Managing the U.S.-China relationship in three (and three alternative) dimensions

Abstract

Gregory Shaffer’s article discussing the legal aspects of the multifaceted U.S.-China relationship is comprehensive, pragmatic, and timely at the twentieth anniversary of China’s World Trade Organization (WTO) accession. Shaffer provides a surgical analysis of the “three central dimensions of this relationship: (i) the economic dimension; (ii) the geopolitical/national security dimension; and (iii) the normative/social policy dimension.”1 He also offers a targeted roadmap to reconceptualize a world where policies are increasingly securitized and to revitalize domestic safety valves embedded in the post-war economic system.2 Under Shaffer’s proposed “Rebalancing Within a Multilateral Framework,”3 states enjoy more policy space and accommodation, subject to the proportionality principle and protection of third parties. Supplementing Shaffer’s analysis, I offer three alternative dimensions, namely, the perceptions of businesses, states, and international organizations and how they complicate the successful delivery of Shaffer’s proposal. I echo Shaffer’s call for empathy between the United States and China regarding their respective domestic challenges and approaches to each other. Yet I contend that adequate trust and understanding of each other and the agreement over Shaffer’s identification of interfaces/dimensions by decision-makers of the two nations are susceptible to disruptions caused by the three alternatives I offer. Furthermore, I argue that a thorough and inclusive policy and legal analysis—designed in a coordinated way (“统筹” in Chinese) —should reduce negative externalities from the management of the U.S.-China relationship and minimize impacts for developing and least developed countries.