Read on Twitter
I second this reply to @thomaswright08& #39;s article in @TheAtlantic, where he takes on our arguments in @NYTOpinion. I also add that Wright& #39;s Europe story is not, in fact, self-evidently correct. He argues Europe& #39;s cooperative stance toward China has failed & shouldn& #39;t be emulated. https://twitter.com/stephenwertheim/status/1264568600024809475">https://twitter.com/stephenwe...
But his chronology & causal connections are unclear. He seems to attribute all bad things China has done since the pandemic& #39;s start to Europe& #39;s allegedly weak strategy, while mentioning not one thing China has done right or how that could have resulted from Europe& #39;s strategy.
Some of the bad PRC behaviors he points to are much more obviously responses to America& #39;s nonsensically belligerent stance in the crisis. E.g. he refers to how some PRC officials promoted the conspiracy theory that the virus originated from a US Army lab--but this was likely
a response to how prominent US politicians (e.g. @SenTomCotton) & media were suggesting it leaked from a Chinese biosecurity lab. Wright also ignores how PRC tamped down such narratives in late March after US & China agreed diplomatically to deescalate. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2020/04/03/us-must-recognize-that-china-is-not-a-monolith-covid-19/">https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2020/04/0...
More notably, the reality is sometimes foreign countries& #39; strategies have limited effect in shaping outcomes when there& #39;s acute domestic pressure in target country outweighing them. CCP leadership is under immense pressure internally in wake of China& #39;s greatest crisis in decades.
This is leading the Chinese government to behave in less "responsible" ways internationally than has been their norm and than their grand strategy dictates. See https://twitter.com/baggottcarter/status/1255231690852663300">https://twitter.com/baggottca...
When the motive for China& #39;s bad behavior is domestic insecurity, it& #39;s unclear how a confrontational strategy promotes better outcomes. More likely, it will exacerbate the dynamic by heightening internal insecurity & playing into the nationalist propaganda of the party apparatus.
Of course, it& #39;s very important to call out the bad behavior, but likely more effective to do so by appealing publicly to China& #39;s better angels rather than attacking its demons, coupled with stern private diplomatic signals. See advice from @ryanl_hass: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/03/19/the-us-and-china-need-to-relearn-how-to-coordinate-in-crises/">https://www.brookings.edu/blog/orde...
Perhaps even more egregiously, Wright ignores any good things China has done, including providing substantial medical aid abroad, participating in multilateral vaccine efforts with Europe and others, and agreeing to a WHO investigation. Many hawks have dismissed these as efforts
by China to deflect attention from its failures in managing the outbreak, neutralize blowback for the pandemic originating there, & bolster PRC soft power. But of course those are their motives! That& #39;s why states do what they do: to enhance their power & promote their interests.
The best case outcome in IR is when states seek to promote their power & interests through positive-sum behavior. When China is attacked for being devious for such pro-social behaviors, it makes them feel they can& #39;t win, strengthening the hands of the so-called "Wolf Warriors."
In this case, it& #39;s plausible that China& #39;s positive behaviors--such as cooperating with Europe in vaccine development and agreeing to a WHO investigation--were at least partially caused, or at least facilitated, by Europe’s strategy of engagement with Beijing.
Though even here, I think that& #39;s just part of the story. The bigger picture is that China& #39;s aspiration to be seen as a responsible global leader is central to its grand strategy. China, authoritarian though it is domestically, is not seeking power through a strategy of autarky.
It is seeking power thru international trade, investment, & diplomacy. China knows it must be seen as legitimate internationally or such a strategy will encounter costly friction & resistance. So although they do not feel it necessary to abide by "Western" norms, and they seek,
