eCommerce

There are no mechanisms for resolving economic and military conflicts.. What is the benefit of the Biden-Shei summit?

Absent from the outcomes of the Biden-Shei summit were practical programs to implement loose pledges on cooperation to confront climate change and the coronavirus, or the future of energy prices. While the two leaders pledged to work together and coordinate, so that the crisis of high energy prices does not affect global economic growth.

Washington – The summit of Presidents Joe Biden and Xi Jinping, on Tuesday, represented an opportunity to discuss issues and files that affect not only the two most important powers in the world, but also the rest of the countries. Meanwhile, US-Chinese relations are witnessing an unprecedented state of deterioration, the worst since the normalization of diplomatic relations between them in 1979.

Over the course of 3 full hours, and in the presence of the two presidents’ senior advisers, the summit discussed “transparently and directly, many contentious issues between the two parties, and a number of agreed-upon issues as well,” as US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan stated, hours after the summit ended, in a statement. In front of the Brookings Institution in Washington, attended by Al Jazeera Net.

Sullivan described the summit as “very important, as it is the first that brings the two presidents together face to face despite being online, where the two presidents were able to see each other and communicate better than a phone conversation.”

Despite that, the summit did not result in a new mechanism for managing the tense relations between the two countries over many important issues, and Sullivan only said that “communication will continue between the diplomats of the two parties, and we will coordinate action in the Security Council and other international forums.”

Chinese people watch the summit meeting between Biden and Xi at a restaurant in Beijing (Reuters)

different top frame

Sullivan considered the timing of the summit very important, as it came a full 10 months after Biden’s arrival in the White House. He believed that Biden invested heavily in his country’s foreign relations in affirming the American leadership externally, and in the American infrastructure internally, which provided a different framework for the most important summit so far during his presidency.

On the other hand, Sullivan says that Biden, by inaugurating the quadripartite alliance with India, Japan and Australia last September, in addition to the new security framework with Britain and Australia in the same month, sent a clear message to China of the importance of the Southeast Asia and Pacific region to direct US interests.

Washington considers that restoring its relations with NATO and Europe – which Biden did last October – adds to its global leadership role, which Biden successfully managed during his active participation in the recent Glasgow climate summit.

The renewal and revival of technological, military, and economic relations with Washington’s allies in East Asia – Japan and South Korea – represented a clear message to China that it is serious about not allowing it to expand and extend its influence in traditional areas of influence of the United States.

frank discussion

Experts believe that the main goal of the summit was linked to setting the conditions for competition between the two parties, as Washington seeks to assert its right to defend its interests and the interests of its allies and partners, especially in the regions neighboring China, while China seeks to confirm its position as a rising power with global interests, and that it does not accept interference. in its internal affairs in any way.

The dispute over Taiwan is the most important hotbed of military tension between the two sides recently, with the dispute over Taiwan’s future in light of a Chinese military escalation, and US signals to intervene if China takes military steps against Taiwan.

Biden reiterated – during the summit – the US position on Taiwan, and America’s belief in the “one China” principle, with its refusal to resort to force in order to change the current situation to determine Taiwan’s fate.

China did not pledge during the summit to stop its military movements in the areas near Taiwan, nor to stop its repeated threats to annex the island by force if it declares independence.

The Xi and Biden summit also came after recent warnings from the Pentagon that China is rapidly expanding its nuclear forces and capabilities, and intends to more than quadruple its arsenal of nuclear warheads from what it is currently, to reach at least 1,000 nuclear warheads before the end of this decade. .

Biden and Xi were unable to put in place mechanisms to limit climate changes that the United States and China contribute to increasing their global (European) impacts

What after the summit?

The summit did not result in a new mechanism for communication between the two parties to confront current or future differences. In contrast to the existence of a mechanism for disarming and stopping the nuclear race between Russia and the United States since the years of the Cold War, Washington and Beijing did not agree to create a new mechanism to control their trade differences, or those related to the nuclear and technological arms race.

Absent from the summit outcomes were programs and action plans to implement loose pledges on cooperation in the face of climate change, the emerging corona virus, or the future of energy prices. The two leaders pledged to work together and coordinate so that the energy price crisis does not affect global economic growth.

However, Counselor Sullivan referred to 3 frameworks (security, economic and technological) on which the discussion with China will be completed between the specialized officials of the two countries.

A high-ranking US official said, in a press briefing after the summit, that Biden made it clear that although he welcomes “intense competition with China, he does not want conflict.” The meeting was considered a “means to ensure that there is no misunderstanding about this matter between the two parties.”

For his part, the US National Security Adviser indicated that the two presidents stressed the need to avoid “miscalculations or expectations that could lead to strategic risks that quickly descend into a state of conflict.”

More policy



Reference-www.aljazeera.net

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *