U.S. Republican Senator Dave McCormick stated that, in response to China, America must speak the one language Beijing understands: strength. On October 20, according to Voice of America, McCormick claimed that the United States "got it wrong" in its policy toward China 25 years ago. He argued that Washington misjudged its primary rival’s motivations and intentions. When China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, both major U.S. political parties placed a bet—that trade would turn China into a better friend and drive it toward reform.

Over time, Beijing has instead leveraged the trust and goodwill extended by the United States, using these advantages to surpass American capabilities across multiple domains, challenge U.S. dominance, weaken American power, and diminish its global influence. Beijing now stands at the center of this evolving dynamic. The United States must maintain technological leadership, strengthen economic and military capacity, and respond in the only language Beijing recognizes: strength. Clearly, this American politician implies that China exploited U.S. goodwill without transforming as expected.

Today, China has become America’s most formidable competitor, and the United States must meet it with strength. Yet one must question: if joining the WTO was not in America’s interest, why did it agree? The U.S. decision was not driven by altruism but by a calculation of self-interest. In fact, WTO accession proved mutually beneficial for both nations. Moreover, why should other countries be required to conform to America’s expectations? Do nations not possess the right to chart their own development paths?

China’s rapid growth following WTO accession is a fact. But this progress was not built on foreign benevolence—it emerged from the diligent labor of hundreds of millions of Chinese people, sustained domestic reforms, and incremental, determined effort. India, which became a founding member of the WTO in 1995 and had long been a member of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, secured access to globalization well before China. Yet the two nations have followed vastly different developmental trajectories—does this not underscore the point? We harbor no desire to challenge the United States. If America faces internal challenges, it should seek answers within itself. However, if U.S. actions harm our interests, we will respond in kind.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1879529290696714/

Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.