Why US and China are struggling to reach a consensus over future shape of relationship
U.S. President Donald Trump bids farewell to President Xi Jinping at Zhongnanhai in Beijing, May 15. UPI-Yonhap
China and the United States may have agreed to establish a "constructive" relationship characterised by "strategic stability" but deep-seated differences have left the future shape of the relationship looking uncertain, a forum in Beijing heard on Saturday.
Looking ahead to President Xi Jinping's possible U.S. visit later this year, Sun Yun, director of the China programme at U.S. think tank the Stimson Centre, said such trips typically required a list of deliverables, "but to my knowledge, both the two sides have not reached any consensus on what that deliverable package will look like".
Sun told the World Peace Forum held by Tsinghua University: "The two leaders have reached the consensus to establish a constructive relationship of strategic stability, but both sides do not have a shared consensus as for what exactly it means."
She also highlighted a fundamental difference in priorities, with Beijing focusing on the constructive aspects such as cooperation while Washington was more concerned about how to manage disputes.
For the U.S., the most important issue was to establish regular communication channels between their militaries, she added.
Sun said there was an urgent need to improve operational-level communication channels — especially one between the U.S. Pacific Command and its Chinese counterparts — to ensure a swift response to any crisis in flashpoints such as the South China Sea or Taiwan Strait.
Sun also cited the stalled plans for U.S. defense undersecretary Elbridge Colby to visit China this year as further evidence of clogged communication channels.
Beijing has been holding up the visit in protest over a $14 billion weapons package for Taiwan, according to The Financial Times.
Wu Xinbo, dean of Fudan University's Institute of International Studies, warned "there will be no strategic stability" if Washington resumed arms sales to Taiwan.
He added that Xi had made the point during Donald Trump's visit to Beijing in May, adding: "So, this time, if [the U.S.] is going to push the Taiwan issue, China is going to fight very hard, making sure the U.S. will regret playing that card."
Beijing sees Taiwan as part of China and has not ruled out the use of force to achieve reunification. The U.S., in common with most countries, does not recognise the self-ruled island as an independent state but opposes any attempt to seize it by force and is legally bound to supply it with weapons to defend itself.
Clifford Kupchan, chairman of Eurasia Group, a U.S. risk consultancy, said the relationship was fundamentally weak and suggested one motivation for stabilising ties was that it would offer both sides a chance to decouple and secure their supply chains.
Kupchan warned that the concept of assured disruption — "where each side recognises the other can really kind of screw up its plans if they clash" — would weaken.
"That will make the two sides more vulnerable to misperceptions and accidents like the balloon affair in 2023, when a wayward Chinese hot air balloon caused a major structural crisis," Kupchan said. "That is what we've got to prevent from now on."
In February 2023, a Chinese balloon drifted over North American airspace before being shot down by the U.S. military, severely straining diplomatic ties. Beijing said it was "an entirely unexpected accident".
Kupchan also drew a historical parallel with the Cold War relationship between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, when both sides were willing to ring-fence the critical issue of arms control away from other aspects of their rivalry.
"So I think the U.S. and Chinese leaders should look across the relationship, decide what's just too important, and try to compartmentalise it," Kupchan said.
Read the article at SCMP.