As the only superpower and the largest economy in the world, the U.S. occupies an extremely important position in China’s diplomacy as well as in its program of reform and opening-up to the outside world. As a result, what the U.S. says and does can attract enormous attention from China (the government, academics, media and the general public). Needless to say, Chinese perceptions are far from unanimous. Based on their own educational background, social status, political orientation, interest in world affairs, etc., ten Chinese can offer eleven different perceptions of the U.S.

This paper will endeavor to elaborate on how China views the U.S., with a focus on the bilateral relations, G2 or “Chimerica”, the U.S. strategy of “pivot” to Asia and the so-called new type of relationship between major powers (NTRMP). I try to avoid “cherry-picking”, but my perception of the Chinese perceptions of the U.S. might be subjective and one-sided.

I. China and the U.S.: Friends or Foes?

As a well-known Chinese saying goes, in the big forest you can hear all kinds of birds singing different songs with different tones. Indeed, in a country with a population of more than 1.3 billion, it is logical to expect that there are many perceptions of the U.S. Particularly, in the last three decades of reform and opening-up, the Chinese are increasingly free to express their thinking and ideas about every topic ranging from world affairs to wallet or from breaking news to bread.

Unlike the U.S., where the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, the White House and Capitol Hill do not necessarily have the same or similar views on any topic, in China the Communist Party, the National People’s Congress (the legislature) and the government speaks with one voice on almost every issue.

Given the fact that the U.S has been a superpower in the 20th century, China cannot afford to neglect the importance of better relations between the two sides. Even during the Cold War era, China viewed the U.S. as an important factor that could have great impact upon its socialist revolution and construction. That could explain why Mao Zedong agreed to receive a secret visit to China by Henry Kissinger at the peak of the Cold War.

The year 1978 marked the most spectacular milestone in terms of China’s external and internal policy transformation. Under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, China started to significantly adjust its foreign policy. Its purpose was to integrate China’s economy with the world so as to overcome the economic hardships caused by the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976).

Deng Xiaoping was considered as the vanguard or the designer of the Chinese reform program. In early 1979, Deng Xiaoping visited the U.S. It is said that, when he was asked the question during the trip “why does China attach importance to the U.S. in its reform and opening-up to the outside”, the Chinese leader replied with the following words: Those who have been following the U.S. have got rich. It is clear that Deng Xiaoping believed that the U.S. could play an important role in China’s new direction of development.

After Deng Xiaoping’s retirement in 1989, all of his subsequent successors believe that better relations with the U.S. are beneficial to both sides. For instance, on October 11, 1995, President Jiang Zemin told a delegation, composed of journalists from the American magazines Newsweek and US News and World Report, in Beijing that both China and the U.S. are big countries with global influence and permanent members of the UN Security Council, and have important responsibility in safeguarding world peace, security and stability and promoting world development and prosperity. Therefore, better cooperation between the two sides is in the interests of the Chinese and American people, and it is also the wish of the peoples in other parts of the world. Cooperation would result in win-win and confrontation would cause lose-lose.[①]

While meeting with President George W. Bush on October 10, 2008 in Beijing, the then Chinese President Hu Jintao said that China and the U.S. had achieved impressive progress from cooperation in such areas as trade, anti-terrorism, energy, environmental protection, etc. He also expressed his belief that good relations between the two countries are compatible with the fundamental interests of the peoples in both nations, and would also exert great influence upon peace, stability and prosperity of not only the Asia-Pacific but also the whole world. The Chinese leader promised that China would deal with the bilateral relations from a strategic height and a long-term objective and hope to strengthen mutual understanding and trust by strengthening dialogues and exchanges as well as tackling sensitive issues in a proper way.[②]

China completed its leadership change in March 2013. The first trip by the new Chinese leader, President Xi Jinping, was to Russia, but his second overseas visit abroad included the U.S. The informal talks between the two leaders on June 7 and 8, 2013, took place at the 200-acre Annenberg Retreat in California. Without formality, they discussed many issues of common interest. President Xi Jinping told the host that the place is very close to the Pacific Ocean, and China is just beyond the Ocean. “I said when I visited the United States last year that the vast Pacific Ocean has enough room to accommodate the development of the two great powers in the world, namely China and the United States. And it is still true at present. Today I meet here with President Obama, with a view to charting out a blueprint for the development of China-U.S. relations and conducting the transpacific cooperation”, said the Chinese leader.[③]

Needless to say, the general public in China has had different perceptions of the U.S. Some consider it an important source of capital and technology as well as a huge market.[④] So many people wish to emigrate to the U.S. via either legal or illegal means because they believe the U.S. is a paradise where “gold can be easily found in the streets”. Newly-graduated Chinese students want to pursue graduate study in the U.S. In the last five years or so, even the middle school students are sent by their parents to American schools.[⑤]

On the whole, the Chinese perceptions of the U.S. are positive and benign. However, it cannot be denied that some Chinese people have different views. As a matter of fact, the image of the U.S. in some people’s mind is terribly negative.[⑥] Particularly, with the popularity of the Internet, a number of Chinese netizens have expressed their aversion to or distaste for the U.S.

While it is impossible to calculate the exact percentage points of those who like or dislike the U.S., the negative views can be summarized as:

First, the U.S. is always afraid of China’s rise because it fears the loss of its dominance on the world stage. As a result, it has been trying its best to contain China’s peaceful development.

Second, the U.S. always wishes to destabilize China with all means, including supporting ethnic separatists spreading Western values and inciting “peaceful evolution”.[⑦]

Third, the root cause of the Taiwan issue is the intention of the U.S. to block reunification of China. It was said that the Chinese mainland might have liberated Taiwan in the 1950s if the U.S. had not sent the Seventh Fleet to the Taiwan Strait. Even today, the U.S. still violates China’s sovereignty by selling advanced weapons to Taiwan.

Fourth, the U.S. not only supports Japan, a country that has never recognized its war crimes, through the common security treaty, but also stations troops in the Asia-Pacific region. Its purpose is to counter-balance China’s growing influence.

As a matter of fact, the Chinese academics also have varied perceptions of the U.S. on every issue. Some scholars tend to believe that it plays an important role in China’s modernization process. According to Yuan Min, for instance, the “U.S. factor” is an external force that has always been exerting its influence upon every aspect of China’s economic development. The Beijing University professor believes that China and the U.S. can improve their bilateral relations through dialogues and consultations because the two sides need each other on many issues. [⑧]

In the past few years, many people in China are engaged in the discussion of the question whether the U.S. position on the world stage has been declining or not. Those who say “yes” point out the following facts indicating that the U.S. is really weakened: 1, The U.S. cannot do whatever it wants to do. That is because other countries are strongly against unilateralism and American hegemony. The anti-U.S. sentiment around the world is much stronger than in the past. 2, Because of the rise of the emerging economies like the BRICS, the U.S. economic strength has been shrinking, particularly in terms of its share in total world GDP. 3, The U.S. domestic issues, such as government shut-down, fiscal cliff, rising crimes, ethnic tensions, sub-prime crisis, etc., are just the symptoms of its decline.

But there are many Chinese scholars who tend to believe that the U.S. is not declining. They offer the following evidence to support their argument: 1, The U.S. military power is still the strongest in the world and no other country can obtain such military supremacy. 2, Competitiveness of the U.S. in the world economic field is still powerful. That is because it can attract the best talents from around the world and attaches great importance to R&D. As a matter of fact, most of the Nobel Prize laureates are found in the U.S. 3, The U.S. multinational companies are extremely powerful, reaching to every corner of the world market. Moreover, each year the U.S. can attract huge amount of capital from abroad. 4, The greenback still dominates the world economy. 5, Soft power of the U.S. is enormous: Hollywood films and other American cultural products enjoy a big overseas market; so many people want to migrate there; American values and the American dream are quite popular in many parts of the world.

On the whole, despite the varied perceptions of the U.S., it is proper to say that many Chinese people have a good image of the U.S.

II. Chinese Perceptions of G2 and “Chimerica”

The notion of G2 (China and the U.S.) was created by C. Fred Bergsten in his book The United States and the World Economy, published in 2005. No matter whether and how it is misunderstood, G2 has attracted great attention from China.[⑨]

It is interesting to note that the translation of G2 from English to Chinese is not the same as that of G20 or G-8. Rather, G2 is expressed as (or translated into) “China-U.S. co-governance” (中美共治) in Chinese.

A similar word about the special relationship between China and the U.S. is “Chimerica”, a portmanteau coined by Niall Ferguson and Moritz Schularick. According to them, “To understand why global asset markets in the past years were marked by a persistent disconnect between returns on capital and the cost of capital, think of one economy called Chimerica: the sum of China, the world’s most rapidly growing emerging market, and America, the world’s most financially advanced developed economy.” [⑩]

It is important to note that the original meaning of “Chimerica” refers to the economic relations between China and the U.S., but many Chinese scholars tend to interpret it as a kind of cooperation between the two powers in dealing with global issues or undertaking global governance.[11]

As usual, there are different understanding and interpretation of G2 by the Chinese scholars, diplomats, commentators, journalists and netizens. Some were happy to hear the new word because it indicates that China’s international position has been on the rise. Indeed, if China had been weak, no country would like to seek cooperation with it. Others say that, no matter whether G2 is feasible or not, it is time for China to play a more important role, along with the U.S. and other major powers of the world, to undertake more global responsibility in dealing global issues. In this way, China’s position on the world stage can be greatly raised.

But it seems that more Chinese people are not in favor of G2. Their critique of the idea can be summarized into the following points:

First, China is in favor of democratization of world affairs, so anything in the world should be decided not by the big powers, but by all the countries, big or small, rich or poor. That is to say, the notion of G2 is against China’s own foreign policy principle.

Second, though the Chinese economy has been developing very rapidly, it is still a developing nation. Its per capita GDP still lags behind many countries of the world. As a result, China is not able to govern the world with the U.S. As a matter of fact, for China there is so much homework to do.

Third, China should not feel complacent when it hears some seemingly extolling words, particularly from the U.S. Otherwise, China will fall into a “trap” made by the U.S., nor should it get faint by drinking the “mi hun tang”(sweet-nothing soup).[12]

Fourth, G2 is not really a kind of cooperation between two equal partners. Apparently, it is an unbalanced partnership dominated by the U.S. So it would be too naïve to praise the “friendship” between China and the U.S.

Finally, if China believes in G2, it will offend its allies around the world. In the end of the day, China will find itself standing lonely and isolated on the world stage.

Few Chinese leaders have commented openly on G2; however, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao offered his views on the terminology on May 20, 2009, when he was attending the 11th China-EU Summit in Prague.[13] At the press conference he said, “At present there are various kinds of discussions of China’s development prospects and its role. Here, with responsibility, I would like to express my three views on this issue. First, the foundation of China’s relations with the European Union is based on mutual respect and equal treatment…Second, though China’s development has achieved great progress, it is still a developing country. There is a long way to go before it can fully realize its modernization and many generations of Chinese people need to make efforts towards this end. Third, China always adheres to an independent foreign policy of peace and implements a strategy of openness based on mutual benefits and a win-win game. China would like to develop its friendly relations with any country in the world, and will never seek hegemony. Global issues cannot be resolved by one or two countries. Multipolarization and multilateralism is the tendency that cannot be stopped. It is also the hope of everybody. It was suggested the world order governed by China and the U.S. is in the process of making. It is groundless and wrong.”[14]

Some look at the G2 and “Chimerica” from a different angle. They note that, in the period after the World War II, the U.S. and China confronted with each other and both paid a big price. This confrontation jeopardized economic development of both countries and also exerted significant impact on the formation of the world order. “If China did not reject G2 three years ago, China-U.S. relations and the geopolitical framework in the Asia-Pacific area might have been different today.”[15] The U.S. continues to be the major external factor that will affect China’s peaceful development. Therefore, cooperation, not confrontation, between China and the U.S. is in the interests of both sides.[16]

Despite their different understanding and interpretations, all those who have participated in the discussion of notion of G2 and “Chimerica” agree to the view that, given the reality of the world today, China and the U.S. need to work alongside in every field in a cooperative way. It is believed that a better relationship between the two powers is in the interests of both sides and the world as well.

III. China’s Reaction to “Pivot” to Asia

For the Chinese academics in recent years one of the most “hot” topics in international studies is the so-called “pivot” to Asia, initiated by the Obama administration.[17] In an Op-Ed published by the Foreign Policy, the then U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “As the war in Iraq winds down and America begins to withdraw its forces from Afghanistan, the United States stands at a pivot point. Over the last 10 years, we have allocated immense resources to those two theaters. In the next 10 years, we need to be smart and systematic about where we invest time and energy, so that we put ourselves in the best position to sustain our leadership, secure our interests, and advance our values. One of the most important tasks of American statecraft over the next decade will therefore be to lock in a substantially increased investment -- diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise -- in the Asia-Pacific region.”[18]

Why did the U.S. want to “pivot” to Asia? Some Americans have already offered explanations. According to Justin Logan, for instance, the main factor driving Washington’s interest in Asia is the growing economic and military power of China.[19] Matt Schiavenza believes that the U.S. is the only country with enough muscle to check China’s rise, and many of the smaller countries in East Asia have sought reassurance from Washington that it remains invested in the region.[20] Robert S. Ross confirms that “pivot” to Asia is a shift in strategy aimed at bolstering the American defense ties with countries throughout the region and expanding the U.S. naval presence there.[21] A paper published by the U.S. Congressional Research Service also says that “The fundamental goal underpinning the shift [“pivot” to Asia] is to devote more effort to influencing the development of the Asia-Pacific’s norms and rules, particularly as China emerges as an ever-more influential regional power.”[22]

But Robert A. Manning does not think “pivot” to Asia is against China. In an article published by the Global Times, an influential Chinese newspaper, he states that “A widely held belief among many in China is that every U.S. policy move affecting the country is part of a concerted strategy of containment aimed at preventing its reemergence. Thus, the U.S. ‘rebalancing’ in Asia, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the US alliances with Japan, South Korea and Australia are all components of a U.S. effort to maintain U.S. dominance at China’s expense. This view is wrong. Containment was U.S. policy toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The USSR was a rival ideology, a competing anti-capitalist economic system aimed at expanding the Soviet empire. Containment was an effort to isolate Moscow economically and contain its military power. This is decidedly not U.S. policy toward China. Eight U.S. presidents from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama have pursued a policy of facilitating China’s economic modernization and integration into the international system.”[23]

Kelley Currie, Senior Fellow at Project 2049, a Washington research institute that focuses on East Asian security, offers an interesting observation: “When we deny that it’s all about China, it makes them even more suspicious. So I think we need to be honest... that yes, part of it [“pivot” to Asia] is about hedging and about the uncertainty that our allies in the region and our friends in the region feel about the behavior coming out of the People’s Republic of China.”[24]

Indeed, many Chinese scholars believe that the U.S. “pivot” (or re-balancing) to Asia is the strategy to contain China’s peaceful development. They say the U.S. clearly understands that its traditional sphere of influence in Asia has been declining and China’s position on the rise. Therefore, “minilateralism” is adopted by the U.S. to resist the power shift between rising and established powers.

In understanding the meaning of the “pivot” strategy, some Chinese even go further. According to them, the U.S. not only wishes to isolate China, but also intends to change China’s political system. Therefore, it can be expected that, in the 21st century, particularly in the first half of the century, if the U.S. still wants to behave like the “leader of the world”, the pattern of China-U.S. relationship would be the co-existence of cooperation and “fighting and killing by the U.S.” and probably more “fighting and killing by the U.S.” than cooperation.[25]

Other Chinese scholars look at the U.S. “pivot” strategy in the light of the U.S.-Japan alliance. With the evident changes of power structure among the U.S., China and Japan, the U.S. is increasingly keen to encourage Japan to play an important role in containing China’s rise.[26]

Apart from criticizing the U.S. strategy, some Chinese scholars also warn that China itself should not be afraid of it. Rather, China needs to know that it has its own limited capability and means to counterbalance the U.S. encirclement. Others are even more optimistic that not all of China’s neighboring countries are willing to join hands with the U.S. to encircle China. After all, maintaining rapid economic development and doing the homework is always China’s priority.[27]

Other Chinese scholars have highlighted a number of constraints the U.S. might face in implementing the “pivot” strategy. For instance, the U.S. lacks enough resources to accomplish what it intends to do. At the same time, the U.S. cannot neglect the turmoil in the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan, Iraq, among others. That is to say, Washington needs to keep on allocating time and energy on these places.

There are some Chinese scholars who have suggested that, in the face the U.S. intention to “pivot” to Asia, China must adopt a “march west” (西进) strategy.[28] If this strategy is well implemented, it could generate two positive results: on the one hand, China’s head-on confrontation with the U.S. in the Asia-Pacific region might be avoided; on the other, China can further develop its relations with the Middle East and Central Asian countries.

Interestingly, Some Chinese scholars also argue that the word “pivot” is misleading because the U.S. has never left Asia since it set foot in this region at the start of the Cold War. This argument is comparable with that of a few American scholars.[29]

IV. A New Type of Relationship between Major Powers

In the vocabulary of Chinese diplomacy there is a new phrase which has become increasingly popular since 2012: “a new type of relationship between major powers” (NTRMP).[30] According to an article about the origin of the phrase, published by the official news agency, Xinhua, former Chinese President Jiang Zemin suggested in the 1990s that China would like to seek a NTRMP characterized as “non-alliance, non-confrontation and not targeting against any third party”. During the second round of China-U.S. Strategic and Economic Dialogue in May 2010, the then State Councilor Dai Bingguo proposed that China and the U.S. need to “establish a NTRMP by respecting each other, harmonious coexistence and win-win cooperation”. During his trip to the U.S. in February 2012, the then Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping stated that it is necessary to promote China-U.S. relations so as to turn the bilateral relationship into a NTRMP in the 21st century. Three months later, at the fourth round of China-U.S. Strategic and Economic Dialogue, the then Chinese President Hu Jintao said that, no matter how the world and the domestic situations change, China and the U.S. should push their bilateral relations forward firmly and make greater efforts to develop a NTRMP that will reassure the people in China, the U.S. and other countries.” In his report to the 18th Party Congress in November 2012, the then General-Secretary of the Communist Party of China Hu Jintao said that China shall try to improve its relations with the major powers of the world by opening up more areas of cooperation, properly dealing with differences and moving towards the establishment of a long-term, stable NTRMP.[31]

Detailed explanation of the NTRMP did not come up until President Xi Jinping met with U.S. President Obama in Annenberg Retreat in June 2013. It was reported that the two leaders agreed to construct a NTRMP between their two countries. The Chinese leader summarized its meaning in three points: 1, no conflict and no confrontation; 2, mutual respect; and 3, win-win cooperation.[32]

To put the NTRMP into practice, President Xi Jinping proposed four suggestions:
First, it is necessary to upgrade bilateral dialogues and mutual trust to a new level, institutionalize the practice of the meetings between the leaders of the two countries in such multilateral occasions as G20 and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), and make good use of the more than ninety existing inter-governmental dialogue and communication mechanisms.
Second, it is necessary to create a new situation of practical cooperation between the two sides and make the structure of bilateral trade and investment move towards a more balanced direction.[33]
Third, it is necessary to establish a new pattern of interactions between the two sides, maintain close coordination and cooperation on international and regional hot issues like the situation of the Korean Peninsula and Afghanistan, and strengthen cooperation in such areas as maritime counter-piracy operations, transnational crime fighting, peacekeeping, disaster relief and prevention, cyber security, climate change and space safety, etc.
Fourth, it is necessary to explore new approaches of managing differences on the important issues and constructing a new pattern of military relations compatible with NTRMP.[34]
President Xi Jinping is confident about the establishment of NTRMP. At the joint press conference after the first meeting between the Presidents of China and the U.S. at the Annenberg Retreat on June 7, 2013, Xi Jinping pointed out, “I am fully confident of constructing a new type of relationship between China and the U.S.” He offered the following reasons: 1, Both sides have the political will to construct a new type of relationship between great powers. 2, Cooperation between the two sides over more than 40 years constitutes a solid foundation for the further cooperation between the two countries. 3, Both sides have set up over 90 dialogue and communication mechanisms such as the strategic and economic dialogue, cultural and educational exchanges and high-level consultations, providing a mechanism guarantee for the construction of a new pattern of relationship between great powers. 4, Both sides have established over 220 pairs of sister provinces and states and sister cities. There are nearly 190,000 Chinese students in the U.S. and over 20,000 U.S. students in China, laying a profound foundation of public opinion favorable for the construction of a new type of relationship between great powers. 5, There is enormous space for future cooperation between the two countries.[35]

Avoiding the terms G2 and “Chimerica” does not mean that China stays away from taking an active part in global governance. Indeed, misunderstanding or wrong judgment of China’s role in global governance exists. C. Fred Bergsten wrote in an article published in 2008, “To be an economic superpower, a country must be sufficiently large, dynamic, and globally integrated to have a major impact on the world economy. Three political entities currently qualify: the United States, the European Union, and China. Inducing China to become a responsible pillar of the global economic system (as the other two are) will be one of the great challenges of coming decades -- particularly since at the moment China seems uninterested in playing such a role.”[36] This assessment about China’s disinterest or indifference in global governance is incorrect.

By far any big power is hegemonic. Particularly in the 20th century, seeking hegemony by some major powers had caused two devastating world wars. China wishes to break the rule by pursuing peaceful development. As the Chinese government’s White Paper titled China's Peaceful Development (September 2011) made it clear, “China’s overall goal of pursuing peaceful development is to promote development and harmony domestically and pursue cooperation and peace internationally. Specifically, this means that China will endeavor to make life better for its people and contribute to human progress through hard work, innovation and reform carried out by the Chinese people and growing long-term friendly relations and promoting equality and mutually-beneficial cooperation with other countries.”[37]

In his government report to the National Congress on March 15, 2012, the then Premier Wen Jiabao announced that, “China is going to actively participate in multilateral affairs and global governance, and also to push forward the world order to the direction of more justice and rationality.”[38]

V. Concluding Remarks

Chinese perceptions of the U.S. vary greatly. But on the whole, the image of the U.S. is quite positive and benign. Moreover, despite the differences of the perceptions, the majority of the Chinese believe that it is highly necessary for both sides to strengthen cooperation and reduce confrontation. While the U.S. is unlikely to achieve its goal of containing China’s peaceful development, a new type of relationship between China and the U.S. will certainly result in a win-win scenario, which is beneficial to maintaining world peace and prosperity.

Source of documents：Global Review