The high-level meeting between the US and China in Alaska was a meeting to set the tone for “brinkmanship”, rather than a meeting for strategic dialogue. An old Chinese saying goes: “Even when two countries are at war, delegates shall not be beheaded.” Since the US and China have not intention to go to war, it is incumbent upon both countries to meet, as a matter of diplomatic protocol, and to reconfirm the channels and readiness for engaging in ongoing communications following the inauguration of the Biden adminstration. On the other hand, as the US and China are wrestling, both sides took the opportunity to declare their respective positions and bottom lines; there was neither intention nor incentive to compromise and cooperate. There is no end in sight to the so-called reset in Sino-US relations.

We can tell from the meeting protocol and personnel that the Alaska summit was not the typical 2+2 strategic dialogue. The US 2+2 high-level diplomacy has two forms traditionally: First, dialogue with allies such as Britain, Australia, Japan and South Korea on diplomatic and defence matters. The so-called 2+2 are the foreign minister and the defence minister of both sides; second, dialogue with China on strategic and economic matters. In the latter, US representatives are Secretary of State and Secretary of Treasury; China representatives are the high ranking official responsible for foreign affairs and national security (Director of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission Office Yang Jiechi), and the vice premier in charge of trade (Liu He in recent years). The relationship between the US and China is extremely intricate, and it is obvious that many sectors need to be involved.

By contrast, the personnel arrangement of the Alaska summit was totally different from the two traditional forms. The four key officials were all from the “strategic” sector, indicative that the meeting was not intended to deal with any specific issues and its significance was symbolic. This explained why US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told the House Foreign Affairs Committee one week prior to the meeting that “this will not be a strategic dialogue.” It was also evident from the language used by both parties pre-conference and post-conference to describe the orientation and atmosphere of the meeting; words such as difficult, direct, sincere, and frank were used. These words conveyed euphemistically that heartfelt comments on sensitive issues which have been avoided for face saving reasons previously will be brought up at the meeting.

This was also reflected in the agenda. It is well known that the US-Sino relations are deeply strained, very typical when there is a shift of power. Relatively, in the economic arena, the US and China are interdependent like conjoined twins and there is still much room for cooperation. Since all the officials attending the Alaska summit were from the “strategic” sector, the meeting will inevitably focus on conflicts and finding each other’s bottom line, much more than discussions on issues of common interests.

At the summit, the two governments were at loggerheads over various issues. In his opening remarks, US representative Blinken reiterated that there were three aspects in US-Sino relationship：” the US’s relationship with China will be competitive where it should be, collaborative where it can be, adversarial where it must be. Our discussions here in Alaska, I suspect, will run the gamut.” His statement revealed a reluctance to self-censor and evade sensitive issues, as well as a readiness to embrace any negative impact on possible cooperation.

Hostile exchanges were made because both the US and China strive to define the new foundation for US-Sino relations in the Biden era. For the US, the Biden administration hopes to continue with Trump’s hard-line on China in order to reinforce its role as commentator of sensitive Chinese issues, as well as to prove its credibility as leader of the rules-based international order to its allies in a high profile manner. This line of thought is exactly the same as Biden’s statement in CNN’s “Town Hall” program as well as Blinken’s first speech on US foreign policy on March 3. The essence is China has to accept that American values are inseparable from the liberal international order, and the US president must speak up on China’s internal affairs.

On the other hand, China tried to disrupt the US’s advantage of home diplomacy in setting meeting procedures and agenda with tough words and emphasized that the US was in the wrong and has failed to perform the duties as a host. In response to Biden administration’s recent statement that the US’s criticism of China is the safeguard of US and international values, Yang Jiechi refuted it by saying that “The US itself does not represent international public opinion, and neither does the Western world.” Both sides are still in the preparatory stage for a full scale fight. Both are trying to establish a stronghold in the US-China relations with firm statements.

The Alaska Summit has reconfirmed that the relations between the US and China in the Biden era will be characterized by the coexistence of competition, collaboration, and confrontation; but no real war despite intense competition. As expected, no joint statement was issued after the meeting because the meeting did not focus on any substantive issues. No consensus was reached and there was nothing to announce. On symbolic issues, since the political basis for future interaction is not yet established, it is better off not to lay down anything in writing which may convey a soft stance or an approving attitude, lest an impression of compromising future bargaining power be made. The differences in values are going to be very conspicuous in the competition between the US and China in the Biden era.

Click here for Chinese version

(Wen-Ti Sung, Lecturer, ANU College of Asia & the Pacific)

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play