In the News

The big winner in Taiwan's weekend elections? China

Kelly Olsen

CNBC, November 26

Tsai Ing-wen's “Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lost mayoral elections in key cities to the opposition Kuomintang (KMT), or Nationalist Party. The DPP lost its stronghold of Kaohsiung, the southern port city where it had held power for more than 20 years, during the nationwide vote Saturday for local posts.”

“While the vote was largely focused on economic concerns rather than the long-simmering issue of Taiwan's political status, China came out in a strong position,” according to Sean King, senior vice president at Park Strategies, told CNBC's Akiko Fujita on Monday on "Squawk Box."

US companies aren't in a hurry to leave China despite the trade war, analysts say

Evelyn Cheng

CNBC, November 19

Chris Rogers, research analyst at Panjiva, a supply chain data company that's part of S&P Global Market Intelligence, said that a lot of companies are not leaving China and waiting to see “how (G20) summit goes between President Trump and President Xi.”

“Rather than investing more in a Chinese factory, a foreign company may invest more in another country, such as Vietnam, Nick Marro, a Hong Kong-based analyst with The Economist Intelligence Unit said.”

Malaysia best placed to benefit from China-US trade war: Nomura

Alice Woodhouse

Financial Times, November 20

“Nomura analysts say Malaysia is best placed to benefit as an alternative source of imports, while Vietnam is set to gain as companies move production to escape tariffs.”

“The bank identified two areas where other countries in the region are set to benefit - import substitution in the short-term and production relocation in the medium-term.”

APEC fails to reach consensus as U.S.-China divide deepens

Philip Wen, Jonathan Barrett, Tom Westbrook

Reuters, November 19

“Asia-Pacific leaders failed to agree on a communique at a summit in Papua New Guinea on Sunday for the first time in their history as deep divisions between the United States and China over trade and investment stymied cooperation.”

Exclusive: China offer unlikely to spur major trade breakthrough - senior U.S. official

Jeff Mason, Steve Holland

Reuters, November 15

China provided a written document, which includes 142 items divided into three categories: issues the Chinese are willing to negotiate for further action, issues they are already working on and issues they consider off limits, to the United States. “U.S. demands for trade reforms is unlikely to trigger a breakthrough at talks between Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping later this month, a senior Trump administration official told Reuters on Thursday.”

US criticises China’s ‘empire and aggression’ in Asia

Stefania Palma

Financial Times, November 15

“Mike Pence, US vice-president, has condemned “empire and aggression” in Asia in a veiled swipe at China’s growing influence across the region, fuelling tensions ahead of a meeting between the two countries’ leaders at the G20 summit later this month.”

“Wang Qishan, Chinese vice-president and close confidant of Mr Xi, last week said that Beijing was ready to talk with Washington to resolve the trade dispute, while the US and China held high-level talks in Washington that included a meeting between John Bolton, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, and Yang Jiechi, a Chinese state councillor with responsibility for foreign affairs.”

No quick win for China on trade despite Kudlow-Navarro dispute, experts say

Yen Nee Lee

CNBC, November 15

“Peter Navarro, U.S. President Donald Trump's trade advisor and a hardliner on China, has been sidelined by the White House — but prospects of a trade deal between the world's two largest economies remain bleak, experts told CNBC.”

“'We weren't expecting any substantive breakthrough at the G-20, even if Navarro hadn't been sidelined,' Nick Marro, an analyst at The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), told CNBC. 'Remember that he isn't the only hawk in the administration: Robert Lighthizer, who drove the initial investigations used to justify the U.S. tariffs, is also a hardliner on China.'"

US senators alarmed if China gets control of Djibouti port

Channel NewsAsia, November 14

“Two prominent U.S. senators expressed alarm on Tuesday (Nov 13) about the military and political consequences if China gains control of a port terminal in Djibouti, and said they were concerned it could further boost Beijing's influence in East Africa. In a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, Republican Senator Marco Rubio and Democratic Senator Chris Coons said they were concerned about Djibouti's termination of a contract for the Doraleh Container Terminal with United Arab Emirates-based DP World in February and the nationalisation of the port in September.”

“U.S. officials say they worry about what they call China's "debt trap" diplomacy, in which countries end up giving up control of major assets such as ports or roadways when they fund infrastructure projects with Chinese loans that they cannot pay back. Marine General Thomas Waldhauser, the top U.S. military officer for Africa, told a Congressional hearing earlier this year the U.S. military could face "significant" consequences if China took the port in Djibouti.”

China-U.S. trade talks taking place ‘At All Levels’, says Trump adviser

Jenny Leonard

Bloomberg, November 14

“The U.S. and China have resumed contact “at all levels” over trade ahead of a planned meeting between President Donald Trump and China’s Xi Jinping, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said…  A top Chinese negotiator, Liu He, will probably visit Washington shortly to advance “some informal talks,” Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said at a conference.”

Asian mega free-trade deal stalls in Singapore despite China’s push against protectionism

Catherine Wong

South China Morning Post, November 13

“After a fruitless meeting on Monday, trade ministers from ASEAN’s member countries and the bloc’s six dialogue partners – Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, and New Zealand – pushed back further talks on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) until next year. The RCEP is proposed free trade agreement covering the 16 countries and was originally expected to be completed by the end of this year. But stumbling blocks remain, including India’s reluctance to open up its markets, particularly to Chinese firms.”

“The RCEP has long been seen as a rival to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, now renamed the Comprehensive Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal that was spearheaded by the United States until Trump withdrew American involvement last year. China’s escalating trade war and geopolitical rivalry with the US has given it added impetus to conclude the RCEP talks, which began in 2013. The US-China rivalry was at the forefront of the start of the East Asia Summit summit on Tuesday when Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong expressed concern about member countries being caught up in the tensions.”

Ford China sales fall by more than 40 percent, again

Robert Farris

CNBC, November 13

“Ford has recently said it has seen its business in China deteriorate. Ford’s sales in China dropped 43 percent in September over the same month in 2017. The drop is partly due to an slowdown in sales across the industry, and is partly due to problems unique to Ford. One major factor hurting sales is a government crackdown on certain forms of lending that made credit available to a wide swath of buyers in China’s middle class, especially in its growing second-tier cities, said Michael Dunne, CEO of ZoZoGo, a firm that advises automakers on doing business in the country.”

China calls for open world economy ahead of ASEAN talks

Voice of America, November 12

“Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said on Monday Beijing will further open up its economy in the face of rising protectionism, as he headed for meetings with Asia-Pacific leaders in Singapore that are expected to focus on trade tensions. Li's remarks in an article in Singapore's Straits Times newspaper, ahead of his arrival in the city-state later in the day, came as Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong called for more regional integration, saying multilateralism was under threat from political pressures.”

US overtakes China in top supercomputer list

BBC News, November 12

“The latest list by Top 500, published twice a year, puts two US machines - Summit and Sierra - in the top two places. The US has five entries in the top 10, with other entries from Switzerland, Germany and Japan. However, overall China has 227 machines in the top 500, while the US has 109. Summit can process 200,000 trillion calculations per second. Both Summit and Sierra were built by the tech giant IBM.”

Malta, China sign MOU within One Belt One Road initiative

Times of Malta, November 7

“A memorandum of understanding within the One Belt One Road initiative has been signed between Malta and China. The agreement provides the basis for projects, investment, and cooperation in the trade, financial services and tourism sectors to be carried out between the two countries. The aim of the One Belt One Road initiative is to bring together different agreements. It signals to Chinese companies that, for the Chinese government, Malta is a good country to invest in with respect to European Union regulations.”

China unveils stealth combat drone under development

CBS News, November 7

“A Chinese state-owned company says it is developing a stealth combat drone in the latest sign of the country's growing aerospace prowess. The CH-7 unmanned aerial vehicle also underscores China's growing competitiveness in the expanding global market for drones. China has won sales in the Middle East and elsewhere by offering drones at lower prices and without the political conditions attached by the U.S.”

“The U.S., Russia and France are also developing stealth drones, while Israel has long been a leader in the UAV field. [...] The U.S. has been extremely cautious about selling its higher-end unmanned system, even to NATO member states, opening up an opportunity to China in the export market, said Justin Bronk, an export on such technologies at the Royal United Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies in London.”

Strapped for cash, Pakistan looks to China and the Middle East for help

Nyshka Chandran

CNBC, November 6

“Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan wrapped up a four-day visit to China on Monday without achieving his primary goal of securing Chinese financing. As the South Asian nation scrambles for external help, it may have no choice except to approach the International Monetary Fund for what would be its second bailout in five years.”

"China's refusal to agree to anything specific during Khan's trip is a bit of a setback,’ said Michael Kugelman, deputy director of the Asia program and senior associate for South Asia at the Wilson Center. But given rising concerns in Pakistan about the CPEC, Xi's government may be signaling ‘that it's time for Pakistan to figure out how to make things work,’ he added.”

Chinese warship crew says ‘good morning’ to Japanese helicopter carrier sailors in South China Sea

Minnie Chan

South China Morning Post, November 5

The crew of a Chinese warship, Luyang-II class guided-missile destroyer Lanzhou, sent a friendly greeting (“Good morning, glad to see you”) to Japanese sailors aboard a helicopter carrier, Kaga, when they encountered in the South China Sea recently. Analysts said was a further sign, albeit superficial, of the warming ties between the two Asian giants.

Kissinger ‘Fairly Optimistic’ China, U.S. can avoid catastrophe

David Tweed

Bloomberg, November 5

Henry Kissinger, the 95-year-old foreign policy guru to world leaders, said he was “fairly optimistic” the U.S. and China could avoid a wider conflict that would devastate the current world order.

“Some disagreements are inevitable but the objective needs to be that both countries recognize that a fundamental conflict between them will destroy hope for the world order,” he said. “I think that that objective can be achieved and I am in fact fairly optimistic that it will be achieved.”

Arctic Yearbook’s 2018 edition focuses on China in the Arctic

Nunatsiaq News, November 5

This year’s edition of the academic publication, released online last week, puts a spotlight on China’s interest in Arctic resources and shipping corridors…...also looks at some of China’s challenges in operating in the Arctic, and at how China’s present reach in the Arctic is sometimes over-hyped.

Articles and Analysis

US-China trade war raises risk of financial market ‘flash crash’, say analysts

Karen Yeung

South China Morning Post, November 20

“Fraser Lundie, co-head of credit and senior credit portfolio manager at Hermes Investment Management said investors needed to be selective in the current environment, where sentiments were fragile… (more specifically,) related to retail, rural telecoms, hospitals and auto parts because of growing uncertainty over their business models in the next five to 10 years.”

“The analysts cited a warning sign from the US index measuring the effect of buy-backs on stock prices – the index has declined despite a record US$800 billion in buy-backs this year. Apple stock, a tech bellwether, is down 20 per cent from its high as investor interest has been unaffected by a US$100 billion buy-back programme.”

The trade war is pushing business out of China, but not into America

Michelle Toh

CNN Business, November 16

“Many firms are keeping much of their operations in China, which offers a giant domestic market and advantages that businesses struggle to find elsewhere. But those that are moving aren't flocking to the United States. Instead, they're looking to transfer work to other Asian countries.” More specifically, according to the survey from American Chambers of Commerce in China, one-third of the companies said they will move out from China, while only 6% said they will consider moving back to the United States.

Pence: It’s up to China to avoid a cold war

Josh Rogin

The Washington Post, November 13

Vice President of the United States, Mike Pence, “told me in an interview that Trump is leaving the door open for a deal with Xi in Argentina, but only if Beijing is willing to make massive changes that the United States is demanding in its economic, military and political activities. The vice president said this is China’s best (if not last) chance to avoid a cold-war scenario with the United States.”

“In addition to trade, Pence said China must offer concessions on several issues, including but not limited to its rampant intellectual property theft, forced technology transfer, restricted access to Chinese markets, respect for international rules and norms, efforts to limit freedom of navigation in international waters and Chinese Communist Party interference in the politics of Western countries.”

China's building spree in poor nations: Does it really help the local economy?Liu Chen

Joanne Lu

NPR, November 13

“Over the past two decades, [China] has financed and built bridges, hospitals, roads, railways, airports and seaports — many billions of dollars' worth and counting. ‘China has recently become a major financier of economic infrastructure,’ according to a new report from AidData, a development finance research lab based at the College of William & Mary. That sounds like a good thing. But there are skeptics.”

“Development specialists say these accounts are concerning, yet some leaders of recipient countries still voice their preference for working with China. Their argument is that China is a "one-stop shop," not only financing projects but building them as well. Often, it's cheaper and faster to work with China than with traditional donors, like the World Bank, and it comes with fewer strings attached, such as requirements to privatize the project once it's built.”

“There is no doubt that many Chinese investments have had a positive impact, regardless of how short-lived,’ says Jacqueline Muna Musiitwa, an international lawyer based in East Africa. ‘That said, it is important to determine [definitively] if incomes are increasing, what money is being spent on and whether quality of life is improving. It is not enough to look at economic growth figures, because they do not adequately tell the story at the micro-level or change our daily engagement with poverty."

What China talks about when it talks about stimulus

The Economist, November 13

“For China as a whole, the government’s decision in 2008 to rev up investment was also a dividing line. Growth rebounded, while it sputtered elsewhere. Before the crisis China had a 6% share of global GDP; today it is closer to 16%. Yet there was a big downside. The economy became much more reliant on debt. On the tenth anniversary of its big stimulus, China is again confronted by flagging growth, as Mr. Xu can see from a recent slowdown in housing sales. The government has started dropping hints that a new stimulus is on the way. But the excesses from 2008 constrain it today. China knows it cannot afford another binge.”

“China’s steep rise in total debt, from 150% of GDP in 2008 to more than 250% today, is the most obvious problem. Such increases in other countries have often presaged trouble. Much of the debt was channelled through institutions outside the formal banking system, which are less transparent and more lightly regulated. Though some borrowers, such as Evergrande, profited from easy money, many others struggled in its aftermath. Dozens of industries, from solar power to steel, are grappling with overcapacity. Bai Chong’en, a former adviser to the Chinese central bank, has argued that one consequence has been a permanent decline in productivity.”

The US and China are talking again, but ‘competition’ is set to continue

Ankit Panda

The Diplomat, November 12

“The United States and China, after a delay, have concluded their second annual diplomatic and security dialogue at a time of unusually high bilateral tensions along all fronts. Even beyond the ongoing trade war, the recent meeting between U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, U.S. Secretary of Defence James Mattis, Chinese Politburo member Yang Jiechi, and State Councillor and Defence Minister General Wei Fenghe follows several notable events.”

“The reconvened meeting this week does not appear to have generated a way out of the current morass that Washington and Beijing find themselves in, but no one should have expected it to. Rather, it allowed both sides to exchange views at a very high level, even if those views might not necessarily be heard or understood any better than before. For the United States, the dialogue provided an opportunity to underscore serious concern about Chinese attempts to seek influence within its borders.”

The deal Trump should strike With Xi

Geoffrey Garrett

Foreign Affairs, November 12

“What China can give—and what the United States should accept—concerns investment, not trade. Trump should push for more market access and better protections, including on intellectual property, for U.S. multinational firms investing and operating in China. He should also change the terms of Chinese investment in the United States. The aim should be fewer acquisitions of existing assets by Chinese companies, more investments in new projects that promise to create American jobs.”

“Chinese investment in the United States offers the potential for another mutual victory. Talks between the two countries on a Bilateral Investment Treaty have been stalled for years. Even though a formal BIT treaty is probably a bridge too far, Buenos Aires is the right place to revive the ideas behind the talks. In addition to U.S. access to the Chinese market, Trump and Xi should learn from the remarkable success over the past few decades of Japanese investment in the United States, which the Commerce Department estimates supports over 700,000 American jobs.”

How to counter China’s influence in the South Pacific

Charles Edel

Foreign Affairs, November 13

“In the U.S. National Defense Strategy published in January 2018, Washington announced the return of great power competition, branded China a “strategic competitor,” and called for a “free and open Indo-Pacific.” Despite these rhetorical developments, however, there remain lingering questions surrounding the Trump administration’s episodic engagement with the region, its failure to coordinate with allies on major issues, and inadequate resourcing for initiatives outside the military realm.”

“Across the island states of the South Pacific, Washington is working closely with Canberra, Tokyo, and Wellington and expending significant resources. [...] Coordination also requires a coordinator, which could take several different forms. Appointing a U.S. ambassador-at-large for the Indo-Pacific would be the simplest way to accomplish this. Washington should identify an individual with long experience in the region, expertise in economics and finance, and the ear of Congress and the White House to play this role. The United States also needs to spend more on the region. After cutting the budgets for the State Department, USAID, and the Peace Corps, the White House and Congress should boost funding and add positions across the Indo-Pacific.”

On thin ice: Why the United States needs to invest in the Arctic

Jackson Segal

Brown Political Review, November 11

The United States should be further concerned about Russia’s military and China’s economic strength because the two appear to be cooperating in the region. Recent joint military exercises between the two countries and massive Chinese investment in Russian territory indicate a growing alliance between the two countries. Russia recently agreed to let Chinese ships pass through Arctic waters, provided that China pays for a discounted Russian icebreaker escort. Further cooperation between Russia and China could give them uncontestable control over the region. Unless the US changes course, an alliance between the only two global powers invested in the Arctic would give Russia and China the power to expand Russian borders, loosen environmental norms, and extract considerable amounts of oil and gas.

The geopolitical benefits to the United States in competing for the Arctic would be numerous. A buildup in US military capabilities would act as a deterrent to Russian aggression. It is considerably easier for Russia to expand its territory if the United States poses no meaningful retaliatory threat. Though American military power is unbeatable in the rest of the world, no number of troops can be effective in the Arctic if they can’t move through the ice. Moreover, a non-Arctic retaliation by the United States for an Arctic encroachment by Russia would expand the dangerous potential of a large-scale war. A buildup in our Arctic fleet is thus necessary to prevent significant conflict from erupting out of the Arctic.

The cooperative rivalry of US-China relations

Joseph Nye

Project Syndicate, November 7

The liberal international order helped China sustain rapid economic growth and reduce poverty dramatically. But China also tilted the trade field to its advantage by subsidizing state-owned enterprises, engaging in commercial espionage, and requiring foreign firms to transfer their intellectual property to domestic “partners.” While most economists argue that Trump is mistaken to focus on the bilateral trade deficit, many support his complaints about China’s efforts to challenge America’s technological advantage.

There is another dimension, however, that makes this fourth phase a “cooperative rivalry” rather than a Cold War. China and the US face transnational challenges that are impossible to resolve without the other. Climate change and rising sea levels obey the laws of physics, not politics. As borders become more porous to everything from illicit drugs to infectious diseases to terrorism, the largest economies will have to cooperate to cope with these threats.

China faces strong headwinds to mend ties with US after ‘missed opportunities’

Wendy Wu

South China Morning Post, November 7

“We are now in a very difficult position. I don’t see either side trying to break the downward slide of bilateral relations,” said Orville Schell, Arthur Ross director of the Centre on US-China Relations at the Asia Society in New York. “Over the last 10 to 15 years, China has missed extremely good opportunities to rebalance the relations without any catastrophic effects,” the American academic said on the sidelines of the Bloomberg New Economy Forum in Singapore.

Schell also played down hopes for any significant outcome from the planned summit between Xi and Trump at the end of November in Buenos Aires, Argentina. “We don’t see the preparation for having any agreement. We don’t have someone like Wang Qishan and [former US Treasury secretary] Henry Paulson working at the second level,” he said. “There is a big missing link between the presidents and bureaucrats.”

China's trade war woes won't go away after Democrats' midterm gains

Steven Jiang, Ben Westcott

CNN, November 7

“The Democrats have retaken the US House of Representatives, dealing a major blow to President Donald Trump's domestic agenda, but if anxious politicians in Beijing think that means a reprieve from the White House, they should think again. China is one of the few policy areas where there is some bipartisan consensus. The Democrats broadly agree that the US should take tougher action against the rising power across a range of fronts, from the military, to trade, intelligence and diplomacy.”

“Even if the House wanted to, the power to slap tariffs on China is essentially vested in the executive -- that's President Trump. If he needs support from Congress on China policy in the future, the Democrats have shown few signs they'll stand in his way. All this is bad news for Chinese President Xi Jinping, whose government has been scrambling to appease an increasingly hostile US administration, after attempts at flattery and acts of friendship early in Trump's term didn't quite deliver.”

Past Events

China’s Supply Chain Challenge—From Timber to Minerals

Event hosted by the Wilson Center, November 8

The China Environment Forum of Wilson Center hosted a discussion of the on-the-ground investigation by NGOs and lawyers into the environmental and social damage from Chinese and other foreign extractive industries. Panelists Lela Stanley, Policy Advisor for Global Witness’s Asia Forest team, Jim Wormington, Researcher for Human Rights Watch’s Africa Division and Jingjing Zhang, a longtime Chinese environmental lawyer and currently a lecturer in Law, Transnational Environmental Accountability Project, Environmental Law Program, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law shared cases of environmentally unsustainable trades supported by Chinese outbound investments. They concluded that necessary legal and regulatory changes both in China and in the host countries and increased community involvement will be critical to create more sustainable and humane supply chains.

2018 Korea Global Forum

Event hosted by the Wilson Center, November 15

Hyundai Motor-Korea Foundation Center for Korean History and Public Policy along with Asian Program of the Wilson Center held the 2018 Korean Global Forum. Cho Myoung-Gyon, Minister of Unification for South Korea, delivered the keynote speech on inter-Korean unity and prospects for peace on the Korean Peninsula. He pointed out that the “the complete denuclearization and permanent peace on the Korean Peninsula is an earnest hope of Korean people and the South Korean government.” Minister Cho concluded his speech by pressing for further negotiations, “we must try to demonstrate the possibility of success of cooperation to North Korea."

Also featured at this year’s Korea Global Forum were diplomats and scholars from South Korea and the United States, including Jae-kyu Park, former Unification Minister and president of Kyungnam University; Amb. Ho-young Ahn, president of the University of North Korean Studies; Amb. Joseph Yun, former U.S. special representative for North Korea policy; Marc Knapper, acting U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state for Japan and Korea, and Jean H. Lee, director of the Hyundai Motor-Korea Foundation Center for Korean History and Public Policy at the Wilson Center. They broke down the outlook ahead of denuclearization negotiations in a panel discussion.

Upcoming Events

2018 Global Security Forum: Prospects and Priorities for U.S. Gray Zone Competition

Event hosted by Center for Strategic and International Studies, November 27

Other Dimensions of the Impact of War on the Korean Peninsula

Event hosted by The Elliott School of International Affairs, November 10

China's Power: Up for Debate

Event hosted by Center for Strategic and International Studies, November 29

The Arctic and U.S. National Security

Event hosted by the Wilson Center, December 04

From Climate Villain to Hero: Can China Lead the Path to Paris in a Fragmented Climate Action World?

Event hosted by the Wilson Center, December 06

Commentarty

The China Angle to INF Withdrawal is Off

By Will Saetren

The US decision to withdraw from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty continues to send shockwaves through the foreign policy community. The INF treaty, which eliminated an entire class of land-based nuclear weapons is often heralded as one of the most stabilizing arms controls agreements hammered out between the United States and The Soviet Union during the Cold War.

In his announcement, President Trump specifically cited China as a driving factor behind the US decision to withdraw, a sentiment that has gained extensive traction in Washington. Elbridge Colby of the Center for a New American Security recently told Foreign Policy that “The military balance in the Pacific is going in the wrong direction” and that the restrictions of the INF treaty were a major contributing factor. Abraham Denmark of the Woodrow Wilson Center wrote on Twitter that withdrawing from INF “could free us to field more effective systems to counter Chinese capabilities” in the region.

On the surface, this argument has merit. Unlike the United States and Russia, China is not bound by the INF treaty and has been free to develop as many ground-based missiles in the INF prohibited range of 500 km – 5,500 km as it desires. According to Admiral Harry Harris, former commander of US Pacific Command, China has the “largest and most diverse missile force in the world” — and 95 percent of its missiles “would violate the INF [treaty] if China was a signatory.”

But the numbers and nature of China’s missile force alone does not justify tearing up the INF treaty to provide an effective counterbalance to it. Upon digging deeper, the China angle to INF withdrawal fails to hold up to scrutiny. Here’s why:

INF COMPLIANT OPTIONS

The argument that the INF treaty is an obstacle to securing American interests in Asia assumes that short and intermediate ground-launched missiles are the only way to hold China’s assets in the region at risk. This is not the case. The INF treaty does not apply to missiles fired from the air and sea, a loophole that the United States is well aware of. US ships, submarines, and aircraft are capable of launching large numbers of nuclear and conventional INF range weapons from the sea and air. Just last year, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Paul Selva told the US Congress that, “there are no military requirements we cannot currently satisfy due to our compliance with the INF Treaty. While there is a military requirement to prosecute targets at ranges covered by the INF Treaty, those fires do not have to be ground-based.”

Unlike ground-based missiles, sea and air based platforms have the added bonus of being mobile, which makes them far more difficult for a potential adversary to target. The United States can also relocate the assets with ease, whereas ground-based missiles are stationary (and therefore vulnerable) unless deployed on mobile launch vehicles, which the United States does not currently possess.

THE DISTANCE PROBLEM

Besides the fact that there is no capability gap in the Pacific for INF class weapons to fill, a major question that remains unanswered is, if the United States builds them, where will they go? Chinese targets would be far out of reach of intermediate-range missiles based in the continental United States, and virtually none of our allies in the Pacific would be willing to host them. South Korea would be reluctant to upset the peace process with the North, which the deployment of short and intermediate range missiles to the peninsula would do, Japan has already called the prospect of US withdrawal from the INF treaty “undesirable,” and stationing US missiles in Taiwan is an explicit red line for Beijing, which if crossed, will trigger an invasion.

This makes Guam the only US territory in the Pacific that fits the bill for INF weaponry. But Guam is still 4,000 km away from the Chinese mainland, and already serves as a base for America’s Continuous Bomber Presence mission, which involves a permanent rotation of B-52, B-1 and B-2 long-range strategic bombers. According to the US Air Force, “these bombers provide a significant rapid global strike capability that enables our readiness and US commitment to deterrence, offers assurance to our allies, and strengthens regional security and stability in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region.”

Some analysts have suggested storing INF class missiles in Guam, for the purpose of rapidly deploying them to regional allies, such as Japan and Korea in the event of a crisis. However, the act of deploying the weapons would be an escalatory measure in and of itself, and US allies in the region would be taking an enormous risk by accepting them. Forward deploying the missiles in a crisis would also be time-consuming, whereas sea and air-based assets can be repositioned in the theatre quickly, and in the case of submarines, discreetly.

(This article was originally published in Instick.)