James Daly’s Post

Allianz, Atlantik-Brücke e.V., the American Council on Germany, and Edelman surveyed 4,000 Americans and Germans, exploring their views on U.S.-German relations and global challenges. Participants in both countries believe that trust in business sets a higher standard for accomplishing more. Dive into the full findings below. 👇

At the 2024 German American Conference in Washington, DC, we announced our findings from “The State of Trust and the US-German Partnership: A Transatlantic Survey”.   A collaboration between Allianz, Atlantik-Brücke e.V., the American Council on Germany and Edelman DXI, we surveyed 4,000 Americans and Germans about their confidence in U.S.-German relations as well as their views on the global challenges facing both countries.   Due to concerns about a lack of willingness to compromise, extremism, and socio-economic issues, both nations trust in the stability of their relationship less today than two years ago.   But expectations in the partnership remain high. Most agreed that the relationship is crucial for the world’s stability and how each nation could rekindle trust in the other, including firm action on Ukraine and promoting fair trade.   For Germany and the U.S., business was found to be the most trusted institution. Germans and Americans expect their governments to lean on business about issues such as socio-economic security, climate change, and human rights.   To discover more insights about this intersection of international relations, read the report’s full findings here: https://lnkd.in/eubBczC5     #Trust #Allianz

In an insightful contribution to The American Conservative, Rob York, our Director for Regional Affairs, delves into the subtleties of Australia's current diplomatic posture towards China. 🇦🇺🇨🇳 With the Labor Party advocating for a "stabilization" in relations, York's analysis provides a critical lens on what this shift means for the broader Indo-Pacific strategy. This article is a must-read for anyone keen on understanding the evolving dynamics of international relations and security. Read more: https://lnkd.in/gj8gbFjm #PacificForum #Geopolitics #AustraliaChina #IndoPacificStrategy #TheAmericanConservative

"When U.S. leaders press Chinese leaders to permit “competition” to be the conceptual basis for their countries’ relationship, they are drawing on a specific conception of what competition entails, one based on the ideals envisioned by classical democratic liberalism. In this vision—core to the liberal tradition of political philosophy—political competition is competitive in the sense of a sporting match: a contest of ideas that may be waged with great passion but that, at the end of the day, can be resolved peaceably, even amicably. Both competitors know the outcome is not final and the loser has the right to return and compete again. Political competition is, if not a game, at least not a matter of life or death. This understanding of competition could not differ more from the vision of politics held by Xi and the CCP leadership. While the modern CCP has tried to leave behind aspects of Mao Zedong’s legacy—by reforming and opening the economy after 1979 and loosening its collectivist ambitions—Mao’s Marxist-Leninist view of political “competition” remains central to its thinking. This vision presented politics as precisely the life-or-death struggle the democratic liberal ideal claims it is not. In this view, political competition is a raw struggle for power between groups or factions that can only be a prelude to the eradication of one’s competitor; indeed, the history of Leninist politics in China is replete with purges, prison camps, and political murders. As Mao framed it, political competition comes down to “Ni si; wo huo” (You die; I live)."

McLarty Associates Senior Advisor Wendy Cutler’s deep experience on the front lines of the US-China economic relationship is why she is one of POLITICO China Watcher’s "all-star cast of expert contributors." Here are her thoughts on what lies ahead in 2024. "2024 will be the year to see whether U.S.-China economic and trade relations can stabilize, even as both countries look to reduce reliance on one another. With both Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo planning to visit China again and their respective staffs meeting with Chinese counterparts in newly established working groups, there will be an effort to put the economic relationship on a better footing. But this is far from a given in light of domestic pressures in both capitals." https://lnkd.in/e99mgZH4

Some claim that the recent raft of American business delegations circling through Beijing indicates that the PRC has a genuine interest in resetting relations with the U.S. I doubt it. This engagement with tried and true “old friends” like John Thornton and the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations (NCUSCR) delegation last month is likely a gambit by Xi to lower the temperature in U.S.-China relations to water down Western tech curbs and buy time for China's economy to continue its recovery. Important to remember that so much of Xi’s domestic and foreign policy programs are predicated on framing the U.S. as a hostile but fading hegemon bent on suppressing China. #China #USChinaRelations

The recent virtual summit between U.S. President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping was a historic opportunity to address the challenges and opportunities of the U.S.-China relationship, which is vital for global stability and prosperity. However, Biden's unfortunate remark at a later event, calling Xi a "dictator," undermined the positive tone of the summit and raised doubts about the sincerity of his commitment to dialogue and cooperation. This incident highlights the need for respectful and constructive communication between the two leaders, as well as the importance of avoiding inflammatory rhetoric that could escalate tensions and damage trust. Read more about it Here: https://lnkd.in/g-bTR9ub #USChina #VirtualSummit #Diplomacy #Leadership #china #usa #geopolitics

This article from FA examines the Clash of Worldviews between China and the US and how it will impact on attempts by leaders in both countries to find some common ground before the next US election cycle heats up. The essential question is how to bring about cooperation, instead of conflict, when mindsets diverge. The US mindset in regards to China is “managed strategic competition,” a theory that requires both sides to accept the prospect of engaging in sustained and steady strategic competition for the long term, in order to avoid a spiral into conflict. This reflects the very direct, existing US worldview based on individualism that believes that competition is large part of the natural order of how things happen. Competitive orientation on the strategic level can be overtly stated, and cooperation with competitors on some shared challenges on the tactical and operational levels, can still occur in a ‘co-opetition’ framework. This approach to getting things done is alien to the Chinese leadership. Behind closed doors, they acknowledge that strategic competition certainly exists, but believe that stating it as such, has no place in international relations. Such strategic assumptions should remain covert. Instead, Chinese diplomacy prefers flowery formulaic statements on “mutual respect,” “peaceful coexistence,” and “win-win” cooperation: stating that both sides aim to avoid overt conflict, and give face to leaders so they can make decisions on behalf of their citizens to do so. Tough talks should not be played out in the public arena, but kept behind closed doors. China demands the “coexistence” concept out of a deep anxiety regarding how “competition” is defined in by the (CCP)—a view that the U.S. side does not fully understand. These different worldviews underline ideological differences around this definition. In the West, political competition is, if not a game, at least not a matter of life or death. For the Marxist Leninist CCP, political competition involves commitment to a life-or-death struggle and implies that one side or the other will be destroyed.  As China is not really confident of defeating the US, its leadership feels that signing up to a ‘strategic competition’ with the US, will increase the fears of its constituents, and also demands to take all measures to ensure China will win. There is no ‘managed competition’ in the CCP’s ideology, just existential struggle. But it will be hard for the US to compromise by giving up its evangelical universalist liberalism. Where are we heading? Most likely remaining trapped in a tense and uncomfortable rivalry for the foreseeable future, with the mutual desire to avoid outright war serving as the last remaining floor for the relationship. How can Europe and the rest of the world work together to help the US and China find more common ground to share the world - even as their worldviews conflict?

Reflecting on my conversation with Dr. Henry Kissinger. Today, I join many around the world in mourning the loss of Henry Kissinger, a figure whose influence and intelligence shaped global diplomacy. His passing deeply saddens me, as it marks the end of an incredibly important era in history. His death resonates personally with me because of a very memorable meeting I had with him, certainly one I will never forget as we talked of the Rise and Fall of Great Powers (a book by Paul Kennedy that I was holding that sparked our conversation). Our conversation was not only enlightening but also stands as one of the most significant discussions I’ve ever had with one of the most intelligent individuals I’ve met. Among the many insights he shared, one that profoundly resonated with me was his concern over the outsourcing of American production/manufacturing and business processes. He viewed this as not just an economic issue, but a strategic one, posing a significant challenge to the United States’ position in the global arena. His perspective was not just about the economics and assumptions of lower costs of outsourcing but also about maintaining a balance in global interdependencies and preserving national strengths. His concern of American companies chasing cheap labor and short-term profits in exchange for innovative processes and best business practices that are so often the competitive advantages companies hold. This insight remains even more relevant today than it was back then, particularly with the same countries he opened doors to, underscoring the foresight Dr. Kissinger possessed. As we remember Henry Kissinger, let's also reflect on the ways his thoughts and actions have shaped our world. Whether one agreed with him or not, his impact is undeniable. I invite you to share your thoughts on Dr. Kissinger's legacy and his views on global economics, especially the outsourcing trend he cautioned against. How do you see these issues evolving in today's world? #HenryKissinger #globaldiplomacy #economicstrategy #outsourcing #leadership #globaleconomics #reflection

Weekend read: Joe Nye’s latest piece is worth a scan. Nye was former NSC Director. Can China surpass the US? According to Nye, “Former Singaporean prime minister Lee Kuan Yew once told me he did not think China would surpass the US because of the latter’s ability to draw on the talents of the entire world.” In that sense, it’s for the US to lose this century if it misplays its cards. Nonetheless, I wouldn’t underestimate the Chinese abilities to excel in certain areas. Of course, China must play its part too. But to view China through the Western lens of the Cold War with Russia would be a gross mistake. US-China are more interlinked with one another and the rest of world and competitive cooperation would be the best outcome for everyone vs a zero-sum game. That both sides continue to keep their doors open is a step in the right direction. As W Churchill once famously said, “to jaw-jaw is better than war-war”. I’m sure the old boy would agree if he was still around today. #geopolitics #decoupling #derisking #uschinarelations #globalisation #globaloutlook #nationalsecurity #interdependence #foreignpolicy #foreignaffairs