Read on Twitter
Frankly, I find this commentary frustrating and consider it counterproductive for several reasons, even though (and perhaps especially because) I don’t disagree entirely with many of the basic points raised by Mr. Ratcliffe. https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-is-national-security-threat-no-1-11607019599
First, an obvious observation: to declare that China is the "greatest threat to America today," on a day when thousands of Americans have died because of COVID-19, in an op-ed that does not even once mention the pandemic situation, is absurd and offensive. https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/12/02/world/covid-19-coronavirus
Certainly, I'd agree China will be among the greatest challenges to U.S. national security in the years and decades to come. Yet America cannot respond to and contend with this challenge unless we counter threats that are far more urgent at home.
Again, that is obvious, but I worry about perverse incentives and tendencies to point to (and at times inflate) foreign threats, as a means of ignoring and distracting from the necessary reckoning with the serious and systemic problems so tragically highlighted by the pandemic.
Consistently, the Trump administration has looked to deflect blame to China—arguably concentrating more on condemning the Chinese Communist Party than mustering a coherent American response, let alone leading globally in any sense.
Certainly, there is much to critique and condemn about the early mishandling of the crisis by the Chinese government—and the apparent consequences of those failings of early warning and the concealment of key data. https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/30/asia/wuhan-china-covid-intl/index.html
And I'd agree there is an ideological dimension to this competition (clearly in the CCP's view)—and the moral and ethical stakes are stark, especially considering grave human rights abuses and crimes against humanity occurring in Xinjiang (issues unmentioned in this commentary).
The general argument in this piece that the U.S. intelligence community should redirect resources to focus on China is eminently reasonable—and such a shift is long overdue. Still, better late than never? But, that alone is an inadequate response.
For a far more thoughtful perspective on that issue, this report from @HouseIntel is very much worth reading. https://intelligence.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=1085
Beyond that, the intellectual challenge of navigating this complex rivalry and consequential relationship requires sustained investments in education and expertise on China. I attempted to articulate that basic argument in a quick commentary last year. https://thehill.com/opinion/international/454896-america-must-invest-in-skills-and-expertise-to-compete-with-china
To that end, the Trump administration's cancellation of the Fulbright program in China and Hong Kong was terribly counterproductive—and should be reversed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/07/16/trump-targets-fulbright-china-hong-kong
As interest in China studies and Chinese language appears to be dwindling, especially in light of security concerns and repression, the conversation on how to cultivate expertise and promote sophisticated understanding of China becomes even more urgent. https://www.economist.com/china/2020/11/28/as-chinas-power-waxes-the-wests-study-of-it-is-waning
