The final version of the Sino-American grand strategy "term sheet"
Monday, December 20, 2010 at 12:01AM 
U.S.-P.R.C. Presidential Executive Agreement
For Peaceful Coexistence & Economically Balanced Relationship
Prepared by John Milligan-Whyte, Dai Min and Thomas P.M. Barnett
Dec. 14th, 2010
Presidents of U.S. and P.R.C. sign an executive agreement containing each nation’s pledge that:
- U.S. and P.R.C will never go to war with the other;
- Each will respect the other’s sovereignty and distinct political and economic systems;
- U.S. pledge to eschew regime change in P.R.C. and of non-interference in its internal affairs;
- P.R.C pledges to continue its economic, social, and political reforms.
Taiwan
Pledged demilitarization of Taiwan situation, to include:
- Informal U.S. moratorium on arms transfers to Taiwan;
- U.S. President’s adherence to defense requirements of Taiwan Relations Act of1979 is achieved through the following alternative means;
- P.R.C. reduction of strike forces arrayed against Island;
- U.S. reduction of strike forces arrayed against P.R.C. Mainland; and
- Negotiation and promulgation of confidence building measures between U.S. and P.R.C. militaries.
North Korea
Pledged de-escalation of strategic uncertainty surrounding North Korea nuclear program, to include:
- U.S. eschews regime change in North Korea;
- P.R.C. encourages North Korea to adopt economic reform policies to be implemented on terms appropriate to North Korea’s own situation;
- North Korea agrees to terminate nuclear program and resume economic cooperation with South Korea; and
- U.S. and P.R.C. support peaceful reunification of North and South Korea on terms and timetable determined by North and South Korea.
Iran
Pledged management of relations with Iran to include:
- U.S. eschews regime change in Iran;
- P.R.C to support Iran’s peaceful development of its nuclear energy program;
- Iran to willingly submit to regular international inspections of its nuclear energy program; and
- U.S. to eliminate trade restrictions and promote trade with Iran.
South China Sea & East China Sea
Pledged management of sovereignty disputes to be solved peacefully and bilaterally, to include:
- P.R.C. sets up multilateral South China Sea Regional Joint Development Corporation with neighboring claimant states; and
- P.R.C. pledges to negotiate resolution of all such disputes on the basis of the P.R.C.-ASEAN agreement entitled, “The 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.”
ASEAN Economic and Peacekeeping Collaboration
U.S. and P.R.C pledge:
- Harmonization and coordination of their respective roles in regional economic and security forums;
- Pursuit of peaceful coexistence in their bilateral relations with other Asian nations; and
- Promotion of economic stability and growth of ASEAN nations in their multilateral relations within ASEAN, APEC, etc.
Military-to-Military Ties
U.S and P.R.C. pledge to cooperate on international and non-traditional security issues, to include:
- Lifting of U.S. embargo on military sales to China;
- Regular scheduling of joint naval exercises in Asian waters, with standing invitations to other regional navies;
- Permanent expansion of officer-exchange program;
- Creation of joint peacekeeping force/command in conjunction with other countries within the UN Security Council framework;
- Expansion of U.S.-P.R.C Maritime and Military Security Agreement to include frequency of U.S. close-in reconnaissance; and
- Establlishment of joint commission collaborating annually on U.S. and P.R.C. technology sharing and transparency of budget expenditures.
Existing and Future International Institutions and Issues
U.S. and P.R.C. pledge to support continued reform of existing institutions (e.g., UN, IMF, World Bank, WTO, G20) to better reflect the evolving global economy and international issues, to include climate change, Doha Agreement, etc.
Strategic and Economic Dialogue (SED)
To implement the new collaborations:
- SED becomes permanently sitting commission for continuous senior-level communications and collaboration on economic and security issues; and
- SED reviews all existing tariffs, WTO complaints, and other trade and economic disputes and issues.
P.R.C. Investment into U.S. Economy
P.R.C. pledges to invest up to 1 trillion USD directly into U.S. companies at direction of U.S. President in exchange for:
- U.S. removes trade restrictions and high-technology export bans with P.R.C.;
- P.R.C. commits to purchase sufficient amount of U.S. goods/services to balance bilateral trade on annual basis;
- P.R.C. companies’ access to U.S. market made equal to that of U.S. companies access to P.R.C. market;
- Ownership limit for new P.R.C. investments in U.S.-owned or controlled corporations limited to 45 percent of shares, with additional 10 percent reserved for preferred equity/pension funds on a case-by-case basis and final 45 percent remaining with non-P.R.C. ownership;
- Ownership limit for new U.S. companies’ investments in P.R.C. limited to 45 percent with additional 10 percent reserved for preferred equity/pension funds on a case-by-case basis and final 45 percent remaining with P.R.C. ownership;
- U.S. and P.R.C. to facilitate global joint ventures between U.S. and P.R.C. companies, with initial example to involve major U.S. firm, possibly General Motors; and
- U.S. and P.R.C. to collaborate in SED on goal of full employment throughout each economy, targeting in particular areas suffering inordinate unemployment or needing special economic growth arrangements.
Other Areas of Bilateral and Multilateral Cooperation
P.R.C. and U.S. to collaborate:
- Implementing principles in the Preamble, Article 1 of the UN Charter;
- Rehabilitation of failing and failed states seeking assistance;
- Combining U.S. and P.R.C. markets, technology and financing to ensure affordable costs for all nations of effective pollution remediation and sustainable energy and financing of globally needed technology; and
- Joint space exploration with other UN member states.
No Creation or Operation of “G2” Arrangement
Nothing in this Executive Agreement constitutes, is intended to, nor permits the creation or operation of a “G2”, and instead this Agreement:
- Establishes an improved framework of collaboration among the U.S., P.R.C. and other UN member states;
- Neither seeks nor infers any formal alliance between the U.S. and P.R.C.; and
- Creates a new U.S. and P.R.C. partnership commitment to the Principles of Peaceful Coexistence in the UN Charter.
Mutually agreed on the _______day of_________ 2011.
____________________________________ ______________________________________
President of the United States Barack Obama People’s Republic of China President Hu Jintao
Reader Comments (7)
"Permanent expansion of officer-exchange program;"
1. What is this, what significance is it? How do we gain from this?
2. Why is this not expanded to other sorts of "exchanges" and programs such as space exploration, agriculture development, and ect.?
Okay, now where does this go? Who is going to read this that can actually help to implement it?
Based on whom we interacted with on the Chinese side, it gets presented directly to Hu.
An interesting mind game: Imagine China had a democratic goverment, would the US goverment then sign this Whyte-BarnettSolution term sheet agreement or would there still be win-loose-mindsets and the fear of a "sell-out"to China which would prevent it? Is it the fear of the USA descending and China- independetly if a democratic or an authotahiran rule-ascending which could prevent such a agreement or is it the perceived nature of the political system in China.
re: "Permanent expansion of officer-exchange program;"
Longshankes asks, first for definition, then whether strategic contexts other than Military-to-Military Ties were excluded.
> 1. What is this, what significance is it? How do we gain from this?
Officer-exchange program: Senior Chinese, U.S. military officials to exchange visits in 2011
Significance: Encourages the deepening of "mutual understanding of the armed forces of the two sides, expand consensus and contribute to the healthy and stable development of their ties."
Our gain: In the context of everything else, Security is the first aspect in link of mutually assured dependence. Consider the reconciliation of North and South Korea: Who you gonna call?
> 2. Why is this not expanded to other sorts of "exchanges" and programs such as space exploration, agriculture development, and ect.?
Other sorts of exchanges and programs are surely desirable; though, perhaps as to develop competence and capacity in actionable military-to-military ties, their inclusion may be beyond the scope of this term sheet.
WOW
-On international issues we surrender on Taiwan, Iran, and North Korea, and get a warm fuzzy guaranty of mutual assistance based on a piece of paper with no historical norm or example? What about S China sea, Spratly Islands, disputed land borders from all the Stans to India to Vietnam? China has allot of baggage and ole disputes with not just US.
-On military issues we surrender all our technological advantage and open up our weapons and advanced technology for them to incorporate and then copy. In return we get officer sharing and what, another guaranty based on nothing but a signed sheet of paper?
-Economically we surrender our technology and agree to fair trade and access restrictions determined by China?
This is not a treaty this is a happy talk gamble at best and voluntary suicide at worst. We basically assume China will in time surpass US and so instead of attempting to compete or at worse case fight we just go to the upstart and give everything we have guaranteeing their immediate assention. Hoping in return we will be allowed equal standing. WOW What historical examples can we be shown to see why the Chinese leadership can be trusted to be buddah and not khan once they get the advantage or even parity.
What is plan B in case China just takes all our tech, solidifies Taiwan, reaches military/economic parity and then just explains the world has changed time to renegotiate our piece of paper on THEIR terms?
re: WOW
Hmmm... Surrender, then suicide. Wow, C-Low, maybe ole khan got you fooled, eh? You might wanna try thinking with the authors about what the 5 D's data add up to. Just sayin', you know?