Some questions for the Chinese Foreign Ministry

Some questions for the Chinese Foreign Ministry

Hua Chunying thinks I have great ingenuity. She ain’t seen nothing yet.

By Daniel W. Drezner

Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a regular contributor to PostEverything.

Yesterday at 10:23 a.m. EDT

Last week, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying — someone commonly considered to be one of the new “wolf warriors” of Chinese diplomacy — held a regular news conference. As it happens, my name came up.

The Beijing Youth Daily apparently reads Foreign Affairs, because its correspondent asked a question regarding my recent “The United States of Sanctions” essay.

According to a Chinese government readout of the news conference, they asked Hua, “Daniel Drezner, Professor of Tufts University … published an article on Foreign Affairs recently, criticizing US administrations for abusing economic coercion and economic violence. Sanctions have become the go-to solution for nearly every foreign policy problem, which do not work but exact a humanitarian toll. The United States of America has become ‘the United States of Sanctions’. What is China’s comment?”

Story continues below advertisement

Hua’s response was complimentary toward me but not the United States: “This professor of Tufts University is of great ingenuity. ‘The United States of Sanctions’ is far and away a name tailored for the US. For a long time, the US has been abusing its financial hegemony and technical advantages to adopt frequent unilateral bullying practices, impose long-term sanctions on Cuba, the DPRK, Iran, Venezuela, among other countries, willfully wage ‘trade wars’ with multiple countries and wantonly hobbles foreign high-tech companies in the name of national security.”

Hua said more, but you get the gist.

The hard-working staff here at Spoiler Alerts is not used to being cited in Chinese Foreign Ministry news conferences. Though I appreciate the compliment, I strongly suspect Hua just liked my critique of American foreign policy.

If she really does think I possess great ingenuity, however, then maybe the Beijing Youth Daily could ask some follow-up questions. Here are some possibilities:

“It is true that the United States employs economic sanctions on a regular basis. When the United States imposes such sanctions, however, it does so with transparency, publicly announcing such actions. There is significant evidence that China has dramatically expanded its use of economic coercion in recent years, and yet the Chinese government repeatedly denies that it is doing so. Why is your government unwilling to be as transparent in your use of economic sanctions?”

“In your Sept. 28 press conference, you scolded the United States for its ‘coercive diplomacy’ and ‘bullying’ behavior. How should outside observers interpret China’s behavior in reaction to the arrest of a Huawei official accused of violating U.N. sanctions on Iran, a charge that she confessed to before being released? China’s response included the arrest of two Canadian citizens and multiple U.S. citizens facing exit visa bans. How is hostage-taking not coercive? Why should outside observers not warn their citizens about the risks of capricious incarceration when visiting China?”

“You repeatedly accuse the United States of engaging in bullying and coercive behavior. There appears to be no evidence, however, that coercion was responsible for Australia’s recent decision to procure nuclear-powered submarines from the United States. Nor does U.S. coercion seem to have played a role in the strengthening of the Quad as a policy coordination mechanism. If the United States is such a bullying hegemon, why do you think your neighbors continue to seek out U.S. security commitments?

“One last question. As you noted, my Foreign Affairs essay was rather critical of how U.S. foreign policymakers employed economic sanctions. In response, however, I have received informal feedback from U.S. policy practitioners. Some of them have made minor criticisms of my essay but most have acknowledged that this is an issue that needs to be addressed. Some have solicited suggestions. No agency of the federal government has hectored me, threatened me or otherwise bullied me despite my critique. My question is: Would a Chinese academic as critical of Chinese foreign policy ever feel as safe as I do in publishing such criticism? If not, why not?”

I look forward to Hua’s responses to these questions.