[ad_1]
The Trump administration is would have considered sanctions against China in response to Beijing's mass detention of the Uyghur ethnic group in the western province of Xinjiang. This comes after a bipartisan group of lawmakers called the situation a "continuing human rights crisis" and urged the White House to act. Yet, it will take much more than the Congressional letter for President Donald Trump to become an advocate for the human rights of the Uyghurs. He and his advisers will have to be convinced that placing the fate of Chinese Muslims above other elements of US-China relations would clearly serve the president's agenda.
The situation in Xinjiang certainly constitutes a serious abuse of human rights. According to the United Nations, up to One million civilians are being held in internment camps on the pretext that the Uyghurs, by their very existence as a distinct ethnic and cultural group, pose a threat to China's national security. Journalists and human rights observers report cases of forced displacement, physical and psychological torture, family separations and other atrocities. The magnitude of hell is hard to understand. But none of this means that President Trump will answer Beijing with a firm hand. In fact, the biggest likelihood is that Trump will not punish or even criticize China too harshly – if it does it at all.
In some ways, of course, it seems painfully overdetermined that President Trump will not make human rights a defining element of the US-China relationship. Who in their minds would expect that Donald Trump, a man who once called for "a total and complete stop of Muslims entering the United States", would it be willingly tempted to defend the Muslim minorities of China? Trump made it clear that the era of US officials giving lectures to other countries on how to organize their internal affairs ended on January 20, 2017. In any case, Trump congratulated the President Xi Jinping for his authoritarian style.
In contrast, Trump is more than capable of policy reversals and surprises. His decision to launch air strikes twice against the regime in Syria, for example, has encountered previous statements that the United States should not be involved in the country's civil war. Perhaps in particular, the first of these strikes would have occurred after Trump saw disturbing images of children dying from a chemical attack, which convinced him of the need to take decisive action against the government. barbaric "of Bashar al-Assad. Similarly, could Trump be shown images of Uyghurs detained by the Chinese authorities and conclude that America has a moral obligation to act? This is not a totally unthinkable result, especially since the president has already shown an interest in exacerbating China for other issues such as Taiwan and trade.
Be that as it may, domestic politics will play an important role in the president's response to the Uyghur crisis. Like its predecessors, Trump will take the temperature of the national opinion on China before deciding on its next steps. If the suffering of the Uyghurs presents a significant political advantage, Trump and his advisers will seize the opportunity to beat Beijing with the human rights stick – for cynical reasons, if not for real concern. But if the risks of frustrating Beijing outweigh the expected benefits, the White House will behave accordingly. To date, this last result seems most likely.
The reality is that relations between the United States and China are complex and multifaceted. From trade and investment to arms control and security competition in the Western Pacific, there are countless issues that Washington and Beijing are forced to count on each other. Many of these problems are difficult to say the least. Only a few can be prioritized at a time. US leaders must therefore choose the style of their approach to China, usually keeping in mind what they are trying to achieve, both domestically and globally.
Some presidents wanted to give China an unequivocal negative light in order to guarantee the support of a broader foreign policy agenda. This was the case with President Truman, who pointed out the threat posed by Chinese Communism to strengthen support for the broader containment strategy. Other times, the presidents have drawn attention to the benefits of cooperation with China in the hope of gathering national support for Beijing's commitment. Both George HW Bush and Bill Clinton have sought to define the US-China economic relationship in terms of a positive sum, while President Obama has often described Beijing as an indispensable (if not stubborn) partner in tackling global challenges such as climate change.
Human rights have been an important feature of relations between the United States and China. Between 1980 and 2000, China's most favored nation trade status was subordinated to an annual assessment of Beijing's human rights record, which led to a ritualized (and humiliating) annual reprimand of Chinese leaders in the US Congress and in the media, especially after the massacre of the Tiananmen Square in 1989. In 1992 office promising to be severe towards the "butchers of Beijing". At that time, brandishing the sword of human rights seemed to be a good way to score political points at home and bring about political reforms in China.
