Policy Alert #200 | December 30, 2019

The year 2019 was a tumultuous one for the Rising Powers. China and the United States waged a war of words and economics as trade negotiations dragged on until December, India faced an unprecedented flare up in tensions with neighboring Pakistan early in the year from which relations have still to recover, and Japan’s attempts to normalize its relations with Russia over disputed island territories proved unsuccessful. They collectively faced major US foreign policy changes, such as its escalation in antagonizing Iran and withdrawal from Syria. In the last few weeks, China and India have been rattled with major political protests which have complicated their foreign relations, while Japan and Russia again handled another snag in their territorial dispute. On the other hand, China and Japan have managed to finalize their trade agreements with the US, and Russia has just put its first hypersonic missile regiment into service. In this RPI Policy Alert, we review how the Rising Powers stand as they head into 2020.

 

CHINA

For China, the end of 2019 has been marked with a number of reprisals by Western countries. Protests in Hong Kong, concern over “re-education camps” for ethnic minority Uyghurs in Xinjiang, and renewed demonstrations of support for Tibet appear to have eroded diplomatic gains from maintaining support for free trade agreements and overshadowed the conclusion of a new trade deal with the United States. In a statement to commemorate International Human Rights Day earlier this month, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo criticized China: “The Chinese government continues to repress members of religious and ethnic minority groups in Xinjiang, Tibet, and elsewhere, as well as to undermine the freedoms guaranteed to Hong Kongers under the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law. […] In order for countries such as China, Iran, Syria, and Venezuela to regain moral authority in the eyes of freedom-loving nations, they must rededicate themselves to protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms.” The US House Committee on Foreign Relations also passed the Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2019. The European Parliament adopted a resolution condemning China’s treatment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang that includes potential “targeted sanctions and freeze assets […] against the Chinese officials responsible for severe repression of basic rights in Xinjiang.” At a press conference, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Hua Chunying responded to Secretary Pompeo’s comments: “What the US says reminds me of the foolish emperor in Andersen’s fairy tale ‘the Emperor’s New Clothes’. It cannot be more ironic that a naked man is so proud of his imaginary clothes. The US today is in no position to talk about human rights or morality with China.” Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang provided a similar rebuttal to the European Parliament’s resolution: “[S]ince Xinjiang affairs are domestic affairs, we firmly oppose the interference of anyone or any force under the pretext of Xinjiang-related issues. I believe Xinjiang residents and other Chinese people have greater say in Xinjiang’s actual situation than those who live in Europe and have never been to Xinjiang.”

 

• The state-supported China Daily responded to foreign countries’ scrutiny of the Chinese government’s response to unrest in Hong Kong with a pointed comparison of how the same countries are relatively silent on the Indian government’s crackdown on protesters: “[T]here has so far been little, if not no response at all from the self-claimed human rights guardians in the West in regard to what is happening in Assam. […] But then, in the eyes of the West, India remains the world’s largest democracy and shares the same values with the West. China, on the other hand, is an ‘undemocratic’ country and therefore anything it does is fair target for defamation and denigration.”
• The nationalist Global Times similarly condemned the “double standard” against China regarding its treatment of protestors.
• The independent South China Morning Post took stock of China’s recent foreign policy gains and losses and concluded: “China has grown more confident about its international presence and is now willing to confront foreign criticism and media reporting perceived as biased or unfair. But that more forceful approach is putting at risk its considerable investment in improving its image through soft power promotion of language, culture and the arts and boosting exchanges of people. […] For the sake of perception, Beijing needs to be more mindful of getting the right balance.”

 

INDIA

Despite its diplomatic successes this year, India has similarly faced scrutiny in the wake of the passage of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA, previously referred to as the Citizenship Amendment Bill or CAB), which provides that “any person belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan” who arrived in the country before December 31, 2014, will not be treated as an illegal migrant. The passage of the CAA and the proposal of a National Register of Citizens (NRC) resulted in massive protests across India as the actions were seen as efforts by the ruling BJP government to marginalize Muslims and undermining the secular foundation of the Indian constitution. In response, the Indian government suspended internet access in some areas and cracked down on protestors, resulting in more than 1,500 arrests and at least twenty-two deaths. While India’s “2+2” Foreign and Defence Secretary Dialogues with Australia and the US were completed earlier this month, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, leader of the fourth corner of the Indo-Pacific “security diamond,” postponed his planned trip to India and meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi due to security concerns in the wake of the protests. Even the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) rebuked India’s actions, prompting a terse response from Ministry of External Affairs Spokesperson Raveesh Kumar: “The position articulated by USCIRF is not surprising given its past record. It is, however, regrettable that the body has chosen to be guided only by its prejudices and biases on a matter on which it clearly has little knowledge and no locus standi.” Prime Minister Modi took to Twitter to call for calm: “I want to unequivocally assure my fellow Indians that CAA does not affect any citizen of India of any religion. No Indian has anything to worry regarding this Act. This Act is only for those who have faced years of persecution outside and have no other place to go except India.”

 

• The left-leaning Hindu criticized the government’s response to the unrest: “[S]ince 2015, [internet] shutdowns have been rising — 134 in 2018 — and the NDA [National Democratic Alliance] seems unwilling to change course. It seems to matter little that blunt interventions make the ambitious goal of growing into a $5-trillion economy even more unrealistic, or that India is losing face as a democracy because it chooses to sit with authoritarian regimes. That is the wrong road to take.” 
• The liberal Hindustan Times condemned the government’s handling of the protests as a “great harm to India’s democratic stability and its international image.” The Indian Express, another liberal paper, argued that “the world’s largest democracy cannot look like it cannot accommodate its young who disagree, it cannot afford to signal that it is so ill at ease with itself.”
• The pro-government Daily Pioneer carried an op-ed by conservative commentator Swapan Dasgupta who argued that the CAB was “not regressive.”
• The center-right Times of India highlighted the effects of international condemnation of the CAB and voiced its support for peaceful protests. The Times also argued that while the “2+2” between India and the US demonstrated that New Delhi and Washington are moving forward in their strategic partnership, their economic relationship remains out-of-step in the wake of US tariffs: “To make the India-US relationship the defining partnership of the century, a comprehensive trade deal must be expedited.”

 

JAPAN

The Japanese press has focused on Japan’s apparent hypocrisy in its efforts to reduce carbon emissions in the wake of the stunning outcries at the United Nations Climate Summit. Although Japan was a leading force for reducing emissions at the time of the adoption of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, it has become increasingly reliant on coal and natural gas for energy after the triple disaster in March 2011 led to reduction of nuclear power production. The end of 2019 also brought a frustrating complication to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s efforts to normalize relations with Russia as twenty-one Japanese fishing vessels were seized in disputed territory north of Hokkaido. In response to questions about the government’s efforts to have the ships released, Minister of Foreign Affairs Toshimitsu Motegi explained: “Currently, the people in charge of negotiations for both sides are seeking a mutually-acceptable solution. […] I will persistently conduct negotiations under the basic policy of fundamentally resolving the attributions [sic] issue and concluding a peace treaty”. The issue of the ships remained unresolved at the meeting between Minister Motegi and Minister Lavrov, however, the ships were later released on December 24 after paying fines to the Russian government for overfishing. In another diplomatic upset, Prime Minister Abe’s planned trip to India was postponed due to security concerns related to on-going protests.

 

• The progressive Asahi Shimbun lobbed critiques of the Abe administration’s refusal to cooperate with opposition leaders on terms of the US-Japan trade deal concluded earlier this year. The Asahi Shimbun also called for a reassessment of current plans to deploy Aegis Ashore defense systems purchased from the US in Akita and Yamaguchi Prefectures: “The Abe administration is eager to introduce the Aegis Ashore systems at least partly because of strong pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump for Tokyo’s purchases of many expensive U.S.-made weapons. But it is vital for Japan to make its own cool-headed, well-reasoned decisions concerning the plan. The nation’s fiscal crunch demands that the government evaluates afresh the appropriateness and effectiveness of the plan more rigorously.”
• The liberal Mainichi criticized the government’s vague proposals to reduce its coal-fired power generation program at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Madrid earlier this month: “Japan must not settle for the status quo, but instead opt for a path in which it can strive to achieve the goal of phasing out of coal-fired power. That is the minimum responsibility that an advanced country ought to fulfill.” Noting increased instability in the region with North Korea and China, the Mainichi nevertheless questioned the government’s large purchases of defense equipment from the US without any prior plans of how to use it: “The United States, which has strengthened its policy of putting itself first, is therefore likely to demand that its allies bear a heavier military burden. […] But officials should realize that Japan’s ad hoc responses to such demands are reaching their limit.”

• • The centrist Japan Times called for a reassessment of Japan’s efforts to reduce the carbon emissions of its energy production through the use of nuclear energy: “The government should take the cue from the slow restart of nuclear reactors to review its energy plan and place greater emphasis on renewable energy. […] The government needs to make an honest assessment of the situation surrounding nuclear power in this country and reconsider whether its nuclear energy plan is feasible.”

 

• The conservative Yomiuri Shimbun argued that the issue with the increased defense spending was the government’s unwillingness to negotiate for better terms with the US: “The [Ministry of Defense] must negotiate with Washington tenaciously to work toward lowering acquisition prices, besides getting commissions reduced or exempted.”

 

 

RUSSIA

Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov visited the US to meet with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Following the meeting, Minister Lavrov reported that despite the increased tensions between the two countries, “[W]e agreed that it would not be the right thing to do to put our relations on the backburner, suspend or postpone contacts on the key issues the world is facing today. We are ready to engage in practical efforts on all matters of mutual interest and act proactively as long as it suits our American partners.” Responding to a question about the possible renewal of the New START Treaty to reduce offensive arms between the two states, Lavrov responded: “President Vladimir Putin has recently reaffirmed yet again Russia’s readiness to agree to an extension for the New START Treaty in order to ease international tension over the termination of the last arms control instrument between the Russian Federation and the United States. We are ready to do so even today. The ball is in the court of our US partners.” Lavrov’s visit coincided with the impeachment proceedings in the US House of Representatives, and in response to reports that House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff criticized the closed-door format of the meeting with Pompeo, Lavrov quipped: “[T]he Russian media were not allowed to attend either, so it was not just about the US media. If [House Intelligence Committee Chair] Adam Schiff describes routine contacts between foreign ministers and the fact that a visiting foreign minister was received by the host country’s president as a ‘triumph of Russian diplomacy,’ maybe the next thing we know is that our diplomats, like our athletes, are being accused of taking dope and are then prosecuted.”

 

Following his meeting with Japanese Foreign Affairs Minister Toshimitsu Motegi, Minister Lavrov updated the press regarding Russia’s position on the issue of the Japanese fishing vessels: “We have touched upon issues related to the implementation of the 1998 Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of Japan on Certain Issues related to the Harvesting of Living Marine Resources. We asked our Japanese neighbours to take measures through their relevant government agencies to ensure that Japanese fishermen strictly abide by this Agreement and refrain from contravening the declared and permitted catch volumes.”

 

Russia had much to say regarding the summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in London earlier this month, as well. Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova called for the security alliance to change course: “Covering its connivance with Washington’s scrapping of the INF Treaty, the Alliance continues to spread unproven accusations against Russia and to avoid meeting Russia halfway in its efforts to maintain predictability and restraint in the missile area. The European countries’ acquiescence to this destructive US approach only encourages Washington’s purported plans to deploy intermediate- and shorter-range missiles, which is fraught with the obvious risk of destabilising the situation and an arms race in Europe and other regions.” The Russian military closed out the year with an announcement that its first regiment of Avangard hypersonic missile systems “assumed duty” on December 27th.

 

• While the government-supported media outlets avoided discussing domestic issues, columnists for the independent Moscow Times pointed to potential cracks in support for the Russian government. Leonid Bershidsky, Bloomberg Opinion’s Europe columnist and founding editor of Russian business daily Vedomosti, for example, argued that this last year has demonstrated that Putin is “increasing reliance on the stick as the carrot harvest fails to come in.”
• In another Moscow Times op-ed, Konstantin Gaaze, sociologist as guest expert at the Moscow Carnegie Center, and Alexandra Prokopenko, an independent journalist and former columnist at Vedomosti, were pessimistic about the potential for the Russian economy to grow given its performance this year: “There is no point in hoping that an improved economic situation on global markets will help to lift the Russian economy out of its stagnation in the next few years: on the contrary, external markets are where the main economic risks are coming from.”

RPI acknowledges support from the MacArthur Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York for its activities.