Hamilton Journal News

Bond has no time for China, America’s leading rival

- Ross Douthat Ross Douthat writes for The New York Times.

The final James Bond outing for Daniel Craig, “No Time to Die,” also marks a notable milestone for Bondian geopolitic­s: The franchise just completed a fivemovie arc with a single lead actor, and amid all the globe-trotting and intrigue, you would barely know that China existed. Shanghai and Macao were brief backdrops, and one villain had been tortured, offstage and in the past, by Chinese security forces — but overall, a series released across the years of China’s rise gave little hint that America’s leading rival mattered any more than any other exotic Bondian locale.

In fairness, the Cold Warera Bond movies were not obsessed with Russia, serving up stateless supervilla­ins rather than Soviet adversarie­s in many of his outings. But the reality of Russian power was part of the fabric of the series. The same actor showed up as the head of the KGB, for instance, in five Bond movies in the 1970s and ’80s. China’s absence from Bondworld is part of a general absence in American cinema. Out of fear of losing the Chinese market and amid the aggressive use of commercial soft power by Beijing, in the almost quarter-century since Brad Pitt’s “Seven Years in Tibet” and Richard Gere’s “Red Corner,” no major Hollywood release has portrayed the communist regime in a substantia­lly negative light. Instead, China appears in our pop production­s in soft focus, as in “The Martian” and “Arrival,” or else takes a fantastica­l form, as in “Mulan” and “Shang-Chi.”

Or just as often, as in the Craig movies, it barely appears at all. The Asian pop culture that has increasing influence on America is mostly Korean and Japanese, while China ... remains more a domain for experts, its internal life and culture more distant and opaque.

As a consequenc­e, its relationsh­ip to American ideologica­l debates is fluid, fraught and strange . ...

On the left now, you see several impulses. There is an irrelevant but fascinatin­g fringe of very online “tankies” — a reference to the communists who justified the USSR sending in the tanks to Hungary — actively championin­g the Beijing regime. There is a Bernie Sanders left that wants to critique the Chinese regime on trade and human rights but fears anything that seems like warmongeri­ng. And there is a left that thinks the existentia­l stakes of climate change require deep cooperatio­n with Beijing.

The center, meanwhile, has lost its optimism about China turning into a democracy. But it’s not sure whether to pivot to confrontat­ion and try to disentangl­e our economies, or whether globalizat­ion makes that disentangl­ement impossible, and so we need, with whatever nose-holding, to deepen ties instead. (This divide runs through President Joe Biden’s Cabinet.)

The right includes several tendencies as well. There’s a Cold War 2.0 mentality, which fears China as a sweeping ideologica­l threat, a fusion of old-model communism with 21st-century surveillan­ce technology that promises to make totalitari­anism great again. There’s a realist perspectiv­e that regards China as a traditiona­l great power rival and focuses on military containmen­t. And there’s a view that sees China and the United States as actually converging in decadence — with similar problems, from declining birthrates to social inequaliti­es to internet-mediated unhappines­s . ...

Americans have never exactly excelled at understand­ing other societies, and a few Chinese bad guys in James Bond movies obviously won’t shed the light we need. But Hollywood’s supine attitude toward Chinese power is a useful window into a larger problem: We need to see our great 21st-century rival clearly, and too often we see only through a glass darkly, if at all.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States