Observers are watching closely as Beijing and Washington show their moves on the dance floor
　　
　　SHALL WE DANCE? Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Dai Bingguo and U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick exchange views on issues of common concern during the second senior dialogue in Washington
　　Humans are social animals. People talk to their partners or neighbors with the aim of getting to know and understand them better. The same is true of nations, and China and the United States are no exception.
　　These two heavyweight players, whether viewed in terms of geographical size, population, national strength or political importance, are engaging in more forms of interaction.
　　But their “dance” has been conducted against a background of not very harmonious music.
　　The two nations engaged in prolonged bargaining over U.S. imports of Chinese textile products such as shirts and pants. China’s growing economic, political and military strength prompted the revival of the decades-old “China threat” theory in the United States. And Sino-U.S. discussions on the value of the yuan, human rights and intellectual property rights have not been pleasing to the ears either.
　　Nevertheless, the countries appear willing to extend a hand to each other, as more signs of closer China-U.S. ties were seen in 2005. Top U.S. officials lined up for their turn to visit Beijing, and two high-level dialogues between the countries were held in Beijing and Washington, respectively.
　　Speeches were made to extend goodwill, and global events such as the commemoration in Moscow of the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II, the anniversary celebration of the founding of the United Nations in New York, the G8 summit in Scotland and the APEC gathering in Busan, South Korea, saw leaders of the two countries seated at one table.
　　The past year also witnessed five meetings between Chinese President Hu Jintao and his U.S. counterpart George W. Bush; Hu has accepted Bush’s invitation to visit the United States this spring. The momentum of high-level visits gives new impetus to the development of bilateral relations.
　　All of this seems to indicate that the world’s only superpower and the largest developing country are getting along with each other in a more sociable and serious manner.
　　But will Beijing threaten its dance partner, since the view of China as a “strategic partner” was called to a halt after Bush took office in 2001, and is it safe to dance?
　　
　　Wary America
　　
　　“It has been proven that having an awareness of the overall situation and being pragmatic are key to increasing mutual trust and improving Sino-U.S. ties.” ---Zheng Bijian, Chairman of the China Reform Forum
　　The bid by China’s CNOOC Ltd. to purchase U.S.-based oil company Unocal in early 2005, though failed, put many Americans on alert. Would China “buy up” the United States, just as Japan appeared poised to do in the 1980s? Some were even more concerned about China’s military spending. Would Beijing have the potential to mount a serious military challenge to U.S. interests sometime, somewhere?
　　Last September, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick delivered a much-quoted speech. The talk’s title posed the question, “Whither China: From Membership to Responsibility?” and was the first in which the term “responsible stakeholder” was used to describe China.
　　These questions have been raised frequently and actually have been answered many times. President Hu reiterated last September at the UN’s 60th anniversary celebration that China’s development will not threaten any other country, but rather will make a contribution to the world. The solemn oath of the top leader of a “responsible stakeholder” on a hallmark day should be trustworthy. If all these were not persuasive enough, then only time will tell.
　　Many in the United States actually agree with Hu, convinced that China’s development will not pose a danger to the current world structure, and that the Chinese Government does not mean to create a brand-new international order but only wants to develop under the umbrella of the current system.
　　Chinese experts on Sino-U.S. relations agree that the United States used the term “stakeholder” to indicate that it has acknowledged China’s status as a responsible power and wants to introduce Beijing to the world system led by Washington.
　　Even several months after Zoellick’s speech, debates on the “stakeholder” concept have not faded in Beijing. Lu Yousheng, professor at the Department of Strategy of the National Defense University of the People’s Liberation Army, said, “Sino-U.S. relations are far more complicated than the issue of stakeholders; they are still not in a proper place.”
　　Many observers believe that China and the United States still have doubts about the other side, and lack an understanding of and trust in each other’s strategic intentions.
　　Lu said the Bush administration’s China policy has been maturing and becoming increasingly stable, but Bush’s description of bilateral ties as “important and complex” prior to his Beijing trip last November better summarizes those links.
　　Zheng Bijian, Chairman of the China Reform Forum, said, “It has been proven that having an awareness of the overall situation and being pragmatic are key to increasing mutual trust and improving Sino-U.S. ties.”
　　Zheng’s organization is a nongovernmental think tank studying the country’s domestic, international and development issues. He made the comment in a speech at a symposium on regional cooperation and bilateral relations just before the second Sino-U.S. senior dialogue last December.
　　
　　Complex ties
　　
　　“There is one point without any doubt, which is that Washington values its relations with Beijing, and is evaluating the relations consciously.” -Wu Jianmin, President of China’s Foreign Affairs University
　　Zheng also believes that Sino-U.S. ties are important but complicated. He said in the new situation where China and the United States are driving global economic development from manufacturing and consumption ends, respectively, active communication between the countries is of the utmost importance to building sound bilateral ties as well as maintaining a peaceful, prosperous world.
　　Lu also acknowledged that bilateral ties are important, for they have exceeded the sphere of state-to-state relations and are of great significance to the region and the world at large, yet they are also complicated because Beijing and Washington share common interests and seek cooperation in some fields, but confront each other over their differences.
　　The nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula is one example. Beijing and Washington have been working together with Seoul, Tokyo, Moscow and Pyongyang to solve the problem through the vehicle of six-party talks. The talks have gone on for more than two years, with four rounds and phase one of the fifth round completed.
　　“These talks can be viewed as one successful case of strategic cooperation between China and the United States, which share many major strategic interests on the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula,” Liu Jianfei, from the Institute of International Strategy of the Central Party School of the CPC, has written in China Strategic Review magazine.
　　Neither country wants to see turbulence on the Korean Peninsula, nuclear programs, nuclear proliferation or even an arms race in Northeast Asia. Therefore, China and the United States agree on the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the peaceful settlement of the issue. This common ground has set a favorable foundation for the ongoing multilateral talks.
　　According to Liu, Washington knows all too well that the stability of the Korean Peninsula is of great importance to China’s strategic interests, and China is one major and irreplaceable force it can rely on to resolve the nuclear deadlock. Meanwhile, China is very clear that nuclearization or war on the neighboring peninsula would certainly damage its strategic interests, and therefore Beijing also cherishes a peaceful resolution of the nuclear issue and is willing to play its role in the talks. The underpinning of the six-party talks is that since China and the United States share wide common strategic interests in the post-Cold War era; they can and should maintain strategic cooperation.
　　However, on the level of tactics in dealing with the issue, many Chinese observers view the United States and China as playing a game of go. “Washington keeps praising China unctuously, which is only a tactful gesture,” Zhang Liangui, professor at the Institute of International Strategy of the CPC Central Party School, told Beijing Review. “For China, the most urgent thing is to find an interest dividing line that can be accepted by all sides.”
　　Professor Shen Dingli at Shanghai’s Fudan University suggests that China should make it clear that the Korean nuclear problem is fundamentally a bilateral issue between North Korea and the United States, adding that Beijing should actively participate in resolving the issue, instead of being dragged into the six-party talks.
　　“China’s leverage is limited. No country can stop another from developing nuclear bombs,” Shen said. Nevertheless, China is a major country and has the responsibility to resolve the nuclear deadlock. In addition, a deterioration or improvement in the issue is of great importance to China’s environment.
　　The term “responsible stakeholder” should be used to designate every member of the international community, many observers agree. It is not a privilege given to one side, but a two-way responsibility.
　　
　　Strategic dialogue
　　
　　Just before the second senior Sino-U.S. dialogue last December, a strategic dialogue was held among Chinese and U.S. scholars and officials. Chinese scholars noted that while Beijing is concerned about U.S. interests, this is not sufficient to develop bilateral relations. Both sides should be concerned about each other’s interests.
　　Should the U.S. side pay attention to China’s interests and support the country’s reunification at the proper time? Besides supporting a strong and prosperous China, should the United States support a unified one as well? This issue was brought up at the meeting, demanding U.S. consideration and deliberation.
　　“How to build bilateral strategic mutual trust is a topic for both China and the United States. It is a process that needs support from and for each other and their great efforts,” said Wu Jianmin, President of China’s Foreign Affairs University and a former ambassador. “The growing common interests between China and the United States will check the trend that goes against China.
　　“Of course, Americans have their own values. But there is one point without any doubt, which is that Washington values its relations with Beijing, and is evaluating those relations consciously,” Wu continued.
　　That may explain why a new word was coined to describe Sino-U.S. relations: “stewardship.” What its connotation is, and whether it can better depict the ever-changing relationship of China and the United States, the two might determine after a new round of dancing.
　　Lu from the National Defense University predicts that no matter what term is used to describe their relationship, China and the United States will cooperate with each other in all fields. There will be occasional friction, but the two will jointly promote their overall relations to a more mature and reasonable level.
　　In other words, the two will continue dancing even if one steps on the other’s toes by accident. Neither will abandon its partner, but rather just adjust the dance steps.
　　

相關(guān)熱詞搜索：Dancing Duo Ｄａｎｃｉｎｇ�。模酰� dancing滑板 dancing長板