Did Biden Get China Right? Lessons Learned and What Comes Next
Why It Matters
A coherent, allied‑backed China strategy is crucial for preserving U.S. economic and security interests; policy volatility under the current administration could erode that advantage and reshape global competitive dynamics.
Key Takeaways
- •Biden built a whole‑of‑government China strategy framework for governance.
- •Aligning allies was central to Biden’s “invest‑align‑compete” approach.
- •Trump’s policy oscillates between tariffs and accommodation, lacking coherence.
- •Leader‑to‑leader diplomacy remains the primary agenda‑setting mechanism for US‑China relations.
- •Absence of allied coordination risks ceding strategic advantage to China.
Summary
The Carnegie Endowment released a 165‑page report titled “Implementing the Biden Administration’s China Strategy,” and convened former officials Laura Rosenberger, Rush Doshi and Julian Gwartz to assess how the strategy was executed and how it compares with the current Trump administration.
Panelists highlighted that the Biden team stitched together a whole‑of‑government framework—‘invest, align, compete’—that integrated the State Department, Treasury, Commerce and the NSC, and deliberately leveraged allies as a force multiplier. By contrast, the Trump approach has been described as fragmented, unilateral and marked by abrupt policy swings, from 145 % tariffs to recent back‑off on export controls.
Rosenberger noted the pre‑Biden era lacked a coherent China policy, while Gwartz observed Beijing now perceives a weakening U.S. alliance network, interpreting it as a strategic advantage. Doshi emphasized the enduring assumption that China will not collapse, requiring competition tempered by management, and cited the oscillation between confrontational tariffs and diplomatic overtures as a source of Chinese confidence.
The discussion suggests that without a bipartisan, allied‑based strategy, the United States risks ceding strategic initiative to Beijing. Business leaders and policymakers must watch for further policy volatility, as shifts in tariffs, technology controls and diplomatic engagement directly affect supply chains, investment decisions and global market stability.
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...