The “China Card” Remains the Core of Translating U.S. Domestic Issues into Foreign Policy

Domestic and foreign policy are never completely separate

Jinghao Zhou

and

The Monitor

Oct 22, 2024

Read this article on our website here.

Dr. Jinghao Zhou is an associate professor of Asian studies at Hobart and William Smith Colleges in New York. His research focuses on contemporary China, and U.S.- China relations. He has published six books and six dozen articles. His latest book is Great Power Competition as the New Normal of China-U.S. Relations (2023).

Since 2008, U.S. presidential elections have been dominated by domestic issues, despite the importance of both domestic and foreign policy. IR commentators have noted that the 2024 election once again downplayed key U.S. foreign policy issues in Asia, with China notably missing from the presidential debate. This suggests that the “China card” is not as effective in this U.S. election.

However, the absence of China as a primary concern does not necessarily mean that the China issue is less important to the United States. Competing with China remains central to U.S. national security and foreign policy, reflecting mainstream American public opinion, bipartisan consensus in Congress, and the focus of the U.S. president. Biden’s remarks at the Quad summit indicate that China policy will continue to be a top national security concern.

Current Landscape

The focus of American voters on domestic issues reflects current U.S. realities. Rising prices for everyday goods and services are straining household budgets, making it harder for families to make ends meet. Economic uncertainty, including job security and wage stagnation concerns, has further heightened anxieties. Currently, 50% of Americans identify the economic issues and cost of living as their top concern, even in Democrat-dominated New York. The ongoing dockworkers’ strike will worsen the U.S. economy, increase prices, and significantly impact the tight presidential race.

The American people will largely vote for the best economic plan despite other domestic issues that concern them, as economic stability is the key voter concern. The next U.S. president will need to prioritize addressing these domestic issues and incorporate them into the foreign policy-making process. If Trump is elected, he could compete with China more fiercely and wisely by drawing lessons from his first term.

Moreover, after the 2024 election, the United States could gradually pivot its focus from Europe to Asia, addressing China’s growing challenges in the region while meeting domestic demands. This transition is likely to occur regardless of whether Donald Trump or Kamala Harris is elected, suggesting a significant reallocation of resources and strategic focus, potentially reducing support for NATO and Ukraine. In addition, if Trump is elected, the dynamics between the United States and Russia could shift unpredictably, which could directly impact the competition between the United States and China.

However, China remains unwilling to accept Washington’s competitive view of the U.S.-China relationship. When Xi Jinping met Jack Sullivan in August, he stressed that “the first question to be answered is whether China and the United States are rivals or partners.” China’s view is out of touch with American reality and conflicts with the implementation of its foreign policy toward the United States.

Candidate Perspectives

The top concerns of U.S.-China policy are clear to both nations: China’s role in the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the war between Israel and Hamas, potential crises over the Taiwan Strait and the South and East China Seas, China’s cyberattacks, China’s penetration in U.S. politics, and intellectual property theft. China can anticipate how the United States might respond to these concerns. However, the uncertainty for both countries lies in how the incoming U.S. president will translate major domestic concerns into China policy.

The translation of domestic issues into U.S. foreign policy will largely depend on how the new president interprets the causes of major domestic problems, such as the economy, inflation, health care, and climate change, among the six key issues—economy, inflation, abortion rights, immigration, health care, and climate change—most relevant to U.S.-China policy.

Kamala Harris attributes inflation to supply chain disruptions, high healthcare and housing costs, and insufficient investment in infrastructure and green technologies. She emphasizes that the economic situation is significantly influenced by factors such as corporate greed and systemic issues affecting middle- and working-class families. She points to record profits from major corporations, particularly in the food industry, as evidence of price gouging contributing to inflation. To improve the financial situation of the American middle class, it’s necessary to lower the cost of everyday items, increase access to affordable housing, and raise taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations.

Donald Trump views inflation primarily as a result of trade imbalances and excessive regulation. He believes that high tariffs on Chinese goods will reduce the trade deficit, bring manufacturing back to the United States, and protect American jobs. He also sees U.S. healthcare problems as worsened by his trade war with China, which imposed tariffs on medical supplies, leading to shortages and increased costs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trump proposes higher tariffs on imports to protect American jobs by reducing dependence on foreign goods, alongside cutting regulations to lower consumer costs and implementing tax cuts for American businesses and individuals.

The contrasting interpretations of U.S. domestic issues will directly and significantly influence each leader’s policies and strategies toward China. Overall, Harris primarily advocates for internal solutions, while Trump seeks external ones. Harris’s approach to China will likely emphasize strategic competition and cooperation, aiming to ensure fair trade practices through multilateral agreements and alliances. In contrast, Trump’s strategy takes a confrontational stance, aiming to fundamentally reshape the trade relationship with a strong protectionist trade policy, ultimately leading to economic revitalization and lower inflation for American consumers.

Other Factors Influencing the Translation Process

When Congress guides the direction of U.S. foreign policy, candidates Harris and Trump’s potential cabinet members play crucial roles in translating domestic concerns into foreign policy, as they bring expertise in areas such as trade, defense, and diplomacy. They ensure that domestic priorities, such as economic stability and national security, are reflected in international strategies, fostering coherent and effective policies that address both national interests and global challenges. Understanding the policy orientations of cabinet members will help anticipate the direction of shifts in U.S. foreign policy.

Additional factors, such as the president’s ideology and its family members’ influence, international commitments, and interest groups, will also contribute to the translation of U.S. domestic concerns into its China policy. Harris is expected to emphasize coalition-building among democracies, focusing on competition with China and public pressure for a tough stance on democracy and human rights, particularly regarding Taiwan. However, Harris’s donors, including influential tech executives and nonprofit leaders, could potentially influence her policies if elected. Their financial support and policy interests might lead her to prioritize tech regulations and data privacy aligned with donor interests over progressive policies advocated by activists, such as limiting Big Tech’s power.

If re-elected, former President Donald Trump’s family, particularly Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, may once again play significant roles in influencing his foreign policy. Trump’s “America First” ideology has led to a more confrontational stance. Policies from his first-term administration were often shaped by domestic lobbying interests prioritizing immediate economic concerns over long-term alliances. Trump views Taiwan as a market and a source of semiconductors rather than a critical strategic partner in the region. Trump’s view that “Taiwan is 9,500 miles away” from the United States and “68 miles away from China” raises significant concerns about its impact on the U.S. economy and national interests.

Conclusions

As the 2024 U.S. presidential election approaches, the focus on domestic issues will significantly influence U.S. foreign policy toward China and navigate their complex relationship within the global context, as both countries strategically respond to shifts in leadership and policy. While expecting the U.S.-China conflict not to escalate before the election, it is a critical moment for both nations to explore how the United States translates its domestic concerns into foreign policy, especially toward China, what is in the United States’ best interest in translating its domestic concerns into China policy, how the United States prevents China from exploiting the new president’s weaknesses, and how both nations can exchange policy shifts wisely for long-term stability. Ultimately, the effectiveness of U.S. responses to China’s challenge will depend on how well the new administration balances pressing domestic concerns with strategic foreign policy goals.