„There was a silence on how to manage China’s rise“

David E. Sanger, White House Correspondent for the New York Times, discusses the Presidential Candidates‘ stance on the US strategy for China. 

By David E. Sanger

For all the obvious differences between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris – over intervening in Ukraine, the isolationism of America First, dealing with immigration — one arena where it can be hard to tell the difference comes in dealing with China. When the topic came up in the campaign, it was usually centered on Mr. Trump’s insistence that he would slap huge tariffs on Chinese made goods, at an even higher rate than on other foreign goods. Ms. Harris, needless to say, did not sign on to that approach. But there was silence on how to manage China’s rise, a topic so much more complex than tariffs. Neither candidate declared on the major issues: Would they attempt to interfere in the growing partnership between China and Russia? Would they come to Taiwan’s defense in the case of an invasion? How about in the case of a slow strangulation of the island?

We don’t know. And looking at their records in the White House doesn’t help. The fact is, Mr. Trump has altered his view on China more radically than Ms. Harris has. True to form, Trump saw every encounter with his Chinese counterparts as a sales opportunity. He was ready to do trade deal after trade deal, even when China sapped the life out of Hong Kong. It was only after Covid hit, and he needed a scapegoat, did his talk of the „China Virus“ begin. And there is no reason to believe the relationship with Xi Jinping would get any better.

Ms. Harris can be relied upon to adopt the basics of the Biden strategy on China, including the revival of industrial policy to build more semiconductor plants inside American borders. But the big question is whether she will use the time gained from export bans on high-tech goods to rebuild America’s manufacturing prowess. And whether she, too, would be willling to rally the world to confront Beijing, if it comes to that point.