Last week saw two events in Washington that illustrate the complexity of the Sino-US relationship. The first involved 15 ministers from China, led by Vice-Premier Wu Yi, who took part in a high-level economic dialogue. Some progress was made, including an agreement to double daily passenger flights from the US to China by 2012, worth an estimated US$5 billion to American airlines.
However, the US Congress, an increasingly important player, was dissatisfied. Congressional leaders, after meeting with the formidable Ms Wu, announced that they intended to proceed with legislation to impose tariffs on Chinese imports unless Beijing agreed to substantially revalue the yuan. The Chinese are now waiting with bated breath for the other shoe to drop.
The second event occurred the day that the Chinese delegation left. The Pentagon, in its latest report on China, repeated the view that it has 'the greatest potential to compete militarily with the United States and field disruptive military technologies that could over time offset traditional US military advantages'. Predictably, the People's Daily said the report 'deliberately exaggerates the so-called Chinese military threat', adding that China had to modernise its military to avoid falling even further behind the US.
These two events underline the seemingly intractable problems that beset the bilateral relationship, which is widely viewed as the most important in the world today.
However, one event, in New York, was much more encouraging, suggesting that problems can be managed and a confrontation is not inevitable. On May 16, an Oxford-style debate, organised by Intelligence Squared, was held at the Asia Society on the topic 'Beware the dragon: A booming China spells trouble for America.' Those for the motion - that China was a threat - were Bill Gertz, defence and national security reporter for The Washington Times; John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago; and Michael Pillsbury, a former Pentagon official. Those opposed were Stapleton Roy, former ambassador to China and now managing director of Kissinger Associates; Daniel Rosen, principal of China Strategic Advisory and adjunct associate professor at Columbia University; and James McGregor, former chief executive of Dow Jones in China.
Before the debate began, 41 per cent of the audience voted for the motion, 37 per cent against, with 22 per cent undecided. That is to say, more people supported the idea that China was a threat to the US than opposed it.