• 

Recently, Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang met with a number of visiting representatives from American-friendly organizations and business communities in Beijing. During the exchange, he reminded Washington of steering clear of its futile containment efforts against China, and instead, meeting Beijing “halfway” for the benefit of healthy, stable, and constructive relations. 

Qin’s wisdom on China-U.S. reciprocity is unique in its prescription and mirrors the interests of the American business community. But China hawks in Washington are likely to ensure it falls on deaf ears, despite the potential for substantial market opportunities if containment attitudes are recalibrated for the better. “China-U.S. relations are the most important bilateral relations in the world,” said Qin at the meeting. “A good relationship between the two countries will benefit the whole world.”

China’s foreign minister has a very valid point. The country’s consistency in committing to constructive relations with the U.S. through thick and thin delivers an important reminder in the business space: that zero-sum mentalities can only hamper convergence, and compound reconcilable economic differences. The broad-based support for China-U.S. de-escalation is a telling tale in itself, given how many U.S. business representatives spoke against unchecked bilateral tensions that their own government helped advance. Moreover, in a sign that the U.S. government has minimal anti-China traction with its own business elite, many even backed Chinese people’s aspiration for sound development and remain keen to benefit from China’s economic vigor and opening-up. 

The 2023 China Development Forum, a major event commanding presence from over 100 overseas multinationals, global leaders, and American business representatives, was also a case in point. It featured prominent calls for U.S.-China cooperation, and recognition that greater engagement was still possible, no matter the self-destructive rationale presented by the Biden administration. Promoting those interests at the official level means relinquishing efforts that run counter to stability from the U.S. To that end, Washington’s insistence that it will not change course makes the entire affair of ganging up on China economically and politically counterproductive. “It is hoped that the US will abandon its zero-sum mentality, stop using unscrupulous means to contain and suppress China, and work with China to push China-US relations to overcome current difficulties and return to a healthy and stable track,” cautioned Qin in his exchange.

A level-playing field for businesses can indeed become a catalyst for trust-building between two of the world’s top economies, even if Washington tries to explain away the China-U.S. common ground as a weakness. Beijing’s stated desire to provide an even better business environment for global companies, including U.S. firms, strikes a damning contrast to the treatment of many Chinese enterprises in the U.S. Only credible attempts at balancing the market playing field by the U.S. could stem some tensions and advance the cause of deepening economic, trade and investment opportunities in the future. For now, persisting with market double standards within its own borders makes opposition to China personal to the U.S. It remains to be seen if a heavily integrated – and disgruntled – American business community sees any merit in coercive posturing.

To date, principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation continue to dominate China’s attitude towards constructive bilateral ties with the U.S. But the sustained refusal by Washington to question its zero-sum containment impulse on China risks validating fears of “mutual isolation and conflicts” in the eyes of the American business community. Record-setting exports and expanding service sector cooperation are two of many strong points for U.S. to join China in avoiding protracted tensions to the benefit of “the whole world.” Beijing has the patience to see tensions through. Washington, on the other hand, is increasingly capable of fueling tensions to its own disadvantage.

Correct assumptions about China’s strong recovery and engagement intent can also render the world’s most consequential relationship maximally favorable to both sides. Over one million U.S. jobs are already supported on the back of exports to China, illustrating the extent of U.S. interdependence on a country it hopes to “contain.” Similarly, to leverage untapped opportunities – including expansion of two-way investments in key sectors – Washington should limit preferential targeting of Chinese enterprises, and focus diplomatic energies on bringing shared cooperation interests together.

Alternatively, repeated attempts to court alliances to contain China’s growth risk backfire. Such choices will simply refuse pathways that are conducive to long-term coexistence, especially when the same relationship has yielded dividends for U.S. jobs and American businesses heavily invested in China. For these reasons, Qin’s view that the U.S. should work with China to overcome obstacles reveals big stakes in bringing the relationship to stable shores. 

Diplomacy is a two-way street; Washington may have to force itself to reciprocate in due course.  Therefore, letting the relationship fall prey to a zero-sum containment mentality is neither sustainable nor does it promote the objective of meeting each other halfway.