues as his decisions on Afghanistan and how he handles an Iran that refuses to live up to its commitments. But if the past is prologue, he should do well."

The Bs

"Progress has been evolutionary, not revolutionary, because U.S. policy is rooted in national interests that do not change dramatically with a change in the occupant of the White House."
"While the administration cannot be blamed for the mess it inherited, it as of yet offers no real strategy for the future."

The Cs

"The Obama appeal? It is fading fast."
"On AfPak and Iran, he is a better Hamlet than Jude Law on Broadway"

The Ds

"It seems almost a cheap shot to give the president low marks on a foreign policy that is so obviously failing."
"The president's UN general assembly speech presented the problem: Obama positioned himself above the nation, mediating between us and the world, his job to restrain America's ugly aggressive instincts and apologize for past crimes. No wonder friends and allies wonder where this all leads."

People's blind zest for the US first black president has passed after almost a year's test. He's doing well in certain aspects and it is obvious that he wants to change the image of the US in the world. To abandon the ant-missile defence in east europe, to visit mid-east and give important speech their, to assess the military movement in Afghanistan, etc. These are what he's done abroad. He also put foward some reform within the country and the medical system reform is one of the most controversial one. But however, now too much achievement has been obtained either at home or abroad. and I think that's why he's graded as B+.

Still I'm waiting for his visit to China to see whether he could make some change in sino-us relations.:p

[zyyyuan]

can't agree with you more the upstairs "only"~~

[replica1]

I like the article, but that from the article I know maybe we can be good friends.

[frogman]

No matter who is the president,the relationship can't change a lot ,as their fundamental interests havn't changed.

[jone]

Actually the relations of Sino- Us has changed a lot before the visit of Obama in China. For the powerful international influence of China, the government of USA have to admit the power of China in International affairs.

For the economic relations between China and the USA , the government of USA have to admit the economic strength of China.

And these are the basic elements that USA have to consider to deal with China-US relations.

[frogman]

Maybe you refered to so-called G2,I have to tell you it is a wicked scheme and a big joke.

[zyyyuan]

haha ~~I'm glad to make friends~~