Romney's China hand encounters rough seas

[xchrom]

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NH17Ad01.html

The struggles of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to define a coherent China policy continued last week. The nomination of Robert Zoellick, former World Bank Group president, to head Romney's national-security transition team has drawn the ire of prominent neo-conservatives who take issue with a variety of Zoellick's foreign-policy positions, not least of which is his "pro-China" orientation.

The problems Romney has encountered speak to the distrust many hardline conservatives have toward his candidacy: Should they take his many changes of heart as sincere, or as political necessities? If the latter, can they trust him to govern in ways consistent with their values, or should they expect him to reverse course? These misgivings explain why many from the neo-conservative wing of the party are quick to react when Romney



appears ready to tack to the moderate middle, as his nomination of Zoellick suggested.

Thus far, Romney's public statements about China are noticeably different from those of past Republican candidates. His emphasis on China has led many pundits to proclaim that a Romney-led administration would "get tough" on Beijing. He has famously declared his intentions to identify China as a currency manipulator on "Day 1" of his presidency. All of these are interesting comments from the otherwise conventional, pro-business Republican, and markedly different from those of past Republican nominees whose emphasis on free trade and access to China was an all but explicit part of their platforms.

It is widely accepted that if elected, Romney's position toward China would tack to these traditional Republican stances, an opinion reinforced by Zoellick's nomination. In nominating Zoellick, it appeared Romney was signaling to the world an acknowledgement that his administration would come back to center on foreign-policy matters.