Biden Caves To China At San Francisco Summit

Following this week’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in San Francisco, Joe Biden’s diplomatic exchange with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, has sparked significant discourse. The meeting, highly anticipated and lauded by the administration as a momentous stride in foreign policy, culminated with limited tangible outcomes. In his bid to present the summit as constructive, Biden announced agreements on fentanyl control, military communication and artificial intelligence (AI) risks.

However, critics argue that these accords fall into China’s historical pattern of empty promises. In an analysis published Friday by The Federalist, Helen Raleigh observes that Biden missed a crucial opportunity to use America’s leverage effectively. With China’s economic downturn and the U.S.’s robust growth, the U.S. could have set preconditions for the summit that demanded China halt its military harassment in the South China Sea and cease supporting Russia and Iran’s geopolitics.

Yet, Biden’s focus on climate change and green initiatives has deepened the U.S.’s reliance on China, which commands the market for renewable energy components, exploiting its workforce and coal resources.

As detailed by former State Department advisor Miles Yu, Xi’s strategy leverages international platforms to legitimize China’s regime, portraying strength to its populace despite internal weaknesses. Xi’s last-minute agreement to meet with Biden positions China as a formidable power, sidelining the U.S.’s foreign policy efforts, which included cabinet-level visits to China.

Post-summit, Biden’s positive spin contrasts sharply with the skepticism of analysts who cite China’s record of reneging on commitments. Kelley Currie, a former diplomat, reminded the public of China’s 2019 fentanyl control pledge, which was short-lived. Similarly, China’s ambitions to enhance its military prowess through AI remain uncurbed, with no real commitment to alter its trajectory following the summit.

Military relations between the U.S. and China also remain fraught. Despite Biden’s assertion that open communication is vital for avoiding conflict, the Chinese military’s refusal to engage in dialogue and aggressive maneuvers in the South China Sea has been a deliberate policy choice, not a communication gap.

Moreover, an expected deal between Biden and Xi to limit AI’s role in nuclear weapons is stirring debate over the U.S.’s sacrifice of its technological lead. Critics like Christopher Alexander of Pioneer Development Group question the wisdom of forfeiting the U.S.’s AI advantage, as it aids in crucial decision-making, particularly in nuclear scenarios.

The broader implications of the summit are disconcerting to conservative observers. The Biden administration’s eagerness for dialogue and cooperation with China is perceived as a strategic blunder, overshadowed by China’s habitual empty rhetoric. The post-summit landscape seems to lack progress and poses heightened risks as the U.S. navigates Xi’s timeline and China’s military ambitions remain unchecked.

The summit has become a flashpoint for debate on the U.S.’s foreign policy posture in a world increasingly intertwined with AI and its potential military applications. With national security at stake, the consensus among conservative critics is clear: The U.S. should not compromise on developing AI systems that safeguard its interests, especially when adversaries show no inclination toward reciprocal restraint.