In the current U.S.-China economic and trade relations, the general concern of the outside world is in bilateral economic and trade, since the market space of China and the United States is very large. One is about 24% of the world, and the other is about 14%. When such two major trade countries get involved in trade war, it would not be a small matter and will certainly trigger shocks in the world market. Such international disputes involving in the taxation of imports of steel and aluminum by the United States are in fact, rather complex. The fundamental goal is far from being limited to trade; it may well evolve into an epoch-making strategy competition after the end of the Cold War.
As a matter of fact, the U.S. is now undergoing an unprecedented large-scale strategic debates and reflections on China, and the debates are participated by those involved in politics, academia, business, and the military, involving in a wide range of topics from economics to trade, security to the humanities, and science and technology. These in-depth debates point to one direction: should the strategy of the U.S. on China require fundamental adjustment? Some believes that such major debates were guided and led by the U.S. government. The "National Security Strategy Report" launched by the White House defines China as a "strategic competitor" and declares a complete failure of its previous China strategy. In the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the U.S. Department of Defense’s Pentagon, it is stressed that the primary concern of U.S. security is no longer terrorism, but strategic competition among big powers, especially China and Russia.
On February 13, six heads of U.S. intelligence agencies were collectively called by the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to participate in the hearing, detailing China's strategic threat to the United States. The six heads of intelligence agencies come from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Intelligence Authority, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. Based on the participation of these important institutions, one can imagine that the current situation between China and the United States is vitally urgent.
Why did the United States change its strategy towards China after 40 years of China’s reform and opening up? Is it accidental, or is it because of Donald Trump emotional antics? The answer is neither of these two.
We believe that the current strained relationship between China and the United States is mainly based on the four major reasons on the part of the United States:
First, the United States believes that China is no longer a friend that can be used, and has lost its value of being a friend. In the Cold War, China had the geo-relation value that threatened the Soviet Union. This was the reason why Richard Nixon started his visit to China and opened up its door. The United States now believes that China has lost such "friendship value". China and Russia now are close with each other, and has not provided much help to the United States on the North Korea issue. Trump’s decision to start talks with North Korea is in fact influenced by such background. North Korea’s unwarranted demand for direct talks with the United States also directly confirmed the U.S.'s position and judgment that China has lost its “friendship value”.
Second, the United States believes that China does not reform and loses its confidence in China’s future. The withdrawal of foreign capital from China not only takes away capital but also the technologies. It also takes away international influence and creates a universal perception that China has no hope in the future. As for the various multinational companies that have encountered obstacles in China, they have also generated a sense of mistrust towards China in the United States when they complained about China, and believe that China’s reforms will not advance in substance in the future. The United States believes that such unreformed China will only become its competitor, not partner.
Third, China is not a friend of the United States but also its strategic competitor, and this is related to China’s Belt & Road Initiative and its strong pursuit of international growth in the past.
The biggest difference between China’s previous New Silk Road with the current Belt & Road Initiative is that China has involved in the completion of maritime power, an area of traditional influence of the West for centuries and the main accumulation the world’s wealth. Since the partnership of the United States in the world is entirely tied up in this region, therefor the United States is trying its best to curb China's involvement in this trend as it determines its future status in the world.
Fourth, China has become strong enough and it is no longer harmless to the United States. China’s strength is directly related to its market. In the past Chinese market was attractive to the West; the United States can accept to a certain extent the view that market interests could neutralize the “harm” caused by China’s power, yet The United States now sees that a large amount of foreign investment has left China, American companies could not gain much advantage in the Chinese market, and there is still a huge deficit in bilateral economic and trade relations. This leads the United States to believe that the Chinese market has lost its value.
Therefore, it is no accident that U.S.-China relations have reached this point today; it cannot be simply attributed to a single issue or single person; instead it is the sum of decades of changes. In the future, the trend of China-U.S. relations will inevitably be very difficult. The degree of difficulty may far exceed the current estimate of public opinion. If a rough speculation is to be made, the future direction of U.S.-China relations is likely to determine the fortune of both countries in the coming decades; the effect will indeed be of great importance and far-reaching.
