Share This

Showing posts with label Bunn Nagara. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bunn Nagara. Show all posts

Saturday, 13 December 2025

Hard to rewrite history

Loose cannon: Takaichi’s war talks have prompted Xi to call Trump to remind him that US and China were allies during WW2. — AFP

Japan’s new gov­ern­ment has had to take a crash course in inter­na­tional dip­lomacy as it learns for­eign policy on the job.

FROM curtailed Chinese tourism revenues to a suspended summit of Chinese, Japanese and South Korean leaders, Tokyo continues to reap the fallout from novice Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s combative style.

Just 17 days into taking office, she unnerved Chinese leaders by suggesting that Japan may attack China if Beijing forcibly reclaimed Taiwan. This was the most extreme declaration by any Japanese leader in decades.

 

Takai­chi’s far-right for­eign policy was not unex­pec­ted given her polit­ical record, but its extent and in com­ing so early in her term raised uncom­fort­able geo­pol­it­ical tem­per­at­ures.

Japan’s liab­il­it­ies in for­eign rela­tions con­tinue to grow, not only with China but also much of Asia dev­ast­ated by its war­time aggres­sion. China reacted most robustly because it suffered Imper­ial Japan’s worst depred­a­tions within liv­ing memory, with tens of mil­lions of civil­ians slaughtered and many more bru­tal­ised.

Unlike Ger­many that has fully atoned for its WWII atro­cit­ies, Japan has not. Takai­chi belongs to an ultrana­tion­al­ist fac­tion of the Lib­eral Demo­cratic Party and is a lead­ing mem­ber of the unre­pent­ant Nip­pon Kaigi (NK) organ­isa­tion that routinely denies Japan’s war crimes and praises its con­victed war crim­in­als as her­oes.

Japan and China may one day fully nor­m­al­ise rela­tions, but not yet. The wounds of war still run deep, their grav­ity fur­ther aggrav­ated by a gov­ern­ment that denies its hor­rors at the highest levels.

Hitler’s Holo­caust still haunts a post­war West that con­tin­ues to

give Israel a blank cheque to do any­thing. Revul­sion at Imper­ial Japan’s even worse mas­sacres in China may take longer to sub­side.

What upsets China fur­ther is Takai­chi’s cava­lier indif­fer­ence to the facts. Most coun­tries includ­ing the US and Japan have long had a one-china policy that does not recog­nise Taiwan as an inde­pend­ent nation, yet Japan’s Com­mon Defence doc­trine she cited for Taiwan applies only to assist­ance for sov­er­eign nations.

This implies that no basis exists for identi­fy­ing Taiwan’s per­ceived secur­ity interests with Japan’s. Even efforts to repu­di­ate Art­icle 9 of Japan’s post­war peace Con­sti­tu­tion through re-inter­pret­a­tion have been denounced by crit­ics as uncon­sti­tu­tional.

Attempts at re-inter­pret­a­tion to allow for greater assert­ive­ness are not widely accep­ted. It remains a highly con­tro­ver­sial issue at home and abroad.

Japan’s hope to become a ‘nor­mal coun­try’ no longer beholden to post­war US tutel­age is neither unreas­on­able nor lim­ited to ultra-con­ser­vat­ives, provided it can acknow­ledge its own past, recog­nise cur­rent real­it­ies and engage its neigh­bours fully with ‘nor­mal’ trust and con­fid­ence. That can­not hap­pen with revi­sion­ist lead­ers who are polit­ic­ally unre­formed and his­tor­ic­ally delu­sional bent on rewrit­ing his­tory.

Takai­chi’s state­ment about pos­sibly attack­ing a China that has not attacked it is reason enough for wide­spread alarm. Japan did pre­cisely that to China and a slew of other coun­tries by people who remain unapo­lo­getic about Pearl Har­bor and other tra­gedies.

That loose and dodgy inter­pret­a­tion of Japan’s national secur­ity interests promp­ted Pres­id­ent Xi to call up his US coun­ter­part and recount how China and the US were once allies in the war against fas­cism. Pres­id­ent Trump then advised Takai­chi to cool off.

Even Asian coun­tries inspired by Japan’s rapid indus­tri­al­isa­tion and eco­nomic growth remain wary of its ultra-nation­al­ists’ fas­cin­a­tion with remil­it­ar­isa­tion. Japan’s post­war rise was made pos­sible only with con­cili­at­ory rela­tions with its neigh­bours.

NK mem­bers have included former Prime Min­is­ters Shinzo Abe and Shi­geru Ishiba, but they have been less extreme than Takai­chi. Fol­low­ing her out­burst last month, Ishiba openly and repeatedly rep­rim­anded her.

Although the late Abe cham­pioned the Us-led Quad­ri­lat­eral Secur­ity Dia­logue (Quad) in try­ing to isol­ate China, he later relen­ted. In 2017 he declared Japan was ready to join the China-led Belt and Road Ini­ti­at­ive (BRI), and the fol­low­ing year Japan was reportedly engaged in sev­eral dozen BRI projects.

After los­ing WWII, Japan’s Yoshida Doc­trine relied on US pro­tec­tion to build its eco­nomic strength, developed the Fukuda Doc­trine to offer a meas­ure of war repar­a­tions, and issued the Murayama State­ment as a means to repair ties with neigh­bours. Now all those efforts may be under­mined, par­tic­u­larly when Trump is seek­ing peace with China and downs­iz­ing alli­ance oblig­a­tions all-round.

How Takai­chi’s admin­is­tra­tion now pro­ceeds with China will decide its own pro­spects. With eco­nomic stag­na­tion already in its fourth dec­ade, the Japan­ese ‘mir­acle’ is over.

But whether Japan then declines or can still thrive will depend on how, and if, it can work with a rising Asia helmed by Chinese entre­pren­eur­ship and pro­ductiv­ity.

Monday, 13 October 2025

Call for contingency plans in face of US govt shutdown

 

-Photo credit Reuters.

PETALING JAYA: Several export-oriented sectors in Malaysia will be impacted if there is a prolonged shutdown of the US government, say industry players.

As one of the country’s largest export markets, contingency plans should be drawn up to assist the affected sectors in weathering the effects of the political impasse in Washington DC.

Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Malaysia treasurer-general Datuk Koong Lin Loong said that while the impact of a short-term shutdown would be minimal, an extended one would create a ripple effect on the US economy and Malaysian exporters.

“If US civil servants are not paid their salary, this will decrease their spending power and consumption. This in turn will affect the export of our furniture to the United States.

PETALING JAYA: Several export-oriented sectors in Malaysia will be impacted if there is a prolonged shutdown of the US government, say industry players.

As one of the country’s largest export markets, contingency plans should be drawn up to assist the affected sectors in weathering the effects of the political impasse in Washington DC.

Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Malaysia treasurer-general Datuk Koong Lin Loong said that while the impact of a short-term shutdown would be minimal, an extended one would create a ripple effect on the US economy and Malaysian exporters.

“If US civil servants are not paid their salary, this will decrease their spending power and consumption. This in turn will affect the export of our furniture to the United States.

“Also, the shutdown will interrupt services such as customs clearance at the ports and entry points in the United States. This will become an issue for our exporters.

“The disruption to the logistics sector would have an impact on the supply chain.

“This will be especially true for Malaysian companies involved in the export of electrical and electronics (E&E) products to the United States, which is a major importer,” he said when contacted yesterday.

The United States is one of the largest importers of Malaysian E&E, totalling almost RM120bil last year and representing about 20% of the country’s total E&E exports.

Of these figures, some RM60bil were semiconductor products, which account for about 20% of Malaysia’s total semiconductor exports.

Koong suggests that Malaysia leverage its position as Asean Chair to coordinate with other Asean members states and regional countries in facilitating exports.

“We could leverage the strength of Asean as a whole in respect of the individual countries’ niche products and services,” he added.

If there is a prolonged shutdown, he said the government should assist exporters by exploring other potential markets such as the Middle East and Africa.

Koong noted that development grants and soft loans, which were announced in Budget 2026, could help small and medium enterprises (SMEs) weather the effects of a prolonged shutdown.

The US government shutdown, which began on Oct 1, was triggered by the US Congress’ rejection of a Republican funding Bill, resulting in some 750,000 federal government workers being furloughed without pay.

The deadlock is expected to persist for a third week despite pressure from President Donald Trump on the Democrats to support the Republican Bill.

Airfreight Forwarders Association of Malaysia chairman Thomas Mathew said the shutdown, though a US domestic political issue, carries far-reaching implications for the global economy.

“As one of the world’s largest importers and exporters, any disruption in the operations of US federal agencies reverberates through supply chains worldwide,” he said when contacted yesterday.

Among the immediate impacts of the shutdown are delays in customs clearance, port congestion and slower regulatory processing by key US agencies, he added.

“This includes the Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Department of Commerce, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

“These delays can significantly disrupt the flow of goods into and out of the United States, prompting re-routing, rescheduling, and increased costs across shipping networks,” he said.

Mathew said a prolonged shutdown would have a multifaceted impact on Malaysia, as the country is a key trading partner of the United States, particularly in the E&E and manufacturing sectors.

“Malaysia may encounter delays in order fulfilment, payment cycles, and reduced demand from US buyers facing their own domestic uncertainties,” he said.

He added that there could also be logistical slowdowns affecting compliance-dependent sectors that require US regulatory approvals, such as semiconductors, medical devices and pharmaceuticals.

“Additionally, any resulting market volatility may impact the ringgit, investor confidence and broader business sentiment in Malaysia,” he said.

While a short-term shutdown can be absorbed with minimal disruption, a prolonged one risks undermining the predictability and efficiency upon which global trade and export-driven economies rely on.

Mathew suggests that contingency plans are drafted for the affected sectors.

“Diversifying trade partnerships will be key for Malaysian businesses navigating such external shocks,” he added.

Malaysian Consortium of Mid-Tier Companies honorary president Callum Chen said a prolonged shutdown would be a double whammy to businesses, not only globally but also Malaysian too.

“The impact will make things worse. Ports in the United States are already jam-packed with stuck containers due to tariff uncertainties.

“Most US SMEs are already facing cash flow problems due to the tariffs,” he said when contacted.

He added that unpaid US federal workers would be forced to prioritise their spending.

“They will have less money to buy things, and their priority will be putting food on the table,” he said.

Chen expects the latest episode to be longer than the previous 35-day shutdown from Dec 22, 2018, to Jan 25, 2019, which is the longest in US history.

“Everyone is in a limbo and this only creates more uncertainty for businesses,” he said.

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/world/2025/10/11/white-house-says-substantial-us-government-job-cuts-have-begun

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2025/10/12/experts-theres-a-silver-lining-amid-us-shutdown


MOFCOM slams US' planned 100% additional tariff, says willful threats not right way to get along with China

China's Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) on Sunday slamm

Related posts:

  •   https://bbc.com/news/articles/crrj1znp0pyo Anthony Zurcher North America correspondent  and James FitzGerald   Watch: What could happen du...

Goodbye trade war

Goodbye trade war

 

China seems to be winning the tariff war even as Trump threatens to impose a massive increase of tariffs on Chinese imports in response to the republic's announcement of new export controls on rare earths. — Getty Images/AFP


South-east asia, once only a bruising trade war’s secondary victim, should now have asean showing its mettle as china wins.

BEYOND multiple global uncertainties are two core fundamentals: Us-china relations being the world’s most important bilateral relationship, and economics determining much of everything else.

This makes the trade war between the world’s two biggest economies pivotal to all. Multiple spheres in various regions are impacted accordingly.

That much is the main plot in today’s geopolitics. Problems tend to arise when the script is amended without warning, explanation or acknowledgement.

US President Donald Trump has sought a personal meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping since last year, but that will happen only next year. Why does it take two years for such a crucial event to occur?

It is precisely because of the summit’s importance that it has to take so long. Unlike MOUS, summits do not set the tone of an intended agreement but to cap what has already been agreed.

Transnational deals are too important to be left to formal summits with their pomp and pageantry. The serious business of negotiations by government experts and specialists differs vastly from the PR theatre of official photo opportunities.

The months and years between signalling interest in a summit and actually holding it are for senior officials to work out sufficiently agreeable terms to constitute a deal. That period of talks by officials began informally last year between the incoming US administration and China’s incumbent team.

It is a period now effectively coming to a close in ending the trade war, but still only unofficially. The basic agreement that is now done in all but writing has the US broadly conceding to China’s terms.

China is the only country that has pushed back on Trump’s tariffs, with resounding effect as recent events show.

After Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s grating condescension about supplying China with only Nvidia’s sub-par microchips, Beijing blocked all of Nvidia’s chips. Nvidia boss Jensen Huang said China’s own chip development is only “nano seconds behind” his company’s best products.

In agriculture, China has stopped buying US soybeans for supplies from Brazil and elsewhere. With US farmers devastated, China again demonstrated considerable leverage.

With Trump clamping down on countries buying Russian and Iranian oil and gas, India was hit with high additional tariffs, but not China. Instead, China raised Russian gas supplies with the Power of Siberia (POS) pipeline and now also POS 2.

China is also importing more than a million barrels of Iranian oil daily, amounting to almost 90% of Iran’s output. These major purchases were never going to be impacted by US restrictions.

Trump declared victory on Tiktok but it was a net gain for China. Beijing refused to sell Tiktok’s proprietary algorithm, the heart and brain of the winning platform.

A copy of the original algorithm was supplied to US investors, and China’s Bytedance owns just under 20% of US Tiktok – yet is entitled to 50% of US profits. US negotiators must have realised that was the most they could get from China’s tough bargaining position and accepted it.

China has introduced new restrictions on rare earth exports, launched an antitrust probe into US chip giant Qualcomm, and will raise port fees for US ships in return. In virtually every sector China is fighting back through tit-for-tat action and new policies.

If there is still any doubt that China is leading the charge of what remains of the trade war, its use of carrots and sticks to access the US market confirms it. Beijing has offered more than a trillion dollars (RM4.2 trillion) of investment in the US through Chinese companies admitted there.

These could include Chinese electric vehicle companies, which Trump last year said he would invite to the US to provide jobs. Only the stronger economy can dish out inducements of such proportions to the relatively subordinate economy.

Such is the substance of a negotiated trade peace. Ultimately, Trump is less concerned about what actually makes a trade victory than what can be interpreted and portrayed as his personal triumph.

He is anxious to gain snatches of a win between trade skirmishes, however fleeting or questionable, and China is only too happy to provide them to win the trade war. More of this can be expected at next year’s summit.

Meanwhile, Louis Gave of Hong Kong’s Gavekal Research has declared China’s trade war victory. South-east Asia should likewise flip the old script to its favour.

Asean countries are not just collateral economies subjected to the whims of a trade conflict. When China takes a beating, South-east Asia was assumed to be beaten also.

But the US still hopes to obtain from this region what it failed to get from China. To do this it needs to keep up appearances that it is winning over China as the centre of global supply chains.

Asean can call that bluff to protect itself.

Repated posts|:

  •   https://bbc.com/news/articles/crrj1znp0pyo Anthony Zurcher North America correspondent  and James FitzGerald   Watch: What could happen du...

Call for contingency plans in face of US govt shutdown

 


Monday, 24 March 2025

Getting it right

 

US-china trade needs to improve as much as their bilateral relationship deserves much better, but not at the present rate.

Auto ambition: With limited competition abroad but hypercompetition at home, China’s EV industry has powered ahead. — AFP

T

HE constant stream of major global events can be disorienting, particularly when their consequences spin off to produce secondary effects.

Worse, self-interested politics enters as a disabling narrative to make factual understanding more difficult. How to make sense of all this?

One way is to identify the root causes and critically analyse how they develop and proceed. Factual accuracy in descriptions and definitions always helps, while imprecision makes everything more difficult.

Much relates to a rising China and the state of US-China relations. With the world’s biggest economies, theirs is the most critical bilateral relationship for the world and also the most politically fraught. 

In 2004 China displaced the US as Japan’s main trade partner. The following year it displaced the US as the world’s biggest consumer market.

In 2006 the EU became China’s biggest trade partner while China became the EU’s second-biggest. In 2009 China displaced the US as Africa’s main trade partner, and in 2010 it beat Japan as the world’s second-largest economy.

China’s external trade covered a wide range of goods and services as its productive forces gained critical mass. In the process, industrial clout came not simply from resources and scale but also strong production ecosystems and supply chains, including a skilled workforce.

China quickly developed as the “world’s factory” with the Global North’s industries choosing to relocate production there. They flocked to establish factories in China offering the best returns on investment.

But while foreign companies retained older technology like internal combustion engines (ICE), China prioritised electric vehicles (EVs) to cut air pollution and dependence on imported oil. There was no domestic oil lobby to derail EV development, only government encouragement instead.

With limited competition abroad but hypercompetition at home, China’s EV industry powered ahead. That meant a quick and considerable lead in technology and marketing overseas.

In 2009 China surpassed the US as the world’s largest automobile market. This spanned both ICE vehicles and EVs, with a muted but growing market for the latter.

In 2020 China displaced the US as the EU’s top trading partner. That same year it acquired the world’s largest foreign exchange reserves, developed the finest fintech, and had the most companies listed in the Fortune Global 500.

China’s auto production was booming, exploding into a global market hungry for sophisticated yet affordable vehicles. China fulfilled that need better than any other country.

In 2021 Chinese auto exports surpassed South Korea’s, and the following year it displaced Germany as the world’s second-biggest exporter. Within months China beat Japan as the world’s top auto exporter.

Much the same is happening with other sectors, if at different growth rates. China continues rising through the rapid development of multiple industries, particularly when several foreign markets remain unexplored or under-served.

Western automobile manufacturers in China felt a need to work more with Chinese companies, particularly on EVs and hybrids. They prefer joint ventures to discriminatory tariffs or sanctions on Chinese vehicles from their governments.

Yet last April US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen visited China to complain about “excess capacity” and “overproduction”. It was more a political point than an economic argument.

Excess capacity is surplus productive capability over and above what is needed or appropriate. Overproduction is the additional goods produced and left idle because of insufficient demand.

As the world’s factory with regional markets still untapped, China has no excess capacity or overproduction. High Western tariffs to stifle demand may create a semblance of either, but artificially inducing a situation to accuse Chinese industry of it is dishonest.

Sometimes dumping happens with a specific commodity temporarily, typically for an intermediate or upstream item. But that is different.

After Joe Biden’s administration acted against Chinese EVs, batteries and solar panels, they shifted to markets in Russia, Latin America, Central Asia, Africa and South-East Asia. China is a global producer, and since there is no global overcapacity or overproduction, it is not engaging in either.

Chinese industry’s ultra-competitiveness seriously challenges US industry, notably in the latter’s obsolete business models. Regaining US global competitiveness requires extensive retooling, not distorted narratives.

From 2011, China has consistently been the world’s top patent applicant country. Each year it graduates more STEM students than the US population has in total, having produced the most STEM PhDs every year since 2007.

In 2021 China beat the US in its national share of published high-impact AI papers. In the same year it also displaced the US with the highest national net worth.

Such data from established Western sources also noted in 2023 that China had seven of the world’s top 10 universities conducting leading scientific research. Last year China had six of the world’s top 10 STEM institutions.

The US is now denying students from China study visas. America would be greater in training more American students without restraining others who pay to be there.

By Bunn Nagar,  Director and Senior Fellow of the BRI Caucus (Asia-Pacific), and Honorary Fellow at the Perak Academy. The views expressed here are solely the writer’s own.

Monday, 14 October 2024

Appreciating Asean

 

Regional togetherness: Asean’s first summits were irregular and distantly spaced. Now two summits are held regularly every year. — Bernama


Asean is a realities-grounded institution with certain strengths, which are hidden only to those who fail to appreciate them.

AS regional summits go, Asean’s has been growing by leaps and bounds. Not that this positive attribute is universally acknowledged, as is typical with Asean attributes.

Asean’s first summits were irregular and distantly spaced, and at one point even 12 years apart. Now two summits are held regularly every year, either together or spaced apart by months, with related Asean-led meetings in series.

Between summits, several hundred meetings of Asean officials are held each year to implement, oversee, and calibrate policies. The numerous meetings have prompted a misperception that Asean is merely a talkshop. 

Asean’s irregular summits proved that Asean leaders meet only when needed, as circumstances require, and not for the sake of meeting. Asean has never prioritised form over function, or ceremony over substance.

Asean is popular and successful for the common familiarity and shared comfort level leaders feel when they meet. These come only with frequent meetings forming a seamless web of mutual and reciprocal goodwill.

Critics cite the failure of the 2012 Asean Foreign Ministers’ meeting in Cambodia to issue a joint communiqué at its conclusion as a sign of weakness and inefficacy. But it takes decisiveness to opt not to issue a statement rather than produce a bland and meaningless one just for the sake of doing so.

Formal meetings are judged by how or whether they serve their purpose while in session, not by the feel good diplomatic summaries issued afterwards. As a process, Asean proceedings have seldom if ever been “full glasses”, but the uninitiated would see the “glasses” only as half-empty.

Asean’s core purpose has always been the quality of membership relations. How others see it is up to them, but this is no more than a concern for Asean’s public relations department if there is one.

Laos’ Asean chairmanship this year and its hosting of the 44th and 45th Summit over the week have predictably been scrutinised critically. A typical complaint is the seeming absence of any definitive resolution on the Myanmar impasse or the South China Sea disputes.

No annual summit is like a task force producing fail-safe solutions for outstanding issues. A small and underdeveloped Laos is already doing its best tackling the mammoth logistical and financial demands of hosting a series of international conferences at the highest official levels.

Any other country chairing Asean this year would face the same challenges. Asean makes no judgment about the economic status of members while helping less endowed members fulfil their financial obligations.

Asean is better at avoiding upheavals like Myanmar’s or war-torn Cambodia’s before its 1999 membership, than in conclusively resolving conflict that has occurred. It’s still not perfect, of course.

Asean’s record still compares favourably with the European Union’s, which failed to prevent the Kosovo and Ukraine wars. Nato (the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) as a military alliance may mitigate these conflicts but has instead instigated and amplified the Ukraine war.

The EU and Asean were once described as the world’s most successful regional organisations, in that order, but that was before Brexit, when Britain exited the EU in 2020. No Asean country has sought to leave despite some challenges, while several countries not eligible to join have nonetheless tried.

The next and final member of Asean is Timor-Leste, the former Portuguese territory and Indo-nesian province of East Timor. It is the only sovereign nation in South-East Asia still to join Asean.

Others, from Sri Lanka and Papua New Guinea to Mongolia and Turkey, have reportedly sought Asean membership, but were never seriously considered. Timor-Leste is different not least because it is in South-East Asia, although its Asean journey has been long and challenging.

In 2006 Timor-Leste submitted a “soft application” to join, and the following year Asean signalled a “willingness in principle” to consider it. Most Asean member states endorsed its application, but not all.

Meanwhile Dili worked hard to fulfil membership requirements by acceding to Asean norms and conventions, including the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in South-East Asia. It even introduced Asean Studies in schools, unlike most Asean countries.

Dili formally applied to join Asean in 2011, and Asean responded in 2022 with an “agreement in principle” to admit it. Membership remains a work in progress, with the Laos Summit during the week a part of that journey.

The state of the South China Sea’s multiple disputes has also been taken as a measure of Asean’s competence. Any catastrophe resulting from the disputes would be of concern to Asean as it would be to anyone else.

However, the disputes are between individual sovereign nations as neighbours and involves less than half the Asean membership. Asean is quietly confident that they can be resolved or are resolvable with time, provided there is no ulterior motive or foreign agenda at play.

Asean understands that the region has managed challenges before and wants that to continue. Anything less will not be Asean, nor will the region be sovereign.

Bunn Nagara is director and senior fellow at the BRI Caucus for Asia-Pacific, and an honorary fellow at the Perak Academy. The views expressed here are solely his own.

Related posts:

Connected by mountains and waters



What failure of 'Asian NATO' idea at ASEAN indicates: Global Times editorial

We hope that this year's leaders' meetings on East Asia cooperation serve as a reminder to all external countries: the region welcomes partners in peaceful development, but not those that create trouble and conflict.

Regional countries firmly reject Japan's daydream of an 'Asian NATO'

Japan's push for an “Asian NATO” threatens to disrupt decades of prosperity and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.

By Global Times | 2024/10/8 0:26:05
Western media have appeared to function under a consistent principle – whenever international affairs are at play, they are framed as a stage for major power rivalry. Unsurprisingly, the just-concluded ASEAN Summit was once again interpreted through the lens of US-China competition. This time, however, what was revealed was not US' diplomatic advantage, but rather its increasingly visible diplomatic predicament.