Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

About Face : A History of America's Curious Relationship with China, from Nixon to Clinton
Amazon ^

Posted on 03/07/2004 1:34:43 PM PST by maui_hawaii

In the 1960s, China and the United States had no trade relations and no direct diplomatic contacts. At the end of the 20th century, the two nations are major trading partners who regularly swap visits between their heads of state, and the relationship between the world's most populous nation (with its nuclear weapons and rapidly expanding economy) and the world's most powerful nation (standard-bearer of democracy and capitalism) has become increasingly vital to world peace. Though it remains fraught with problems, the relationship between China and America has survived such crises as the Tiananmen massacres and confrontations over Taiwan.

James Mann, a foreign policy columnist for the Los Angeles Times, was that newspaper's bureau chief in Beijing from 1984 to 1987. In the clear language of a veteran journalist, he analyzes the political and historical developments since America's first overtures to a xenophobic China in the early 1970s. President Richard Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were interested in China as a counterweight to Soviet Russia; the Clinton administration is interested in China's markets, with a nod paid to human rights along the way. In this fascinating study, Mann uses his firsthand experience of the events and players to guide us confidently through the twists of a tortuous diplomatic journey, in which China has continually been able to play its opponents--including not only the U.S. and other nations but opposed political factions within America--off one another.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: bookreview; china; jamesmann
For any and all I recommend this book.

It gives a basic background of how we ended up where we are in relation to China...

1 posted on 03/07/2004 1:34:43 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii
Yes. Very good book. Required reading.
2 posted on 03/07/2004 2:41:02 PM PST by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii
President Richard Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were interested in China as a counterweight to Soviet Russia; the Clinton administration is interested in China's markets,...

Interesting, for President Nixon is known for opening up relations with China. A feat which has left Presidents before him envious.

I do recall how awestruck I was in '98 while visiting Beijing, as to the massive infrastructure construction going on and chocking it up to the lessons learned by the Chinese after the merging of Hong Kong with the mainland.

3 posted on 03/07/2004 2:57:28 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
I wouldn't consider it a result of merging with Hong Kong at all.

The book talks about how the Chinese play America, and how each administration handles it.

Anyway read the book and you can see for yourself how 'personalities' ruled the day regarding China.

4 posted on 03/07/2004 3:04:41 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
He has no mercy on anyone really. Which is right.
5 posted on 03/07/2004 3:06:04 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii
I wouldn't consider it a result of merging with Hong Kong at all.

Why so?

After all, comparing the prosperity of Hong Kong, as seen just by the skyline shown, to the prosperity of "mainland China" as seen by the skyline shown on the mainland and then some, what would prompt you to think the merging of Hong Kong with the mainland hasn't had an effect on the prosperity of China?

6 posted on 03/07/2004 3:22:35 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
I was in China and all over the place long before Hong Kong came under 'mainland' control. I was also in China and all over after the handover.

If anything the actual handover has made Hong Kong MUCH more worse off...and much more full of problems, economic and otherwise.

People talk trash about how everyone is reliant on China, but Hong Kong's economic linkages are in some ways tied to China and in others not. Hong Kong was making money off of China at a distance...and because of its special position before the handover.

China has started to develop from the inside out, regardless of Hong Kong. Some Chinese went overseas (to Hong Kong and Australia and the US and Canada, and elsewhere..) and came home with a dose of reality for the folks. China realized it was ass backwards long before they took the reigns of Hong Kong.

We can talk about how Hong Kong and China are linked economically and how that fits into the global supply chain...and how exactly China is developing...That would be a much better conversation and would also answer your questions...

7 posted on 03/07/2004 3:31:57 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
Hong Kong during the initial years of the China boom did rely on China...but at arms length. They were used as a seperate, but independent base of operations for MANY multinationals going into China.

Hong Kong was seperate. It was a place where one could do what they wanted and have legal protection, as well as free speech, and business protection. Hence the main base of financial operations (Hong Kong has an open and developed banking system that doesn't really discriminate)...

The fear now is that many of the previous freedoms are now being eroded. Hence, Hong Kong is losing value in more ways than one.

Many in China actually WANT to see Hong Kong as being 'put in their place'. They want them to be 'subdued'. Hong Kong people and mainlanders are not known for getting along. Same with Taiwan.

Mainlanders have been viewed as backwards, stupid, commie loving, propaganda driven idiots. They have literally been considered as second class by those from Hong Kong. Hence, many in the mainland see the demise of Hong Kong as poetic justice.

8 posted on 03/07/2004 3:41:32 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii
Hong Kong was seperate.

Yes and the shock of driving on the right side of a vehicle to having to drive on the left has left most Hong Kong residence in a fit of frustration getting used to the backward thinking while visiting the mainland.

9 posted on 03/07/2004 4:02:06 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
Here is a direct Nixon quote from the book that I think applies today:

"Any American policy towards Asia must come urgently to grips with the reality of China...Taking the long view, we simply cannot afford to leave China forever outside the family of nations, there to nuture its fantasies, cherish its hates and threaten its neighbors. There is no place on this small planet for a billion of its potentially most able people to live in angry isolation...The world cannot be safe until China changes. Thus, our aim, to the extent we can influence events, should be to induce change."

Richard Nixon "Asia After Vietnam", Foreign Affairs, vol 46, Oct. 1967, p 121.

10 posted on 03/07/2004 4:08:54 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii
Thus, our aim, to the extent we can influence events, should be to induce change."

And we have.

Our financial super power status has given China food for thought, augmented with the realities of what Hong Kong has shown them.

11 posted on 03/07/2004 4:20:25 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
I think your evaluation is 180 degrees off...

Hong Kong used to be the membrane through which China and the World exchanged just about everything - intelligence, goods, political positions, and on and on.

Today it is a small piece of greater China, one that nearly every mainlander resents.

China has not found food for thought in US economic (or any other)strength - other than to define it as a threat.

Bottom line: "China" is too vast, too diverse, and too backward to be governed. It must either be controlled, manipulated, or divided. Every government that has claimed to rule historic or present day China has done so by combining the first two with readily defined means for local management to line their pockets aided by centrally devised law and force to enforce the system.
12 posted on 03/07/2004 5:35:38 PM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson