III

There are five thorny problems for China and the United States to address if they want to successfully build a cooperative partnership and embark on the path of a new-type relationship between major countries.

First, lack of strategic mutual trust. Without trust, one cannot establish oneself in society. Likewise, without trust, state-to-state relations cannot go smoothly. It is unfair to say that there is no mutual trust between China and the United States. But it is true that the mutual trust is inadequate. Being a big country, neither of us will give up its faith, value and social system deeply rooted in its history, culture and tradition. Both will firmly maintain their own interests. A minute misreading of the strategic intention of the other side may have severe consequences. Dr. Henry Kissinger believes that improper policies of China or the United States may reflect in much higher cost than a war in the long run. It is more and more imperative to build up China-U.S. mutual trust, whether it is for managing the bilateral relations or for dealing with common global and regional issues, whether it is out of the need for the long-term development of the bilateral relations or to meet the common expectations of the international community.

"He who knows others is intelligent, and he who knows himself is wise." China has become the second largest economy in the world. But being big does not necessarily mean being strong. China remains a developing country and will be so in a fairly long time to come. It is imperative for

China to focus on development and people's well-being, stay firm on the path of peaceful development and work for a peaceful and stable international environment. China's diplomacy is of a defensive not expansive nature and is of a peaceful not violent nature.

China has no intention to challenge the U.S. standing, still less to compete with it for hegemony. It does not square with the fact to think that China intends to challenge the American international standing. On the other hand, to keep to the road of peaceful development, China needs to rely on its own efforts and also to have the understanding and support of the outside world. In this respect, the U.S. choice is of crucial importance.

Recently, there have been signs in the United States to blame China for American domestic problems. Instead of trying to resolve specific problems between the United States and China simply as they stand, they tend to magnify the problems out of proportion by seeing them through the lens of competition for domination between major powers and by speculating and analyzing China's intentions in the worst possible light. In the course of returning to the Asia-Pacific, the United States has been vigorously strengthening its alliance system, advancing the anti-ballistic missile system in the Asia-Pacific, pursuing "sea-air battle" and intervening in the disputes between China and its neighbors. What is the true motive behind all these moves? What signals do they want to send to China and the region? All these have not only made China raise doubts, but also have upset other countries in the region. The United States must face the issue and convince China, other countries in the region and the international community that there is no gap between its policy statements on China and its true intentions.

Second, the bottleneck of core interests. China and the United States are each other's stakeholders, with more rather than less converging interests. To respect each other's core interests and major concerns will help create conditions and atmosphere necessary for upholding one's own core interests and major concerns. China has never done anything to undermine the U.S. core interests and major concerns, yet what the United States has done in matters concerning China's core and important interests and major concerns is unsatisfactory.

The Taiwan issue is the most important and most sensitive issue in the China-U.S. relations and it is vital to the political foundation of the bilateral relations. Deng Xiaoping once said that there was no other issue between China and the United States than the Taiwan issue, and that once the Taiwan issue was resolved, the knot between the two countries would have been untied. What has happened shows that if the Taiwan issue is properly handled, China-U.S. relations will grow smoothly. Otherwise, the bilateral relations will suffer setbacks and even severe impact.

Although the U.S. side has consistently reiterated its commitment to the one China policy and opposition to "Taiwan independence," it has continued to sell arms to Taiwan even today, 30 years after the issuance of the Communiqué of August 17. Those who believe that to indefinitely keep the cross-Straits separation serves the U.S. interests have clearly misjudged the situation across the straits and misplaced the Taiwan issue in the U.S. relations with China. In the context of increasingly intertwined interests between China and the United States, to play the Taiwan card is a liability instead of an asset. It serves the interests of a small minority, but undermines the broader China-U.S. relations and will only land the United States in a more passive strategic position. Deng Xiaoping also said, "Frankly speaking, doing this (selling arms to Taiwan) will not pose a terrible threat to the People's Republic of China, but it will create an obstacle to a peaceful and negotiated resolution of the reunification issue." More and more people in the United States believe that it is unrealistic for the United States to continue infinitely its arms sales to Taiwan and build a closer relationship with an ever stronger China.

The United States should abide by its commitment made in the Communiqué of August 17, take a more unequivocal position of containing Taiwan independence rather than obstructing China's reunification and translate its commitment to the one China policy into concrete actions. It should play a positive and constructive role in maintaining stability across the straits, promoting peace and stability in the region and creating an enabling environment to sustain the stability of China-U.S. relations. This serves the long-term interests of the United States. If the U.S. side abandons its anachronistic thinking, the Taiwan issue can become a positive factor for advancing bilateral relations.

The United States acknowledges that mutual respect, non-interference in each other's internal affairs and settlement of issues in the spirit of partnership constitute the foundation for the development of bilateral relations. However, the United States has often criticized China publicly on issues related to Tibet, Xinjiang, democracy, human rights and other issues, and it has even openly meddled in China's domestic affairs. Apparently, some Americans have never stopped their attempt for a "peaceful evolution" in China. It is easy to find some dissenting voices in a populous and multi-ethnic country like China, yet seeing it as an opportunity for "color revolution" is a major strategic mistake. The vast majority of the Chinese people cherish the hard-won stability and hope to see reforms progress in the context of overall stability, which is exactly what the Chinese Government is doing. "Peaceful evolution" failed to succeed even when there was a huge disparity in strength between the United States and China, it would only be a forlorn hope at present and in future. As the Chinese saying goes, "If you don't want others to know, you'd better not do it." The less small tricks one plays behind the scene, the more attention both sides would truly pay to win-win cooperation between the two countries, which would only benefit the two countries, the world and the sound new-type relationship between big powers.

Third, truly implementing the principle of treating each other as equals. This is an inherent element in democracy in international relations. There have never existed such issues as one looking for the other's favor, one owing to the other or one above the other in China-U.S. relations. Rather, to develop the bilateral relations is a choice made by both sides to safeguard the common practical and long-term strategic interests. Deng Xiaoping once said that, "As to China-U.S. relations, I heard some Americans say that China tried to improve its relations with the United States because China wanted to ask for U.S. favors. I don't think the claim is right. It follows from the above logic that once China is developed and powerful economically and militarily, then China will neither pursue good relations with the United States nor work with it to tackle challenges in the world. The logic is wrong."

Equality doesn't mean China will sit with the United States on exactly the same status, "managing the world together" or "dividing the world" between them. Instead, either of the two countries should, in mind and in action, regard the other as an equal partner of dialogue and cooperation, try to put itself in the other's shoes, accommodate the other's concerns in a reciprocal manner and handle bilateral relations in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and other universally-accepted norms. Neither side should see itself as above the other side or try to change the rules arbitrarily just to maximize its own interests.

China and the United States cannot change into each other. It is quite normal for them to have different strategic goals in their foreign policies, and different diplomatic philosophy and means. It doesn't mean they cannot achieve win-win results. In fact, the interests they share in the traditional international political, economic, security and other fields have increased and their cooperation in new international space like the cyber-space has expanded. Practice has proved that the two countries will be able to find the confluence of interests and carry out win-win cooperation as long as they follow the principle of equality in good faith. It will in no way help the bilateral relations and will only damage the overall atmosphere of bilateral relations if, on the contrary, one side tries to pressure the other side for self-serving purposes, goes so far as to publicly accuse the other side of being a "selective stakeholder" and "standing on the wrong side of history" or even threatens to form an "international united front" to force the other side to succumb. The Chinese side has always stood for resolution of problems in a constructive manner and by accommodating each other's comfort level. It has not acted or spoken irresponsibly with regard to bilateral relations. But China is firm in its determination to safeguard its independence, state sovereignty and national dignity.

Fourth, restructuring the trade mix. The economic and trade frictions existing between China the United States are, in fact, a sign of the interests between the two countries being more closely intertwined and they can be addressed as their relations grow mature. What is important is that we should adopt a forward-looking approach toward this issue and refrain from politicizing economic and trade issues. Still less should one side push for a so-called timetable for a solution based on its own domestic political agenda. China presents a huge market of more than 1.3 billion consumers. It will generate an import demand of $10 trillion in the coming five years. Many of those countries that have close economic and trade links with China have seen enormous potential for cooperation from China's five-year development plan. They are designing their development strategies with more consideration given to China's five-year plan for reference and for more cooperation opportunities. That is a wise move. Conversely, if one only notes differences over specific issues or only sees trees while losing sight of the wood, not only these issues will not be resolved, even worse, opportunities of expanding cooperation and achieving greater win-win results may also be lost.

Both China and the United States face the arduous task of restructuring the economy, ensuring growth, and promoting employment. To find new fulcrum and platforms, and accelerate the building of an all-round economic partnership of mutual benefit are of vital importance to a steady economic recovery and growth of the two countries and of the world at large. Premier Wen Jiabao has long offered a package proposal for closer China-U.S. cooperation in economy, trade, finance, investment and infrastructure, including expanding the two-way trade, two-way investment and cooperation in new energy, new materials, energy conservation, environmental protection, space, aviation and other sectors so as to create new cooperation highlights. If the United States responds positively to China's proposal, addresses each other's economic and trade concerns through dialogue and consultation instead of protectionism, and takes concrete steps to relax its restrictions of dwindling practical value on high-tech exports to China, the economic and trade ties between the two countries are expected to grow substantially stronger.

Fifth, ensuring healthy interactions in the Asia-Pacific. China and the United States, both being Pacific countries, have their interests more intertwined, more direct contacts and greater far-reaching influence in the region than anywhere else. During his visit to the United States, Vice President Xi said, "The vast Pacific Ocean has ample space for China and the United States." China has always respected the legitimate interests and concerns of the United States in this region. It welcomes U.S. efforts for peace, stability and prosperity in this part of the world. At the same time, it hopes that the United States will respect China's interests and concerns.

There have been some problems recently in China's neighborhood. China is not the maker of these problems, and still less the perpetrator of the harm. Rather, it is a victim on which harm has been imposed. If it were true that China's policy had led to regional instability as alleged by someone, how could they account for the robust development of the Asia-Pacific driven by China's growth and the unprecedented integration of the interests between China and its neighboring countries? If China had sought regional hegemony and pushed for exclusive regional mechanisms as some have claimed, how could they explain China's consistent efforts for a dominant role by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in regional affairs, the fact that China was the first to openly welcome for the United States to the East Asia Summit, and that it vigorously sought cooperation with other countries on regional hotspot issues? China has never sought a dominant position in the region in its strategic objectives or distinguish friends and foes on the basis of ideology in the Asia-Pacific. As a matter of fact, China has lived up to the Asian spirit of standing on its own feet, being bold in opening new ground, being open and inclusive and sharing weal and woe with concrete actions not rhetorics. Its policy of good-neighborliness and friendship has delivered tangible benefits to countries in the region.

On the other hand, many countries are deeply concerned about the U.S. efforts to build up military alliance and military forces in the region, moves that are very much tinted with the Cold War mentality. They run counter to the mainstream aspiration of the general public for peace, development and cooperation in the region. Many of those who know China-U.S. relations echo the concern, believing that the United States has given too much emphasis to the military dimension with inadequate input to other urgent areas. No country in the Asia-Pacific wants to be forced to make a choice between China and the United States. Political leaders in some regional countries have openly warned the United States against handling its relations with China with a Cold War mentality.

It is pointed out in the China-U.S. Joint Statement in 2011 that "working together, both leaders support efforts to build a more stable, peaceful, and prosperous Asia-Pacific region for the 21st century." Starting from June 2011, China and the United States have had three rounds of consultation on the Asia-Pacific affairs with a focus on a healthy interaction in this region. The two sides have agreed to work together under the principle of mutually respecting each other and accommodating each other's interests and concerns to provide public goods to the people in the region, i.e. a peaceful and stable regional environment, a development prospect of common prosperity and a cooperative partnership of mutual benefit. A healthy interaction between China and the United States in the Asia-Pacific meets the fundamental interests of the two countries, the trend of the times and the prevailing expectations of countries in the region.

IV

Dr. Sun Yat-sen, the forerunner of the Chinese revolution, said, "Those who follow the trend of the times prosper and those who don't perish." The transformation of China-U.S. relations from adversaries to important partners is a move that conforms to the trend of the times and also a result of strategic decision made by leaders of the two countries transcending the limitations of the times. Mao Zedong, the founding father of the People's Republic, took a far-sighted view on China-U.S. relations. He said in 1956 that "the Chinese and the American peoples are friends. But the relations between the two governments are not friendly. The governmental relations are not good in my generation, but they might improve in my son's generation. Even if they still would not improve then, they would change for the better in my grandson's generation." It was his strategic decision to "push the big ball with the small ball" that opened the door for China-U.S. contacts and has led the bilateral relations to where they are today. In his remarks during his visit to China in 1972, President Nixon said, "We have great differences today. What brings us together is that we have common interests that transcend those differences."

It took 40 years for China and the United States to come to the consensus on the path of building a new-type relationship between major countries for the benefit of the two sides and the world at large. Looking forward to the second 40 years of their relations, the two countries should focus on moving forward along this path with solid steps. Just as State Councilor Dai proposed to the U.S. side at the fourth China-U.S. Strategic and Economic Dialogues, "This new-type relationship between major countries should have the following features: respect each other and treat each other as equals politically; carry out comprehensive, mutually beneficial and win-win cooperation economically; build up mutual trust and tolerance and share responsibilities in security matters; learn from and promote each other culturally; and seek common ground while reserving differences and live side by side in peace with each other ideologically. This has been evolved from the vision of our two presidents for the China-U.S. cooperative partnership based on mutual respect and mutual benefit. They represent both means and goals." As long as China and the United States adhere to the consensus of the two presidents, to the goal of building a cooperative partnership between the two countries, and to the spirit of the three joint communiqués and the China-U.S. joint statements, this path of a new-type relationship between major countries will become broader and broader, and will lead the two countries to a bright future. We expect the United States to move forward with us in the same direction and to jointly write a new chapter in the history of international relations.

(This article was published in China International Strategy Review 2012)

(Source: www.fmprc.gov.cn)