The Trump administration and China: policy continuity or transformation?

ABSTRACT

The long-run consequences of the Trump presidency on US foreign policy have been a subject of debate. Policy towards China is one arena in which observers have argued that Trump's impact has been significant and is likely to outlast him. Indeed, it might be considered transformational. Many of the commentaries have, however, been largely anecdotal. So as to provide a more rigorous analysis of policy transformation we employ a previously developed framework that focuses on ideational shifts, the development of new or reconfigured interests that are allied to a particular policy, and institutional changes as a basis for change to be considered transformational and thereby enduring. Applying these criteria to Trump's China policy we argue that while there has been a paradigmatic change structured around the embrace of “strategic competition”, there have been some, but rather more limited, shifts in the character of interest configurations and institutional structures. We nonetheless conclude that while policy transformation is incomplete the changes that the Trump White House wrought have been profound and are very likely to shape the actions of future administrations.

KEYWORDS:

• Trump
• China
• policy transformation
• paradigms
• interests
• institutions

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 For an overview of the recent literature see Brazys, Kaarbo, and Panke (2017).

2 There are no clear dividing lines and some of the policy shifts, including a partial redeployment of naval capabilities, associated with the Pivot dated back to George W Bush’s second term (Rolf 2021).

3 The decision to begin the negotiations that would lead to the TPP was originally taken by the Bush administration in February 2008 (Fergusson and Vaughn 2011, 1).

4 The December 2017 National Security Strategy Document referred to the “Indo-Pacific” eleven times and the “Asia-Pacific” just once (The White House 2017).

5 In 2021 Secretary of State Mike Pompeo became a distinguished fellow at the Hudson Institute although it should be noted that Henry Kissinger, who is reportedly seen by China as a “reliable friend and a trusted interlocutor”, is also affiliated (Rogin 2021a, 5).

6 There were exceptions. Some attached to the Cato Institute, the free-market thinktank, questioned the claim that tariffs would induce structural reform in China and saw “decoupling” as dangerous insofar as it detached China from the constraints imposed by the logic of economic necessity (Carpenter 2020).

7 The concept of a logic of action refers to the clusters of goals, predispositions and purposes that shape the way in which actors select and structure their preferences. It thus rests upon a generalized and fundamental set of sentiments (Etienne and Schnyder 2014, 367; Streeck and Thelen 2005, 18).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Edward Ashbee

Edward Ashbee is a professor with special responsibilities in American politics and policy in the Department of International Economics, Government and Business at Copenhagen Business School. His recent work includes The Right and the Recession (Manchester University Press, 2015), The Trump Revolt (Manchester University Press, 2017) and articles considering western policy responses to Chinese initiatives such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Belt & Road Initiative. He also co-authored (with Steven Hurst) an overall assessment of foreign policy change during the Trump years (“The Trump foreign policy record and the concept of transformational change”, Global Affairs, 2020 6 (1): 5–19.)

Steven Hurst

Steven Hurst is Reader in Politics at Manchester Metropolitan University in the United Kingdom. His research interests are US foreign policy toward the Middle East and aspects of Foreign Policy Analysis. He is the author of The United States and the Iranian Nuclear Programme (Edinburgh University Press, 2018) as well as four other books and various articles and chapters on US foreign policy. He is currently working on a variety of projects related to understanding the dynamics of foreign policy change.