[Opinion] Is the US-China meeting in San Francisco similar to international events of 1972?

Summary

The article discusses the significance of the US-China meeting in San Francisco, drawing parallels to the 1972 US-China summit, and reflects on the implications for current geopolitical tensions, energy markets, and international relations.

Abstract

The author of the article encourages readers to engage in discussions about the interplay of war, energy crises, and international politics, particularly in light of the recent US-China meeting in San Francisco. This event is compared to the historic 1972 meeting between US President Richard Nixon and Chinese leader Mao Zedong, which occurred against a backdrop of political scandals and the Cold War. The current geopolitical landscape, marked by conflicts in various regions and the strategic importance of energy markets, echoes the complexities of the early 1970s. The article suggests that the US-China relationship, despite recent strains, may see a resurgence in trade and investment post-meeting, potentially influencing China's economic recovery. Additionally, the article touches on the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict and the role of US politics in the Middle East, emphasizing the need for a focus on Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The author also references previous writings on the global oil markets, energy transition, and the geopolitical analysis provided by George Friedman and his team at Geopolitical Futures.

Opinions

The author finds it insightful and somewhat controversial to compare the current US-China meeting to the 1972 summit, considering the historical context of oil markets and international alliances.
There is a suggestion that the US-China relationship, despite tensions from the trade war and pandemic-induced supply chain disruptions, might see a revival in economic ties following the San Francisco meeting.
The author acknowledges not being an expert on historical geopolitics but appreciates Friedman's ability to draw connections between past and present international dynamics.
The article implies that the US's involvement in the Middle East, particularly in the Arab-Israeli conflict, is an unwanted responsibility that persists due to historical inertia.
The author believes that the mass media may be overlooking the significance of Israeli settlements in the West Bank amidst the recent escalation of conflict between Israel and Hamas.
The author emphasizes the importance of considering the historical context when analyzing current geopolitical events, as it can provide valuable insights into potential future developments.

War and energy are on the minds of so many people right now. Conflict rages on from Israel and Palestine, to Ukraine and Russia, and between armed groups in Myanmar, all the while OPEC+ meetings are stirring up the pot of international politics by cutting output of global oil supplies.

That’s why I encourage everyone to join this discussion. We should be talking more about world affairs these days!

I even wrote a previous opinion for [The Weekend Brief] newsletter about the global oil markets and energy transition—Is rising supply of solar panels causing the peak oil demand scenario in global energy markets? — which includes some commentary from other Medium writers.

Geopolitical Futures and its diverse team of writers, analysts and forecasters have been continuously writing about the situation these wars have created for international politics. George Friedman is founder of Geopolitical Futures and author of many books on geopolitics. His latest writing about the US-China meeting in San Francisco is insightful and a little controversial. Have a look at it here.

Now, here are my thoughts about the article.

“One can’t help but be reminded of a similar trip in 1972, when U.S. President Richard Nixon famously met Chinese leader Mao Zedong. By then, Mao’s age and health had reduced him to a shadow of his former self, while Nixon was dealing with the Watergate scandal, which, I’m sure, he knew would eventually destroy him.”

I personally was not thinking about the historical context in this way. I was thinking more in terms of volatile geopolitical trends in the last three years. But, clearly, I am not an expert on the topic, which is why Friedman continues to surprise me on any given topic related to geopolitics. It is indeed plausible to relate current events to what was happening in 1972, as oil markets were still under the influence of Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf producers. I imagine some of the discussions on global energy markets were quite similiar to now as in 1972.

“The meeting with Nixon was about an informal and undocumented alliance between the United States and China against the Soviet Union. Neither liked each other, but practicality makes strange bedfellows. Ultimately, the meeting would open the door to Chinese exports to the U.S. and U.S. investments in China.”

Bedfellows? Well, there’s definitely been talks of a divorce between these bedfellows since the the Trump Administration’s trade war and the unraveling of global supply chains since the global Covid-19 pandemic. What remains to be seen, however, is to what extent these events will impact the future of the global economy. It’s too difficult to predict, which is why Friedman prefers to look objectively at the historical context preceding this era of the global economy and international politics. After this meeting in San Francisco, I imagine that Chinese exports to the US markets will ramp up, in a bid to get China’s recovery going in the lead up to the Chinese Spring Festival. That will be another time to reflect on these current events.

“At the periphery of all of this is the Arab-Israeli war, which the U.S. wishes would go away but which clings to history as an unwanted responsibility. It’s the same war as in 1973 with different players and weapons, with no solution and the sounds of the highly moral demanding that someone else do something.”

Weapons and oil are always playing out in the affairs of US politics in the Middle East, but how about those Israeli settlements in the West Bank of Palestine? It seems to me that the mass media is neglecting to focus on the settlements in this latest escalation of the conflict between Israel and Hamas. I still think that a long-lasting peace settlement in the Middle East comes with some serious conditions around those settlements. On the contrary, the government in Israel is expending its political and economic resources abroad, by getting countries like Lebanon and Morocco to cooperate with the historical enemy of the region. Israel’s cooperation with those countries should not be an underestimated factor going forward.

If you like my opinion on current affairs, check out some of the previous opinions I wrote for [The Weekend Brief] newsletter about the wars in Israel and Ukraine below:

[Opinion] Is the US-China meeting in San Francisco similar to international events of 1972?

Sign up for [The Weekend Brief] newsletter by Areas & Producers