"Quemoy-and-Matsu" Watch: Can the US really not live for more than a few years without a "new Cold War"?

The "New Cold War" narrative about conflict between the US and China rolls along, with a disturbing supply of that sacred Bipartisanship (on dubious military policies) on hand. Rajan Menon of the Quincy Institute writes in How U.S.-China ‘competition’ could lead both countries to disaster Los Angeles Times 11/22/2021.

Compare the China policies of Donald Trump and Joe Biden and you’ll find many more similarities than differences. Four months after Biden’s inauguration, Kurt M. Campbell, coordinator for Indo-Pacific affairs at the National Security Council, declared that engagement, the approach American leaders have adopted toward China since the 1970s, had failed and that “the dominant paradigm is going to be competition.” A much-praised book by Campbell’s top deputy, Rush Doshi, warns that China’s goal is nothing less than supplanting the United States as the world’s premier power.

Left unsaid by both officials is what this future U.S.-China “competition” will look like, and what will prevent it from turning violent.

Both sides would incur massive losses in blood and treasure if their rivalry intensifies untempered by any sense of shared interests, and leads to war. Ditto the rest of the world.

Deutsche Welle brings this report, U.S. lawmakers vow 'rock solid' commitment to Taiwan 11/27/2021:

Note in this video that the DW interviewer comments that China has "sent in more than 150 warplanes into Taiwanese air space," with no mention of the crucial difference between Taiwan's "offshore" Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) and Taiwan's sovereign airspace. Reporting on this without noting that distinction is not only lazy but irresponsible, because war hawks and defense contractor lobbyists are using a very deceptive talking point here for purposes that hardly limited to legitimate national security concerns.

After nearly a year of Biden's New Cold War policy against China, the more convinced I am that it is just a continuing of the same great-power arrogance and triumphalism that has plagued the US since the Second World War and especially since 1989.

And on this, he so far has accomplished the bipartisanship he promoted as one of his most important political assets during the 2020 Presidential campaign. Yukon Huang of the Carnegie Asia Program sketches the (bipartisan) background of the current policy this way (The U.S.-China Trade War Has Become a Cold War Carnegie Endowment 09/16/2021):

What began as a trade war over China’s unfair economic policies has now evolved into a so-called cold war propelled by differing ideologies. U.S.-China bilateral relations took a nosedive in 2018 when then U.S. president Donald Trump’s obsession with trade deficits led him to impose punitive tariffs on China. The tariffs were followed by restrictions on both China’s access to high-tech U.S. products and foreign investments involving security concerns and by allegations of unfair Chinese commercial practices.

Despite pleas from the U.S. business community to ease tensions, U.S. President Joe Biden so far has amplified his predecessor’s policies by strengthening anti-China alliances and implementing additional sanctions. Biden now characterizes the U.S.-China conflict as “a battle between the utility of democracies in the twenty-first century and autocracies.” Putin's Russia and the 'New Cold War'-Interpreting Myth and Reality 2008 But the logic underpinning the U.S. trade war was flawed, and the more recent, politically driven restrictions are counterproductive given the damaging long-term economic consequences for both sides. Nonetheless, there have been few signs to date that Biden is likely to change course. In the meantime, then, Europeans may be in a better position for productive give-and-take discussions with China on economic policymaking. [my emphasis]

The hope that the EU countries can establish some kind of offsetting policy to that of the US on China looks like a long shot, when we think about how sadly and scandalously the EU just allowed Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukachenko to send them into a panic with a few thousand refugees on the borders of Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania.

It's worth remembering that not so long ago, entrepreneurs of war were promoting the "New Cold War" - but with Russia.

The original Cold War of roughly 1947-1989 wound up spilling a lot of blood and came perilously close to a nuclear apocalypse at least a couple of time. But patriotic providers of the weapons of war made lots of money on it, so the nostalgia for a New Cold War is understandable. See, for instance, David Galbreath's review, Putin's Russia and the 'New Cold War': Interpreting Myth and Reality Europe-Asia Studies 60:9 Nov 2008. Note: In 2008, rising world oil prices were providing a substantial boost to petrostates including Russia. And this was years before the events that culminated in Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014.

Now we're on to a New Cold War with China. Since Russia and China have a generally good relationship at the moment, it can't be too long before enthusiasts are talking about the new "Sino-Soviet bloc", right?