Breathe
By Brenda Estefan
Despite deep differences between the United States and China, this Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken met in Beijing with Chinese President Xi Jinping. This was the first visit by such a high-level official since 2018 when then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was in the Chinese capital.
The differences between Beijing and Washington have become too great to be resolved in a few hours. However, the U.S. diplomat's visit to Beijing is good news considering that the two rival superpowers of the 21st century had hardly communicated at a high level since seven months ago, when Joe Biden and Xi Jinping met in Bali on the sidelines of the G20 Summit.
Blinken's tour was scheduled for February this year, but was postponed after the Chinese spy balloon incident that flew over U.S. territory. However, the fact that the visit has finally taken place does not imply that the relationship is going through a better moment. On the contrary, military friction between the two countries has increased in recent months and the U.S. proposal for a meeting between the defense ministers last month was rejected by Beijing, given that its minister is the target of U.S. sanctions.
There is a long list of points of tension between the two countries which, among others, include: Chinese military maneuvers around Taiwan and the South China Sea, Beijing's implicit support for Moscow in the war in Ukraine, fentanyl trafficking, technological rivalry, US sanctions against Chinese digital industry giants, the treatment of the Uighur Muslim minority in China, Chinese spy balloons and the revelation of the existence of a Chinese espionage base in Cuba.
In the face of so many disagreements, why seek to revive high-level dialogue? First, because Chinese and U.S. strategists know that communication between their countries is vital to avoid misunderstandings or miscalculations that could have a tragic global outcome. And second, because of their own economic interests.
The comparison of Sino-U.S. rivalry with the Cold War is valid to some extent, but there is an important difference. While there were no significant trade links between the United States and the then USSR, China and the United States have significant trade exchanges.
Recognition of this has led to a shift in Washington's approach to the relationship with China from "decoupling" to "derisking". Total decoupling between the world's two largest economies would result in a negative impact for both countries and the rest of the world. In contrast, derisking seeks to strike a balance between economic interests and the need to address legitimate concerns in areas such as national security, human rights and intellectual property. The concept of "derisking" recognizes the importance of maintaining a certain economic interdependence that allows for sustainable growth and the resolution of common problems, while seeking to lessen U.S. dependence on China for strategic goods, mainly technological, and not supplying the Asian giant with some sensitive products.
In this context, the recent visits of CEOs of major U.S. companies, such as Elon Musk, Tim Cook and Bill Gates, to the Chinese capital, where they held meetings with Xi Jinping, can be understood.
The words of Kurt Campbell, the Biden administration's Indo-Pacific policy coordinator, are pertinent: "Intense competition requires intense diplomacy if we are to manage tensions." China and the United States must learn to disagree without jeopardizing global peace and stability, and their own economic interests.
The opinions expressed are the responsibility of the authors and are absolutely independent of the position and editorial line of Opinion 51.
More than 150 opinions from 100 columnists await you for less than one book per month.
Comments ()