The Urgent Need to Re-Establish Reliable Communication with China
The escalating tensions between the United states and China demand a renewed focus on crisis communication. simply put, the existing channels aren’t working, and relying on a crisis to force cooperation is a risky gamble. As experts who’ve dedicated years to understanding this complex relationship – including our time at the now-shuttered U.S. Institute of Peace – we believe a proactive approach is critical.
the current state of affairs is deeply concerning. Diplomatic contact is increasingly limited and feels performative, while a narrative of inevitable conflict gains traction. This erosion of communication, coupled with the closure of institutions dedicated to fostering understanding, actively undermines vital avenues for de-escalation.
Why the Current Hotlines Aren’t Enough
The existing U.S.-China crisis communication mechanisms, often referred to as “hotlines,” are proving inadequate. Christian Ruhl, a global risk expert, highlights a key issue: they’re often unavailable when needed most.This isn’t a matter of intentional obstruction, but a reflection of practical realities.
Here’s where a shift in approach is necessary:
* Infrastructure Vulnerability: Customary phone-based hotlines are susceptible to damage during conflict, possibly severing a crucial link.
* Hierarchical Constraints: China’s political and military structure discourages individual officials from engaging in real-time communication with foreign counterparts.
* Need for Deliberation: The original U.S.-Soviet hotline utilized telegraphs precisely to allow for careful consideration of responses – a valuable principle for today.
A Text-Based Solution: A Modern Approach to Crisis Communication
A text-based hotline offers a viable solution. It addresses manny of the shortcomings of current systems and draws on historical precedent. Consider these advantages:
* Enhanced Security: Text-based communication is less vulnerable to infrastructure disruption.
* Navigating Bureaucracy: It sidesteps the constraints within China’s hierarchical system, allowing for more flexible engagement.
* Acknowledging receipt: A key feature could be a mechanism to acknowledge receipt of information without requiring an immediate, formal reply. This provides reassurance and buys time for considered responses.
* Reduced Escalation Risk: Lower-level officials can offer reassurance without making commitments, potentially slowing down the escalation cycle.
This isn’t about replacing existing channels, but supplementing them with a more resilient and practical option.
Learning from History: Don’t Wait for Another crisis
Some argue that only a crisis on the scale of the Cuban Missile Crisis will spur the necessary investment in robust communication. Though, waiting for such a dangerous event is a reckless strategy.
You, as a policymaker or concerned citizen, should understand that proactive measures are essential. We are already facing increasing military competition across multiple domains. Delaying action only increases the risk of miscalculation and unintended escalation.
The time to strengthen communication channels with China isn’t after a crisis begins – it’s now. Investing in reliable, readily available communication is an investment in global stability.
Carla P. freeman is the director of the Foreign Policy Institute at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a senior lecturer in international affairs. She returned to the school in early 2025 after serving as a senior expert on the China team at the U.S.Institute of peace.
alison McFarland is a Ph.D. student in politics at Princeton University, focusing on Chinese foreign policy and conflict studies.She previously worked on the China team at the U.S. Institute of Peace.
Note: War on the Rocks adheres to a house style that uses the official name for the U.S. Department of Defense unless and until Congress changes it by statute.