Understanding the China-U.S. relations from a historical perspective.
Qin Gang, Chinese ambassador to the United States, delivers a keynote speech during the event commemorating the 50th anniversary of the “Ice Breaking Journey” held at the Nixon Library in Yobalinda, California, the hometown of former American President Richard Nixon on February 24, 2022.
When President Xi Jinping met his U.S. counterpart Joe Biden on the sidelines of the G20 Summit in Bali in November, 2022, he said, “History is the best textbook. We should take it as a mirror and let it guide the future.”
As a European observer, I interpret the comment from several perspectives.
First, respect for each other’s sovereignty. The recognition of Beijing as the only capital of China and a one-China principle forms the core of China’s diplomatic ties and has led to peace, trade and stability. It was reinforced with the restoration of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s seat in the United Nations in 1971 and President Richard Nixon’s trip to China the following year, when the joint communiqué issued in Shanghai indicated Washington’s recognition of the one-China principle, paving the way for the normalization of China-U.S. relations in 1979. The establishment of relations between the then European Economic Community and Beijing in 1975 was also on the premise of the one-China principle.
In other words, the principle is an anchor in Western relations with China. However, the Biden administration, U.S. Congress, and various U.S. politicians visiting Taiwan have disregarded the principle that Washington itself agreed to, which is one of the root causes for the instability of bilateral ties.
Second, geography matters. China is in Asia and the U.S. in the western hemisphere. Throughout 2022, the U.S. Navy increased its manoeuvers along the Taiwan Strait in the name of freedom of navigation and trade. What would have happened if the Chinese Navy had allocated its resources in the Caribbean, close to the United States, on the same ground? The reality is that trade flows by itself and more countries have chosen China as their biggest trading partner than the United States. In pursuance of a free trade policy, Beijing has sought to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but Washington has not.
Third, respect for others’ sovereignty also matters. While it is true that a great power can achieve transformation in distant continents, it is peculiar that before integrating important states like Alaska and Hawaii, America went far from its territory to drive unequal treaties in Asia. It forced the Qing empire to sign the Treaty of Wanghia in 1844, which gave it unequal trade advantages and the enjoyment of extraterritorial status in China.
Fourth, disrupting geopolitics next door to China. Recent U.S. administrations have been intent on articulating bizarre or ill-defined or untenable concepts in Eurasia such as the “war on terror,” “the axis of evil,” and “the Indo-Pacific.” The U.S. intervention in Afghanistan, bordering China, was meant to punish Al Qaeda and change the ruling regime in Afghanistan, which Washington regarded as the ally of Al Qaeda. However, the intervention was cloaked by the pretence of strengthening progress and human rights. After 20 years, the troops led by NATO and a coalition of several countries led by Washington made an abrupt exit from Afghanistan with the loss of lives and material resources. A misreading of Eurasian history underlined these decisions and their catastrophic results.
Fifth, the importance of maintaining engagement, or in other words, the columns of globalization. Decoupling, trade wars and technological disruption are senseless as is apparent from the so-called “chip war” currently championed by Washington against Beijing. In this respect let’s remember American author Thomas Friedman’s “Dell Theory,” which says: “No two countries that are both part of a major global supply chain, like Dell’s, will ever fight a war against each other as long as they are both part of the same global supply chain.” In that respect these recent decades have been win-win situations that deserve continuity.
Sixth, respect for dialogue among different perspectives and systems. Trying to impose one’s own system onto other countries is absurd. Remember Donald Trump campaigning for his first administration in 2016? During it he claimed, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, okay, and I wouldn’t lose any voters,” and his joke did not prevent him from becoming the 45th president of the U.S.! Furthermore, he tacitly led a failed coup d’état attempt in Washington in January 2020 by inspiring his constituency to storm Congress. Is this a model with which to press for “change in China” or to inspire the world?
Seventh, hegemonies are not eternal. While the dollar is still the main reserve currency, despite important structural shifts in the international monetary system in the post-World War II world, changes impacting Washington’s dollar standing are likely to emerge in the long run. We should not forget that in 1986 China’s trade with the outside world was insignificant; in 2022, nearly two-thirds of the countries traded more with China than with any other country. Though the American dollar still hegemonizes the world economic order, changes are visible. The dollar’s share in global currency reserves fell from 71 percent in 1999 to 59 percent in 2021, the lowest point in over two decades, according to an IMF survey. Furthermore, President Xi’s Saudi Arabia tour in December produced new agreements in energy and investment, which are bound to have an impact on both regional and global equilibrium.
Eighth, the progression of history. Throughout millennia leading centers of technology and development have been transforming and changing their geographical location. A trend has been shown that the center has moved from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic to the Pacific, and now it is apparently in transition to Asia, particularly Northeast Asia. It is clear that China, wise from history, will not allow itself to be dragged into the confrontational model and arms race that contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union and will prevail for a long time.
Cycles of national grandeur fluctuate and change. Classic Greek, root of European culture, has given us a philosophy: a Panta Rhei, meaning “Everything flows.” It is also a great lesson for Sino-American relations. 
AUGUSTO SOTO is director of Dialogue with China Project.
