Perseverance Towards a Pragmatic Cooperative Relationship with the U.S.

THERE is much to look forward to this year as regards relations between China and the U.S. A new， younger leadership with a clearer global vision has taken over the helm of the Asian power， and U.S. President Obama recently embarked on his second term， which calls for new adjustments of domestic and foreign policies. Fresh faces feature in the newly assembled diplomatic teams of both administrations.

On the back of expanding and deepening areas of dispute between the two countries， meanwhile， even greater rivalry is apparent in Sino-U.S. relations. Disagreement persists even over the future platform of Asia-Pacific economic cooperation –whether to shift to the TPP （Trans-Pacific Partnership） that the U.S. is advocating， or to continue the FTA （Free Trade Agreement） within the APEC framework. This development has obviously put both parties on higher levels of alertness.

The two countries nevertheless still share aspirations towards global and regional peace， stability and prosperity. Both are aware that they cannot shirk their duties as the worlds two largest economies. The common desire to consolidate and advance bilateral ties and to deepen diplomatic and economic cooperation on multiple levels and in multiple realms has grown stronger than ever. The coming years should be a decisive period with respect to the long-term relationship between the two countries.

New Issues， New Challenges

Spats over cyber attacks and complaints about political discrimination against Chinese investment in the United States at the start of 2013 did not bode well for bilateral ties. Although nothing new， these disputes have escalated to new heights.

Earlier this year a report published by a private Internet security company claimed that organized hackers in the Chinese military had infiltrated American companies computer systems with the intent of plundering secrets. This triggered a spate of recriminations towards China from U.S. policy- makers and media alike.

The fact is， however， that China is itself a victim of hacking， and 60 percent of cyber attacks on it are traceable to the U.S. The hype over Chinas purported cyber theft stoked fears of a cyber war between the two countries， casting a pall over their relationship in the Information Age. Talk of cyber security threats reached such a pitch that President Obama raised the issue on March 17 during a phone conversation with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.

If cyber hacking is a relatively new topic awaiting more interlocutions between China and the U.S. before rules acceptable to both can be laid down， political intervention in Chinese telecom and new energy companies in the U.S. market has been a diehard phenomenon. The latter， however， reveals a new， alarming trend – that trade and economic issues are transforming from ballast to a source of instability in bilateral relations.

Last October the U.S. House of RepresentativesIntelligence Committee issued a report alleging， without concrete evidence， that Huawei and ZTE， both among the worlds leading suppliers of telecommunications gear and mobile phones， pose possible threats to U.S. national security. An 18-month review commissioned by the White House found no clear evidence of espionage by either Chinese telecom company. President Obama nevertheless signed a spending bill last March containing a clause prohibiting four federal agencies from purchasing any “information technology system” that is either “produced， manufactured， or assembled by one or more entities that are owned， directed or subsidized by the Peoples Republic of China.”

These contentions ostensibly center on national security， but are in essence to do with U.S. business and political interests. Huawei， the worlds secondlargest maker of networking gear， supplies 45 operators worldwide， none of whom is a major player in the U.S. telecom industry. That a freewheeling Huawei operation in the U.S. should make forays into the market share of its domestic rival， Cisco， is only to be expected. Nothing beyond this concern prompts U.S. legislators McCarthyesque witchhunt against the Chinese telecom giant.

This is obviously foul play， as top American telecom businesses like Cisco， Software and Intel have experienced no such political obstacles in the Chinese market. Chinas network operators， on the contrary， buy and use substantial quantities of their technologies and systems.

Huawei accordingly launched a slew of campaigns aimed at cracking the U.S. market amid security concerns. They included hiring a local legal team， attempted listings on local stock exchanges， and publishing an open letter from its vice president Hu Houkun. None， however， could neutralize the animosity emanating from American politicians.

On April 23， Huaweis executive vice president Xu Zhijun stated baldly that the company would retreat from the U.S. market due to “unfavorable geopolitical reasons.” Its plan to roll out several smart phone models in the U.S. later this year stalled after months of futile lobbying. The “security threshold”is thus becoming a major hindrance to progress in China-U.S. economic ties and to Chinese investment in the U.S.

More Disputes Call for More Dialogues

In addition to the above two instances， profound fissures are also apparent in East Asian military and security issues， such as the territorial disputes over the Diaoyu Islands and islands in the South China Sea. The U.S. adheres to its stance on the Diaoyu Islands wherein the issue is one covered by the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty. It moreover acknowledges Japans actual control of the area， so prejudicing the establishment and development of strategic mutual trust with China. The discussion on joint military operations on the Diaoyu Islands last February between Japan and the U.S.， on the occasion of Prime Minister Abe Shinzos US visit， further ratcheted up tensions on this matter.

The human rights issue， meanwhile， continues to simmer. The latest U.S. State Department human rights report is， as usual， full of gloomy hubristic narratives. No condolences were forthcoming from the U.S. State Department for victims of the April 21 incident， when a separatist mob brutally killed 15 police officers and community workers in Bachu County， Kashi Prefecture of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. It instead demanded an “independent investigation” and lectured the Chinese government on its policies towards ethnic minorities. This is the latest example of the U.S.s double standards on human rights and terrorism.

In stark contrast， Chinese leaders promptly expressed condolences after the Boston bombing of April 15. The U.S. government and media condemned the explosions at the marathon finishing line， instigated by two men bent on taking revenge on American society， as an act of terrorism. Yet it made peremptory comment on the Chinese governments handling of the bloody assault by separatists in Xinjiang that cost 15 lives. Such inconsistency once again attests to the biased， arrogant approach of the U.S. to Chinas internal affairs.

No one， however， would dispute that Sino-U. S. relations constitute the worlds most significant and complex bilateral relationship of this century. Unraveled， this significance stems from the simple fact that the U.S. and China are the worlds largest and second largest economies. The overarching complexity of the relationship lies in its being a parameter of that between traditional powers and emerging powers， wherein any move in Sino-American ties has global implications.

The Sino-U.S. relationship is invariably under the sway of structural factors such as the security dilemma， of which competition in the realm of geopolitical strategies is an inherent hallmark. The complexity of Sino-U.S. ties calls for closer communication， dialogue and cooperation， in accordance with the wishes of the leaders and peoples of both countries.

The visit to China last March， after the power transition in Beijing， of U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Jacob J. Lew was the first by a member of Obamas second-term cabinet. During his stay Mr. Lew met with Chinese leaders and exchanged ideas on cyber security and economic and trade issues of wide concern in the U.S. On April 13， Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in China for a visit， during which he held talks with Chinese leaders on a broad range of topics including North Korea， Iran， macro economic policies， market access， cyber security， energy security and climate change. Discussions also took place on a new， more efficient cooperative mechanism.

Hot on Kerrys heels came General Martin E. Dempsey， U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff， who landed in Beijing on April 22 for a fiveday visit， during which he met with his Chinese counterpart General Fang Fenghui. Two days later Deputy Secretary of State William Joseph Burns arrived in Beijing for talks on regional security issues of common concern， among them the DPRKs nuclear program. Following these high-level exchanges between the two governments， China and the U.S. agreed to set up a joint cyber security work group within the China-U.S. Strategic and Economic Dialogue framework.

Meanwhile the two sides are whittling away their policy differences on the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula， now a key aspect of China-U.S. collaboration.

What defines the Sino-U.S. relationship today is not the differences and competition between the two countries， but the approaches they take to dealing with them. As long as China and the U.S. unswervingly adhere to the path of pragmatic cooperation in the face of any dispute that may arise， their bilateral ties should move forward steadily.

In reference to the Strategic and Economic Dialogue， former U.S. assistant secretary of state Kurt Campbell said that the intent was “to have a candid and honest set of discussions on a range of issues.”He suggested that the two countries “also have discussions about cross-cutting issues. One of the goals of these dialogues is to bring together people from a variety of agencies and to break down the barriers inside both of our governments to more effectively tackle issues like energy security， development， food assistance， and the like.” Campbell said it was important “to have discussions that bring together critical diplomats and military officials... to create greater understanding around issues that have the potential for miscalculation and inadvertence in our relationship.”

There is every reason to expect more systematic and efficient cooperation between China and the U.S. this year. A regular and fruitful dialogue mechanism between top leaders， in particular， can provide the “Sino-U.S. cooperative plan” for bilateral relationship， regional cooperation and global stability in the 21st century. The two countries undoubtedly have the capacity and political will to construct and develop a new-type cooperative， winwin relationship between big powers.