Biden and Xi 鈥榤eet鈥� and agree: US-China competition, not conflict
One year ago, with the globe reeling from a pandemic, the United States and China not only failed to cooperate to combat the crisis but also unleashed a level of discord not seen for half a century, at one point triggering fears of war.
Indeed, in late October 2020, Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, felt compelled to call his Chinese military counterpart, Gen. Li Zuocheng, to convey a message that the U.S. was not going to attack, General Milley testified in September.
With this backdrop, Washington and Beijing shared one fundamental goal for Monday night鈥檚 virtual meeting between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and U.S. President Joe Biden: to bring a modicum of stability to U.S.-China relations in a bid to prevent further deterioration and risk.
Why We Wrote This
Face-to-face diplomacy still matters 鈥� even virtually. The meeting between Joe Biden and Xi Jinping didn鈥檛 resolve major disputes, but it could prevent the world鈥檚 most consequential relationship from going off the rails.
鈥淚t seems to me our responsibility as leaders of China and the United States is to ensure that the competition between our countries does not veer into conflict, whether intended or unintended,鈥� Mr. Biden told Mr. Xi in remarks from the Roosevelt Room in the White House as the meeting was starting. 鈥淛ust simple, straightforward competition.鈥�
Mr. Xi struck a similar emphasis in the meeting 鈥� the first face-to-face discussions between the two men since President Biden took office.
鈥淎 sound and stable China-U.S. relationship is required for advancing the two countries鈥� respective development and for safeguarding a peaceful and stable international environment,鈥� the Chinese leader told Mr. Biden. 鈥淭he most important event in international relations in the coming 50 years will be for China and the U.S. to find the right way to get along.鈥�
Indeed, experts agree that Monday鈥檚 session, a respectful and open conversation between the two leaders, put the critical relationship on the more solid footing it badly needs.
鈥淭he U.S.-China relationship was effectively dysfunctional. ... It was confrontation through public condemnation,鈥� said Ryan Hass, senior fellow at the John L. Thornton China Center at the Brookings Institution.
The leadership talks 鈥減ut a bit of a floor underneath the relationship,鈥� offering stability and stopping a runaway escalation of conflict that is not in the interests of either side, he said in a Brookings panel discussion Tuesday about the talks.
A shared responsibility
The tone of the lengthy meeting, which ran overtime to last about 3 1/2 hours, was 鈥渋ntense and engaged,鈥� a senior U.S. official said afterward, reflecting how well the two leaders know one another, having spent many hours talking, traveling, and gaining familiarity over the years.
Mr. Xi referred to Mr. Biden as an 鈥渙ld friend,鈥� and the two traded stories and referred to past conversations in a meeting that was at times unscripted, national security adviser Jake Sullivan said at the Brookings session. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not just reading off talking points. There is actually a genuine give-and-take,鈥� he said.
鈥淭hey both recognize the weight of the relationship and stewarding the relationship ... and they are looking to shoulder that weight responsibly,鈥� Mr. Sullivan said.
Both leaders pledged to continue their meetings. Going forward, Mr. Hass said, this would appear to establish a new pattern, where the leaders meet to identify key issues, empower senior officials to follow up, and then meet again to push things forward.
鈥淭he U.S. and China seem to be making strides鈥� in closing the gaps in expectations, he said. 鈥淚t doesn鈥檛 solve the problems that are embedded in the relationship, but it makes it more manageable.鈥�
Both leaders used the meeting to air disagreements and to highlight areas of highest danger for the relationship, according to officials on each side.
President Biden cited China鈥檚 human rights abuses, specifically referring to treatment of the Muslim Uyghur population of Xinjiang province 鈥� a situation Secretary of State Antony Blinken, present at Monday鈥檚 meeting, has labeled 鈥済enocide.鈥� He also spoke of China鈥檚 鈥渦nfair trade and economic policies,鈥� senior officials said.
For his part, Mr. Xi condemned advancing U.S. military cooperation with China鈥檚 neighbors 鈥� presumably a reference to the Biden administration鈥檚 stepped-up cooperation with the 鈥淨uad鈥� countries of Australia, India, and Japan 鈥� saying such bloc-building would 鈥渋nevitably bring disaster to the world.鈥�
U.S. balancing act
A surprise climate accord announced between the two powers last week had raised hopes among some advocates that Monday night鈥檚 talks could result in additional breakthroughs.
But the virtual meeting was more about 鈥渟etting the guardrails鈥� for the intense competition between the two countries, rather than any concrete actions or 鈥渄eliverables,鈥� a senior administration official said after the meeting.
Moreover, the distance between their respective top priorities 鈥� Mr. Biden focused on China鈥檚 rising threats against Taiwan, according to officials, while Mr. Xi wanted progress on lifting tariffs on Chinese goods imposed under the Trump administration 鈥� suggested that cooperation is likely to be more the exception than the rule in coming years.
The U.S. president did not end up offering any of the tariff relief the Chinese leader sought.
Indeed, the Biden administration鈥檚 rhetoric on China suggests the delicate balancing act the administration is executing when it comes to the world鈥檚 most consequential big-power relationship.
On the one hand, Mr. Biden鈥檚 frequent references to 鈥渋ntense competition鈥� with China and tough talk on China鈥檚 human rights abuses and authoritarian model of governance reflect the president鈥檚 vision of China as a rising 21st-century challenge.
鈥淭he use of the term 鈥榗ompetition鈥� by the administration is not a political tactic鈥� to respond to Republican critics, says David Shambaugh, director of the China program at George Washington University鈥檚 Elliott School of International Affairs, commenting in an email. 鈥淚t is an intellectual and policy construct of how the U.S. frames the relationship.鈥�
At the same time, the almost automatic add-on calls for 鈥渃ooperation鈥� when possible and in the interest of both parties suggest a pragmatic realism toward China.
This 鈥渙n the other hand鈥� view recognizes that China 鈥� as the world鈥檚 second-largest economy, with trade and investment ties with key strategic regions of the world that often surpass those of the U.S., and with a rapidly expanding military and growing nuclear arsenal 鈥� requires deft and realistic engagement.
Need for 鈥渘ew mechanisms鈥�
From the perspective of some China experts and some officials within the administration, that means the U.S. cannot deal with China the same way President Ronald Reagan approached a failing Soviet Union in the 1980s, as some new Cold War theorists would advocate.
鈥淲e have the internet now, our supply chains are significantly intertwined, it鈥檚 a deeply different environment from that of the Cold War, so we can鈥檛 address the challenges China poses today by turning to the past for responses,鈥� says Emily de la Bruy猫re, a senior fellow in the China program at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington.
鈥淲e need to come up with new mechanisms to deal with a new situation.鈥�
From the perspective of China鈥檚 domestic politics, Mr. Xi seeks to demonstrate he can manage the U.S. relationship as a crucial Communist Party meeting approaches in late 2022, when he intends to secure a rare third term as China鈥檚 top leader, experts say.
鈥淴i doesn鈥檛 want the possibility a war will break out or the U.S. will radically ramp up sanctions or put more Chinese companies on the entity list,鈥� says Scott Kennedy, a senior adviser and expert on China鈥檚 economic policy at the Center for Strategic and International Relations. Instead, Beijing 鈥渨ants to stabilize things where they are,鈥� he says.
