We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Xi Jinping's solution to his "Taiwan problem"
"Xi has made it clear he plans to go solve the Taiwan problem while he's still in office." That's New York Times national security correspondent and New Cold Wars author David Sanger on why China's leader is setting his sights on the slender island off its eastern coast. Xi Jinping has made no secret of his belief that Taiwan belongs to China and that it is a national security imperative to bring it under Chinese sovereignty. But it's also an American national security imperative to prevent Xi from doing so, says Sanger. That's because the small island nation still manufactures the vast majority of the critical semiconductor microchips that power our modern world in both China and the United States.
"What Biden has done here in the semiconductor field of trying to choke the Chinese of the most advanced chips, but also the equipment to make those chips while trying to build up here, is the right step." At the same time, however, the Biden administration's push to manufacture more chips in the United States may also imperil the "silicon shield" that currently protects Taiwan from its Chinese neighbor. Nevertheless, Sanger argues that it's not just an industrial imperative for the United States to become self-sufficient in this area. It's a national defense imperative one as well."For our long-term security, it is much more important to build those [semiconductor factories] fabs than it is to build those aircraft carriers."
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
US TikTok ban: China’s complaints are a double standard
Beijing blocks US technology companies like Facebook, Google, and X from operating in China. So why is the Chinese government so upset over the proposed TikTok ban in Congress? US Ambassador to China Nick Burns discussed China’s double standard when it comes to foreign tech firms on GZERO World with Ian Bremmer. The US has been pushing for TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to sell the app’s US operation, and millions of nationalist netizens on Chinese social media are decrying it as another example of the US limiting China’s global rise.
Burns says the idea that American firms could operate in China by following Chinese data and national security laws isn’t a convincing argument because a wide swath of US tech has been blocked for years, and China’s “Great Firewall” was set up to insulate Chinese people from the rest of the world. China’s rationale for US tech companies’ absence in China, he says, is fundamentally anti-democratic.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
China shouldn’t “coerce or intimidate” the Philippines in the South China Sea, says US Ambassador
Tensions are rising between China and the Philippines over control of the South China Sea, which Beijing sees as its territory, and Manila as its exclusive economic zone. On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, US Ambassador Nick Burns explained the US position that it is concerned about China’s aggression in the South China Sea, particularly at Second Thomas Shoal, a submerged reef where Manila deliberately beached a ship in 1999 and has used as a military outpost ever since.
“China should not seek to coerce or intimidate the government of the Philippines at Second Thomas Shoal,” Burns stresses, “The Philippines has an absolute right to resupply their forces.”
Burns emphasizes broad international support for the Philippines’ rights in the area, referencing the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty between Washington and Manila. Tensions in the region have escalated sharply since Chinese and Philippine coast guard vessels collided in early March, injuring four Filipino crew members. Burns says China needs to act responsibly and commit to a peaceful resolution on the issue.Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
US aims to maintain military advantage over China by controlling tech
“In critical areas, essential for our national security, we're not going to permit trade,” Burns says, “There's a lot of complaints that I receive from my Chinese counterparts about our de-risking strategy, and I remind them you're doing the same thing.”
Prohibiting the sale of semiconductors isn’t about limiting China’s economy or tech industry, but about maintaining America’s advantage in the race for military development. Burns points to growing tensions in the Indo-Pacific, where the US is keenly interested in maintaining military superiority, and says that so far Washington’s action has been limited to a small yard. Limiting chip exports, he says, is the only way to prevent Chinese leadership from acquiring powerful technologies that could tip the balance of power.Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
Where the US & China agree - and where they don't
“This is largely a competitive relationship,” Burns tells Bremmer. It’ll likely be a systemic rivalry well into the 2030s between the two largest economies in the world and the two strongest militaries in the world, so what happens here is very consequential.”
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
Ian Explains: Xi Jinping's nationalist agenda is rebuilding walls around China
On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer breaks down how Xi Jinping is turning China inwards at a time when it can’t afford to close itself off. Since assuming the presidency in 2012, Xi has consolidated power within the Communist Party to become China’s most dominant ruler since Chairman Mao Zedong. Under Xi’s watch, China has rolled back democratic rights in Hong Kong, implemented crackdowns on the powerful tech, finance, and real estate sectors, restricted English in schools, and even expanded the definition of espionage so broadly that basic interactions with foreigners are viewed as suspect.
President Xi’s nationalist vision has become so dominant that it's written into the Constitution and official history of the People’s Republic. But will that vision make China hostile to the very ideas that fueled its economic transformation in the first place?
Watch the upcoming episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer on US public television (check local listings) and at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld.
(Now former) Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang attends a press conference after talks with his Dutch counterpart Wopke Hoekstra in Beijing.
China's missing foreign minister is out (of a job)
A full month after he vanished from public view, China confirmed the exit of Qin Gang as foreign minister. Qin will be replaced by Wang Yi, who had the job for almost a decade before Qin and is currently the country's most senior diplomat. (Wang also runs foreign policy for the ruling Communist Party, which puts him higher in the CCP pecking order than Qin).
Qin was a rising star who was fast-tracked to the post by Xi Jinping despite a bitter rivalry with Wang. But then he abruptly disappeared, initially for health reasons, as rumors swirled that he was cheating on his wife with a journalist. The Chinese government did not give any reason for his departure.
While the shakeup probably won't have much of an impact on China's foreign policy, which like everything is stage-managed by Xi himself, it might have two spillover effects.
First, with Wang again in charge, Chinese diplomats could feel emboldened to return to aggressive "wolf warrior" rhetoric — right when Beijing is trying to restore dialogue with the US and cool things down with Europe. That said, Wang, 69, will likely only take over the job for one or two years until a suitable replacement is found.
Second, and perhaps more importantly, Qin's departure is (potentially) bad news for his mentor. While state media will quietly sweep the scandal under the rug, the messiness of it all does show that political infighting is still bubbling under the surface even under Xi's tight control of the party. And it highlights one of the main dangers of "Maximum Xi," Eurasia Group's No. 2 top geopolitical risk for 2023: "With few checks and balances left to constrain him and no dissenting voices to challenge his views, Xi's ability to make big mistakes is also unrivaled."
On the one hand, Qin's exit — although probably driven by personal reasons over policy — sure looks like an unforced error by China's leader. On the other, as we've seen with ending zero COVID, Xi also has an uncanny ability to move past screwups very quickly and then act like they never happened.
China brokers deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hello and good Monday morning to everybody. It's Ian Bremmer here, and a Quick Take to kick off your week. Want to talk about China and specifically this big announcement, a breakthrough diplomatic deal negotiated by Xi Jinping, between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Two countries with all sorts of problems between the two proxy wars and major security challenges. When they had the big demonstrations inside Iran against the government, they were blaming the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia for undermining and trying to overthrow the regime. And now instead, you have the Saudi and Iranian foreign ministers meeting together with the Chinese Foreign Minister and signing a trilateral agreement saying that they're going to open formal diplomatic relations within two months.
That's a big deal for a China that historically would have played no leadership role in any major negotiations outside of things that are of critical national security importance in Asia, in their backyard. And here we have Xi Jinping announcing a deal that the Americans, the Europeans, literally played no role in and couldn't play a role. The United States doesn't have diplomatic relations open with Iran. Should be welcomed by the world. It's better for everyone if these two major countries in the region are able to engage diplomatically with each other. But of course, it also shows a more significant footprint for Xi Jinping's China on the global stage. A country that right now has bad relations with the United States, no trust and increasingly heading in a confrontational direction.
Now, this doesn't mean the end of US influence in other areas. If we talk about Asia, for example, it's true the Americans withdrew, were not able to get the Trans-Pacific Partnership done, which would've been a big deal. But the US is utterly critical from the security perspective for all of its allies on the ground. Its building more architecture, particularly in terms of the Quad. And indeed, today you've got Biden meeting with the Australian Prime Minister, with the UK Prime Minister in San Diego, in part because of the August submarine and security agreement. Again, important for Asia in Europe, the US is more important from a security perspective, given the Russian invasion in Ukraine.
But on the Middle East, where the Biden administration doesn't really have a strategic policy, things are very different indeed. The US is on the wrong side of most Middle Eastern countries. From an energy perspective, the United States under Biden talking about a transition away from fossil fuels, but not talking a lot about the fossil fuels that are required to get there. And given that this is the most important economic interest for Gulf producers, you could understand, they don't see themselves as very aligned with the United States there. Where with China, which is increasingly the last country standing in terms of global fossil fuel demand, and the Saudis in particular in terms of inexpensive global fossil fuel supply, that alignment should surprise nobody.
Diplomacy, with the Biden administration saying that the world is increasingly a battle between democracies and autocracies. Well, I mean, if that's the case, I guess the United States doesn't have much to do in the Middle East where there's barely any democracies around, I mean, Israel, and they're hanging on at this point, though Netanyahu is doing what he can to undermine it. And you get beyond that, and where should the Americans be in the Middle East if they're fighting against autocracies? And of course, the Chinese see that as a vacuum created, that is an opportunity for them.
On security, the United States still plays a very important intelligence, military weapon export and strategic alignment, certainly in terms of Qatar, but also the UAE, Saudis and others. But keeping in mind that the Americans withdrew from the Iranian nuclear deal that was supposed to be providing some level of stability and security in the region, the Americans haven't been effective in bringing peace on Yemen, something the Chinese have expressed more interest in recently. And in response to say, Iranian drone strikes on Saudi Arabia, on the UAE, the United States was not acting like much of a strategic ally. For all of those regions, that the level of commitment that the Gulf Arabs see from the United States is open to question. And that meant that they were very happy to see a China that's investing a lot in the region even, yes, with their adversaries, the Iranians saying, "We'll play a role in fostering and brokering peace." The Saudis very interested, the Iranians very interested. Now, you're going to see Beijing host a broader summit for the Gulf Cooperation Council in Beijing. And the Iranians are going to be likely invited to that as long as the GCC can get its head around it. So I think that China's role is structurally becoming far greater. This feels like a very different Middle East than we had in past years, nevermind decades.
And also, we should talk about Russia-Ukraine, where not only have the Chinese put out this 12-point peace plan, which the Russians have said they're interested in, the Ukrainians have not refused, but certainly have problems with. Well, now it looks like Xi Jinping is finally going to have a direct phone call after being pushed, particularly by the Germans, the French, and others to make that happen. Looks like they are going to talk in the coming week and indeed, that Xi Jinping is planning a trip to Moscow to meet with President Putin soon. Big difference between meeting with, as opposed to a call, and of course, big difference between China's strategic partnership with Russia, and Putin and ostensible, performative, nominal recognition of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, which is aligned with the way China feels about Taiwan being a part of mainland China. But doesn't mean the Chinese are going to either condemn the Russians for an illegal invasion, illegal annexations, or try to broker a deal where they leave all of the territory that they have taken illegally since February 24th, nevermind since 2014.
I'm deeply skeptical that the Chinese have a constructive role to play in bringing peace to Russia-Ukraine. But I clearly see that China is in a much better position to align much of the world with a ceasefire and peace in Russia-Ukraine, when they are claiming that the Americans are pushing for escalation by providing all of the military support for Ukraine and by pushing sanctions. Those are completely understandable, and positions I personally support in response to Russia's illegal invasion, but from the perspective of the entire developing world. And I mean everyone, I mean Latin America, Brazil, Mexico, I mean the Middle East, I mean Africa, I mean Southeast Asia, I mean even India, a country that's in principle much more aligned with the US than China on most national security issues. All of these countries generally believe that the Americans are pushing escalation in the war in Russia-Ukraine, and that the Chinese are taking a more constructive position, a position that they are more aligned with. And so this Xi Jinping trip to Moscow is I think going to be much friendlier than one would've expected in the last few months. Really, at any time since the war started on February 24th. May well be more aligned with the joint statement you saw at the Beijing Olympics back in February 4th. And that, of course, is a very deep problem for the United States, especially on the back of Xi Jinping's statements about the US directly that he made just a week ago. Probably the most hawkish direct statements made by a Chinese leader about the US that we've seen in decades.
So, deeply concerning geopolitically, probably the worst week geopolitically the United States has had in years. That's where we are. China's a very big part of it, Russia's a part too, and we'll talk about this. I'm sure very much going forward. Be good. I'll talk to you soon.
- What’s in China's Ukraine peace plan? ›
- Crow on the menu during Biden’s trip to Saudi Arabia ›
- Is Yemen on the road to peace? ›
- How Iran beats Russia at sanctions game ›
- Can Saudi Arabia and Iran really be friends? ›
- What We're Watching: Israel's mega-protest, Iran-Saudi détente, BBC own goal ›
- Ukraine dam sabotage: not enough evidence to speculate - GZERO Media ›
- Saudi-led peace talks on Ukraine ›