The second condition is that, China’s reform and opening up to the outside world and its foreign policies would not have a fundamental reverse and the United States would not challenge China’s core interest.  Without the national development strategy adopted since the Third Plenary Session of the 11^th Central Committee by the Chinese Communist Party, without the expedition of Deng Xiaoping’s talks during his inspection tour, it is almost out of the question for China to try to maintain a constructive relationship with the United States.  If the United States had continuously challenged China’s core interest and did not as in 1994 move human rights issue away from the central place of “One China Principle” on Taiwan issue, it is also impossible for China and the United States to maintain a constructive relations.  Looking at the present situation, the main problem is that the United States should not challenge China’s core interest.

       The foregoing two basic conditions have in fact provided a basic thread for an understanding of present and near future changes of Sino-U.S. relations.  Such a thread is whether both sides have, arising from their respective basic national policies, desires for developing cooperative relations and whether basic conditions have been formed for promotion of development of Sino-U.S. relations.

Forward a New Stage

The Sino-U.S. relations are currently moving towards a new stage.  Compared with the former stage featuring dealing with problems in bilateral relations, an ever bigger proportion in Sino-U.S. relations will be placed on jointly facing and handling significant international affairs and opening dialogues on important principles that guide present international order.

 For example, one direct cause for the setback of Sino-U.S. relations was U.S. attack on Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia.  However, it is better to say that such a drastic impact was a breakout of long term contradictions between the two countries.  Behind that, it reflected significant differences on a series of international issues between China and the United States.  For example, U.S. and the Great Britain air attacked Iraq regardless of the voting result of five permanent members of the security council; U.S. increased its deployment of national missile defense system while going against related international agreements; U.S. expanded spheres of areas of U.S.-Japan military alliance, unwilling to commit that such an alliance would not encroach on Taiwan issue; bypassing UN, NATO carried out military attacks over Yugoslavia, who is a sovereign state and attempted to take this opportunity to make substantial revisions to the state relations norms that of the utmost importance, etc.  It can be expected that debates over basic principles that guide current international system will continue. This is a natural trend of development.

       Ten years since the end of the Cold War, while developing Sino-U.S. bilateral relations in an all-round way, changes have taken place to the positions of both countries in the present world.  The United States, on one hand, as a unique super power, not only its overall national strength is far superior, it also maintains a forceful rising momentum in various fields.  Americans themselves are full of vigor being a world leader, interfering all over the world.

       On the other hand, with a rapid upgrade of its overall national strength, China shows increasingly concern over international affairs and its spheres of influence are widening.  Such is a sense of responsibility for a big nation and also a natural result of China’s rapid expansion of its own interests.  China can hardly take an attitude of evasion on many issues. 

    To some extent, jointly building a “constructive strategic partnership” is just a foreseeing reaction to such a trend of history mentioned above.  It definitely represents a positive will of cooperation.

        Against the such changing background, China and the United States will have to face the problem at the deepest level that determine the bilateral relations, that is, on one hand, whether China has determined to take a constructive pose to mix itself completely into the current international system, whose many important rules now favorable and ever more favorable to developed countries with U.S. occupies a leading position; on the other hand, whether the United States has determined to sincerely not standing in the way of China’s mixture into the current international system as China is a big rising non-western country.  That means the United States has to readjust its attitude and position on some important issues. 

     To sum up, in order to lead the world, the United States has to face and accept certain changes brought by China’s mixing into the current international system.  In order to mix into the world, a rising China also has to soberly think and deal with various problems and difficulties brought by U.S. policies.  It is just from this angle sees that with a view of development of Sino-U.S. relations, the two countries reached an agreement on China’s accession into WTO have epoch-making significance.

Building Trust, Cohering Mutual Understanding

       After the end of the Cold War, Sino-U.S. relations were described as at “the cross-roads” for a time.  In early 1990s, both China and the United States examined seriously at relations between the two sides, striving to orient the relations between the two countries in conformity with their national interests respectively.  At that time, the Chinese government proposed a policy of “building trust, reducing troubles, developing cooperation and not going in for confrontation”, while the U.S. government proposed an “engagement” policy towards China.[2]  Just during the process of running-in these two policies as well as after having experienced toss and torture of ups and downs, the two leaders have gradually excavated and accumulated common understandings and finally reached one on the orientation of development of Sino-U.S. relations.  During Chinese President Jiang Zeming’s state visit to the United States in winter 1997, President Jiang and U.S. President Clinton jointly proposed making joint effort to build a “constructive strategic partnership” between China and the United States.[3] 

       China and the United States are two “super giant” states in the present world.[4]  Their relations involve matters in a wide range of spheres, among which global and regional problems are inevitable.  On matters concerning global and regional issues, cooperation is unavoidable and one may also say that the two sides cooperate in the major aspects in these fields, while some significant differences exist on some specific issues.  Otherwise, Sino-U.S. relations can in no way be like it is today.  In this sense, “constructive strategic partnership” has reflected part of the reality of Sino-U.S. relations, but it has reflected more of an orientation of development that both countries look forward to.

       U.S. bombing of Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia on May 8th led to a drastic deterioration of Sino-U.S. relations, the degree of which has a direct link with two sides’ diametrically opposing positions on NATO’s air attack on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.  Development of events has obviously resulted in both sides’ doubts over “constructive strategic partnership” and obviously lowering anticipation for the future development of Sino-U.S. relations. Under this circumstance, in order to understand the Sino-American relation’s future, it is necessary to analyze some  characteristics created in the transformation. In generally, those characteristics include four aspects as following:

        “Importance”. It means Sino-U.S. relations involves two countries’ significant strategic interests.  For both China and the United States have decisive impact on global and regional international political situations,  and Sino-U.S. relations is alsogreatly checked and influenced by external forces and neither side would be able to go its own way.

       “Comprehensiveness”. It means Sino-U.S. relations involves two sides’ political, economic, social, cultural, military security fields as well as different departments in the government and various regions.  Such a situation determines that different departmental, regional and group interests domestically in making policies towards the other side increasingly influence both sides.  It is harder to keep a consistent attitude in one field.