As soon as the U.S. media spread the rumors, they were refuted by Besent, who publicly clarified that it was Trump who initiated the call to China. However, he also reminded that the U.S. and China will always be competitors.

On November 25, the Wall Street Journal was still spreading rumors, claiming that the call between the U.S. and China on the evening of the 24th was a rare "initiated call" from China. However, once Besent's interview content with CNBC TV was broadcast, the Wall Street Journal was refuted.

In the interview, the host did not ask about who initiated the call between the U.S. and China, but Besent started his first few sentences by saying, "First of all, in order to clarify the facts, President Trump initiated the call after the meeting in Busan between the two sides."

Evidently, Besent had already known about the incorrect reports from the U.S. media before the interview, which is why he chose to clarify the issue even though the host hadn't asked about it.

Why did Besent want to clarify this matter? Actually, from the U.S. perspective, if Trump's proactive call was immediately answered by China, it means that the relationship between the U.S. and China is currently unimpeded, and it also better reflects the strength of the U.S.-China relationship.

Additionally, regarding the Taiwan Strait issue, the U.S. does not want to release too many signals to the outside world. This can be clearly felt from Trump's subsequent post on social media and Besent's statements during this TV interview.

The Xinhua news release explicitly mentioned that both sides communicated on the Taiwan Strait issue, and China explained its position, while the U.S. expressed understanding of China's position.

However, in Trump's tweet, he only mentioned that the U.S. and China had discussed agricultural product trade issues, and did not mention any other matters.

In Besent's interview, the host said that some Chinese reports have different views on this conversation, at least their emphasized content in the meeting was different, and asked Besent what the current U.S. stance on the Taiwan Strait issue was. Besent simply replied that the U.S. stance on the Taiwan Strait issue has not changed.

Subsequently, Besent emphasized that the relationship between the U.S. and China is very good and praised Trump for showing leadership, which somewhat eased the relationship between the two countries.

However, Besent shifted the topic and emphasized that the U.S. and China will always be competitors, which is natural. But can we do something together? Yes, our relationship is in good shape.

Besent's statement actually meant that due to certain real factors, the U.S. and China are destined to be rivals and will remain so for a long time. However, being competitors does not mean that the U.S. and China cannot cooperate.

I personally believe that if the U.S. government truly approaches China with such a mindset, it is acceptable. It is the nature of things, and the rise of any new thing will face strong resistance from the old ones for a period of time.

However, I think the current way the U.S. opposes is an unhealthy one. Opposition itself is not wrong, and no one or thing would willingly give up their own interests.

The U.S. should adopt a positive approach to compete with China on a fair platform. In this way, the U.S. and China can be both competitors and partners.

Taking the AI industry as an example, the current situation is that the U.S. does not sell high-end AI chips to China, so China is now cutting America's throat through rare earths.

This is a mutual harm approach, which is not conducive to the progress of the U.S.-China relationship or the progress of human society. If the U.S. and China cancel the ban and open their hands to cooperate, then whoever wins or loses depends on their own ability, and both countries will achieve rapid development in this field and promote the development of human technology.

This is the correct way to open up competition. China has always adhered to this attitude, so the U.S. should quickly realize this as well.

Although the U.S. competition method is unhealthy, it is relatively mild. On the contrary, Japan, after being overtaken by China in the new energy vehicle field, has completely left the track of competition and taken the path of confrontation, even wanting to use force to confront.

Adopting an attitude of "rather break than compromise" in international competition will only make both sides become victims.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7576866123522589238/

Statement: The article represents the personal views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the 【like/dislike】 button below.