Opinion | US-China relations: how superpower cooperation in three areas can overcome Alaska acrimony

“Tell me who your enemy is, and I will tell you who you are,” German jurist Carl Schmitt said, since ultimately “political actions and motives” boil down to the distinction “between friend and enemy”.

The much-anticipated meeting in Anchorage, Alaska between the scions of the Chinese and American foreign policy establishment exhibited a similar dynamic. As feared, both sides adopted fiery rhetoric in their opening session in front of the global media, reflecting the immense geopolitical gulf separating them.

For the United States, this was about reasserting its claim to global leadership amid rising anti-China sentiment at home. Meanwhile, China’s representatives made it clear they would not accept second place to their American counterparts amid rising nationalism at home.

Nonetheless, both superpowers have ample reason to explore a realistic “grand bargain” in the near future to avoid a devastating conflict as well as jointly address shared global concerns – from the Covid-19 pandemic to climate change.

US President Joe Biden’s administration, which coincides with the return of veterans of the US national security establishment, boosted prospects of responsible statesmanship. China reportedly reached out shortly after November’s election, paving the way for the Alaska meeting barely two months into Biden’s presidency.

Beijing made clear it hoped the high-level exchange would help “get China-US relations back on track”. It’s telling that Beijing dispatched Politburo member Yang Jiechi, China’s top foreign policy official and a former ambassador to Washington, as well as Foreign Minister Wang Yi, a top Asia hand and former ambassador to Japan.

For its part, the US chose Biden’s “alter ego”, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, as well as the golden boy of the Democratic Party establishment, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan. Instead of a smooth reset in bilateral relations, however, the acrimonious meeting revealed how rising geopolitical tensions are more structural than just a product of Donald Trump’s inept statesmanship.

During the meeting, even veteran diplomats couldn’t resist “wolf warrior” stunts and cold war-style posturing. Worryingly, top diplomats from both sides seemed to be playing as much to their domestic political audiences as to their global allies.

First, there is a need to address the escalating trade and tech wars, which have disrupted global supply chains and undermined economic recovery. Trump-era sanctions against Chinese “national champions” have hurt, among others, the automobile industry as chip shortages threaten even multinational industries for the foreseeable future.

Also, US sanctions on Chinese social media platforms have led to social disruption and limited people-to-people communication between the superpowers. China’s retaliatory tariffs, meanwhile, have hurt US farmers and small and medium-sized enterprises.

The Biden administration has paused some of these sanctions, namely on TikTok and WeChat. However, the two sides need a sustainable trade and tech agreement to avoid relapsing into full-fledged economic warfare.

As China indicated, there is room for compromise. For instance, Beijing could consider certain modifications to its “Made in China 2025” industrial policy. This could involve greater transparency and cooperation in cutting-edge technologies, especially 5G telecommunications and artificial intelligence, coupled with verifiable reassurances against systematic corporate espionage.

In exchange, Washington could reverse blacklisting some of China’s national champions and big tech platforms, easing exports of sensitive technology, as Beijing reverses its own retaliatory sanctions and reconsiders any potential restrictions on rare earth exports. The alternative to a compromise would be an inexorable march towards trade decoupling and a “digital iron curtain” with devastating effects on the world economy.

The second area of much-needed cooperation concerns rising military tensions, especially in the western Pacific and China’s adjacent waters. As both sides expand their naval footprint in the South China Sea, for instance, there is greater need for regular military-to-military diplomacy at the highest levels coupled with appropriate crisis-management mechanisms to avoid unwanted escalation.

Given the growing role of both Chinese and US forces in Asia’s contested waters, the two superpowers need to involve civilian maritime forces in any crisis-prevention mechanism, including the establishment of bilateral hotlines and institutionalised dialogue among relevant agencies. The Biden administration can also consider inviting China back to multilateral naval exercises while co-organising joint naval drills with Asian partners such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Sino-American cooperation is indispensable to addressing existential challenges, from climate change to the Covid-19 pandemic. Both sides are moving towards becoming carbon-neutral economies by the middle of the century, but there is much room for diplomatic and technological cooperation in terms of climate change adaptation and mitigation mechanisms under the aegis of the Paris Agreement.

There is also an urgent need to end “vaccine nationalism” and competitive “vaccine diplomacy”. The US and China can instead jointly expand their assistance to the World Health Organization and global vaccine initiatives such as Covax, thus expediting vaccine roll-out in poorer nations and avoiding the emergence of more lethal Covid-19 variants.

It is clear that despite the fire and fury displayed at the Alaska meeting, the US and China have a golden opportunity to defy Schmitt’s “us versus them” mindset for the broader benefit of the world.