Three Essential Principles for U.S.-China Relations

In early May, the annual U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue will begin. Like previous years, many constructive issues will be discussed and many immediate issues will be touched upon. Nonetheless, as an important communication mechanism between the two countries, the dialogue will perhaps focus on the top priority issues and discussions. Earlier this year, President Hu made a stately visit to United States. Regarding the visit, Obama responded to general skepticism about the benefits of U.S.-China cooperation. He said the visit proved a simple point that we mutually benefit from our successes. Although the idea is simple, it has deep implications for policies — designing China’s policy and understanding U.S. policies. I firmly believe there are three important principles to handle current U.S.-China relations.

The first principle is that U.S. economic growth depends on China. The 2008 financial crisis exposed the structural problems and weaknesses in the U.S. economy. These problems provide two implications for effective U.S.-China cooperation: First, because both countries are mutually dependent, China cannot afford a collapse in the U.S. economy. Second, a healthy U.S. economy also depends on China’s growing economy to be strong. Therefore, preventing another U.S. economic collapse is a U.S. concern as well as a Chinese. China plays an important role in sustaining a healthy U.S. economy. Not only are the two economies not a zero-sum game, they have great implications for Obama’s handling of China-U.S. trade relations. For example, should the U.S. restrict export of high-tech skills to China when it depends so much on the “China factor” for its development? Should national security be used as an excuse for preventing investments coming from China? How does the U.S. handle protectionism and its implication on creating tension in U.S.-China trade relations?

The second principle is that China needs to have a stable society. The Tunisian Revolution in North Africa more or less affected China. During an age of rapid development and social transformation, China sways in the turmoil and its ability to stand still is the world’s focus. The Chinese believe that though China has many problems, it needs to find a solution for stability and development. World experts who are not looking through colored lenses also agreed that China’s stability might hugely impact the world economy. This is not good news for the world.

This April, I visited the U.S. and heard some complaints from Americans that the U.S. should focus more on human rights issues in China. Although the issues are important, we should not neglect a more high-level perspective: China’s stability is of utmost importance. Social instability will undo all the current efforts for economic development and miss all the great growth opportunities and trends in the modern era. Globally, the world will miss out on a very important economic driver. Americans might not understand China’s need for stability and development, but they sure will understand the consequences of bringing down China’s economy, especially its impact on the U.S. economy. During the financial crisis, the U.S. government took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Because they were “too big to fail,” the government had to intervene. Now, China is an economy that the world should recognize as “too big to fail.” Observing the issues in China, one should not be merely looking at the trees and forget about the forest. This will shed a practical light on how to create dialogues for human right issues in China.

Third, the U.S. and China need to avoid conflicts in the Asia-Pacific region. Last year, Obama’s government heightened its diplomatic strategy by turning its focus to Asia. From the South Sea of the Korean Peninsula to the Diaoyu Islands, the U.S. stood at the opposite end of China. These various conflicts are of great concern. The U.S. has been actively deploying in Asia-Pacific by using various methods to balance its power in the region. If the two powers continue their open confrontations and hidden struggles, it will soon be very difficult to maintain order here. Very likely, the result will be disastrous.

First, Asia-Pacific is important to both countries; they can both exert influences in this region as well as preventing each other from gaining any benefits here. A stalemate here almost certainly means a no-win situation for both. Furthermore, Asia-Pacific countries may need to pick sides in this conflict. It is a choice between China, whose economy benefits the region, or the U.S., whose military gives security and protection. This is definitely not an easy choice. In light of this matter, both countries should acknowledge that cold war mentalities, spheres of influences and balance of powers are not constructive measures. Both countries should certainly not add fire to conflicts or try to benefit from one. Instead, both countries should seek to create peace in the region, lessen the conflicts and create negotiations in matters that are important to both parties.