The U.S.-China relationship is at a critical juncture, marked by increasing cynicism among policymakers in both Washington and Beijing regarding the value of negotiations.
Despite this pervasive sentiment, President Donald Trump stands out as a notable exception, continuing to believe in the potential of a viable deal with Xi Jinping that could be beneficial for American workers.
This divergence raises a crucial question for American policymakers: not whether to engage in negotiations, but rather how to achieve better outcomes in discussions than previous administrations.
Understanding the historical context of U.S.-China negotiations is key to identifying opportunities for progress moving forward.
While both nations appear to agree on one thing—the diminishing value of direct negotiations—there is also an atmosphere of fatalism regarding their ability to resolve their differences amicably.
Amid escalating tensions over trade and military presence in Asia, the national mood in both countries has veered towards pessimism, leading many to doubt that existing problems can be addressed through diplomacy.
In Washington, the view has taken root that significant negotiations with Beijing have been largely futile, citing a history of unmet Chinese commitments and dissatisfaction with progress on issues such as human rights and market access.
Critics argue that past negotiations, including efforts by the Obama and Biden administrations, did not yield substantial results and only positioned the U.S. as a lesser partner eager for concessions.
Publicly, Chinese officials have echoed this sentiment, expressing skepticism regarding any negotiations’ efficacy while promoting narratives of national strength.
Evidence from the 2020 U.S.-China Phase One trade deal illustrates these tensions; despite promises made by Beijing to increase purchases of American goods, expectations went unfulfilled, further breeding disappointment in Washington.
As skepticism about negotiations grows, Trump’s confidence remains unwavering.
He believes a U.S.-China deal is achievable, one that would support his vision for U.S. sovereignty and bolster American industry while mitigating conflict risks.
Recognizing the interdependence of the two nations, it is clear that direct negotiations serve several purposes: clarifying priorities, mitigating conflict risks, capitalizing on shared opportunities, and resolving disputes that can be agreed upon.
An analysis of the negotiating records of the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations reveals lessons learned that can guide future engagement between the two countries.
During the Obama years, a broad array of dialogue channels aimed to cushion U.S.-China relations from rivalry.
Despite some successes, such as coordinated responses to global crises, critics charged that these dialogues often produced more effort than tangible results.
The first Trump administration took a divergent path, viewing China as too ideologically opposed to sway through traditional negotiations and thus narrowing the focus primarily to trade, notably sparking a trade war.
This resulted in breaking down dialogue structures previously in place, culminating in a near total disregard for substantial communication as the pandemic set in.
Conversely, the Biden administration aimed to restore functional relations but hesitated to engage in discussions without ensuring strong ties with allies first.
This led to encounters marked more by performance and political posturing than productive negotiations, causing setbacks instead of progress.
Biden’s efforts did yield some advancements, particularly in law enforcement cooperation and risk reduction protocols, yet criticisms persisted regarding the adequacy of these efforts.
Reflecting on these varied approaches reveals a pattern: successful negotiations often hinged on leadership engagement, clearly identifiable objectives, mutual benefits, and empowered negotiators.
Yet critics caution that the ongoing trend towards a cold war mindset might threaten the potential for effective negotiations, as both sides increasingly perceive the relationship through the lens of competition rather than cooperation.
Trump’s unique positioning allows him to perceive public sentiment favorably towards managing competition without escalating into conflict, believing in his ability to negotiate advantageous deals without the burden of domestic pressure.
In the current geopolitical climate, both U.S. and Chinese leaders seek respect and power, making negotiations complex but not impossible.
With trade relations underscored by high tariffs and mounting tensions, the need for a focused negotiation process has never been more critical.
The framework for potential negotiations can revolve around three pivotal areas: trade and economics, military and risk reduction, and law enforcement cooperation.
For economic negotiations, both nations need to recognize their interdependence, seeking reciprocal market access that could boost growth while stabilizing trade balances.
China has indicated interest in increasing domestic consumption but must substantiate those claims with actionable plans to achieve equitable trade relations.
Within the military sphere, establishing risk-reduction measures is paramount as neither leader desires conflict, making it essential to foster better communication regarding military capabilities and intended uses.
Lastly, law enforcement can serve as a bridge, addressing pressing concerns such as the flow of fentanyl precursors while enhancing collaboration on shared legal challenges.
Yet, initiating meaningful negotiations requires deliberate action from leadership, particularly from Trump in reaching out to Xi to define areas of interest and establishing a timeline for discussions.
In recognition that traditional methods of negotiation have often been ineffectual, a reallocation of strategies focused on concrete priorities can aid both leaders in making headway.
Engaging Xi with a clear agenda and designated teams for each priority will be vital while managing public displays that would hinder diplomatic negotiations.
The necessity for a private, sincere approach rather than grandstanding in public forums is paramount in ensuring that messages to possess genuine intent.
If Trump can effectively set the stage for negotiations, he may find avenues to advance American interests while simultaneously crafting a respected and credible diplomatic stance with China.
However, the opportunity to negotiate is time-sensitive, and if not seized soon, both nations risk a deterioration of relations that could lead to an unmanageable estrangement.
The window for a constructive and mutually beneficial dialogue remains open, driven by the awareness that both nations will continue to be shaped by their interactions regardless of their preference.
In conclusion, Trump and Xi hold the key to navigating a path forward, but it requires a willingness to engage earnestly and substantively in negotiations that prioritize mutual benefit and respect.
image source from：https://www.brookings.edu/articles/why-should-america-negotiate-with-china/
