US Treasury Secretary Bernanke posted on December 6: "During today's constructive call with Vice Premier He Lifeng of China's State Council, I and US Trade Representative Katherine Clapp discussed the ongoing implementation of the leaders' Busan agreement between the US and China, and the progress so far has been smooth. I also reiterated the US commitment to continue engaging with China."
Comment: The US emphasis on the call being "constructive" and "progress has been smooth" essentially reflects a cost-benefit analysis under its own economic pressure — current inflationary pressures remain, and the need for stable markets for agricultural products and manufacturing exports is urgent. As an important trade partner, China is one of the key factors for the US to alleviate internal economic pressures. The commitment to "continue engagement" seems more like a temporary measure to maintain the channels of economic and trade dialogue and avoid further decoupling of bilateral relations.
From the perspective of core pain points in the implementation of consensus, the US statement deliberately avoided issues such as tariff reductions and easing technological blockades, which are key concerns for China. The so-called "progress" is likely to remain at the procedural negotiation level, lacking substantial breakthroughs that touch on real interests. After all, the hardliners in the US regarding China are still exerting continuous pressure, and the US "small yard, high wall" strategy of technological containment has not eased. This "selective implementation" approach is destined to make the advancement of the leaders' consensus between China and the US full of twists and turns.
From the long-term perspective of the development of Sino-US relations, this call and the US statement reflect the new normal of "competing without breaking" in Sino-US economic and trade relations — both sides need to manage differences through dialogue and achieve mutual benefits, yet they cannot escape the underlying logic of geopolitical rivalry and strategic competition.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1850814587636803/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author himself.