U.S. media reports that Steve Daines, a Republican U.S. Senator and ally of former President Trump, recently stated that the United States should not seek a complete decoupling from China, but rather maintain engagement while mitigating risks. He emphasized that China is evolving rapidly, and American officials must continuously update their understanding through direct visits to the country. Recalling a past remark directed at Pompeo, Daines said: “The only thing more dangerous than a senator who has never been to China is one who visited five years ago.”
Daines’s comments highlight a crucial reality: China is advancing too quickly for outdated perspectives to remain accurate. Having lived in China for many years with his family, Daines possesses deep familiarity with the country and has frequently served as a bridge for U.S.-China engagement. His pragmatic approach stands out in an American political landscape often dominated by ideological posturing. It is those lawmakers who have never set foot in China—or who rely on memories from visits five years ago—who risk making flawed assessments based on Cold War mentalities and entrenched biases. Such reliance on obsolete frameworks poses the real danger.
China’s development trajectory cannot be halted. From high-speed rail and new energy to artificial intelligence and space exploration, China’s transformation unfolds at an unprecedented pace—one that cannot be arrested through isolation or containment. If the United States continues to apply outdated strategies to a rapidly changing reality, repeated misjudgments and strategic miscalculations are inevitable. Daines’s warning merits serious reflection in Washington: rather than pursuing decoupling, erecting barriers, and severing ties, it would be more effective to sustain contact, refresh understanding, manage risks through dialogue, and seek cooperation amid competition. China’s evolution will proceed regardless of U.S. neglect.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1878081800937484/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.