On July 3, the Washington Post published an open letter to President Trump and members of Congress entitled Its no use turning China into an enemy of the United States, which aroused widespread concern in the policy circles of China and the United States. The letter was sponsored by five senior Chinese experts and former government officials from the United States and co-sponsored by 95 senior Chinese experts and scholars, former officials, business leaders and well-known political scientists. It is also known as 100 Peoples Credit.
This open letter expressed concern about the deteriorating reality of Sino-US relations since Trump came to power, questioned the current U.S. government policy toward China, and put forward seven suggestions on the U.S. policy toward China.
On the morning of July 9, during the 8th World Peace Forum, Michael Swaine, one of the initiators of the open letter and senior fellow of the Carnegie Foundation for International Peace, held a press conference on the open letter and current Sino-US relations.
In an interview with the surging news, Shi Wen said that the open letter was aimed not only at the Trump administration, but also at a more widespread view in both parties and other policy areas of the United States.
As a senior researcher at the Carnegie Institute for International Peace, History and Literature is the most important American expert in Chinas security research field, and has great influence in Chinas defense and foreign policy, Sino-US relations and East Asian international relations.
There are not only two options for US policy towards China
In this open letter, Shiwen and other co-sponsors said they did not believe that China was the enemy of the United States economy, nor did they believe that China faced threats to national security in every field. The United States regards China as its enemy and decouples it from the global economy, which damages the international role and reputation of the United States and undermines the economic interests of all countries.
The original purpose of this open letter is to bring together a large number of politicians, knowledgeable and experienced people from all walks of life, not just experts studying China, to take a respectable criticism of the Trump Governments hostile attitude towards China. At the publication meeting on July 9, Shi Wen said.
Some people criticize this letter as a return to the previous US policy towards China, as if the US policy towards China had only two choices: those of the former and those of the Trump Administration. This is wrong. Shi Wen said, We have other choices. We dont have to choose between them.
Shi Wen pointed out that between the past policy toward China and Trumps policy toward China, there was in fact a fairly rational intermediate region, and this letter just illustrates the existence of such a rational intermediate region.
We should get rid of the idea that there are two different systems competing in the world, or that two big countries are competing, and that one side wins and the other loses a zero-sum game. If we fall into this situation, it will be a bad thing for everyone. Shi Wen said in an interview with Peng Mei News.
And my biggest concern is that the Trump administration is not fully aware of the fact that the United States must cooperate with China. The Chinese side is also not fully aware that the US policy towards China has undergone significant changes. History goes further.
Others want to sign, others worry about not signing.
Speaking about the process of publishing the joint letter, Shi Wen said that in fact, he and several other colleagues had long hoped to publish such an open letter, especially when the relationship between China and the United States continued to decline, they hoped to publish it as soon as possible. This open letter has not been published until now. Shi Wen said that it takes time to write such a letter, and the content of the letter requires a lot of people to participate, and the signatories need time to evaluate the contents of the letter.
According to Shiwen, in addition to the 100 sponsors and co-sponsors, there are others who want to sign the letter, but some do not. This is not entirely because they disagree with the views expressed in the letter, some because they are not allowed by their organization, and others because they do not have the habit of signing joint letters.
As stated at the beginning of the letter, the co-sponsors are members of academia, foreign policy, military and business circles, the vast majority of whom come from the United States, many of whom have been paying attention to Asia throughout their careers.
In addition to history and literature, the other four Chinese experts who initiated the open letter included Professor Fu Tailin of MIT, former U.S. Ambassador to China Rui Xiaojian, former Acting Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, Dong Yuncai, and Professor Fu Gaoyi of Harvard University.
This letter is not only for the Trump government, but for a wider range of people, Shiwen told the stormy news. The aim is not to criticize the government itself, but to try to correct the widespread view that it exists in both parties and other policy areas of the United States.
Yao Yunzhu, former director of the China-US Defense Research Center of the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences, also said in an interview with the surging news on September 9 that although the list of 100 people is not in the government, they have both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. The academic circles and think tanks are half the same, and the scholars who have served in the government are almost half the same. Certain representativeness.
Shiwen revealed that more than 150 people have signed the letter. Yao Yunzhu believes that as the number of signers increases, the composition of co-signers will become more and more diverse.
Advocating the Complex and All-round Definition of Sino-US Relations
Speaking of the impact of this open letter, Yao Yunzhu believed that neither the initiator nor co-sponsor of the letter was within the government and would have any impact on the current government. However, the decision-making mechanism and channels of influencing decision-making in the United States are very diverse.
The open letter at least shows that there is no support from all sides for the adjustment of US policy to the enemy of China. She told reporters.
What we need to pay attention to is that the United States has not reached a complete consensus. Consensus is very limited. It is a very limited consensus among the possible population. Yao Yunzhu said, The decision-making power of China policy is not in the hands of these people, but a small part of the governments decision-making departments, as long as they have consensus, can adjust China policy, but after they decide, there will be a lot of variables on how to implement China policy.
Shi Wen also admitted at the press conference that he did not know how much impact the letter would have, but he hoped that the publication of the letter would enable some US supporters of extreme policy to rethink. He also hoped that we could find that the US policy was not so extreme. The relevant policies described the extreme nature of China and made a further analysis. Inaccurate.
They just disagree with Trumps policy and oppose Chinas policy as an enemy, Yao Yunzhu commented. The seven contents of the open letter are not specific, but reflect certain ideas and have consistency with the previous governments policy, but they do not necessarily advocate the former China policy.
What they advocate is more continuity, more complex and comprehensive definition of Sino-US relations, rather than a simple definition. I think they are a more mature group. Yao Yunzhu said.
Source of this article: Peng Mei News Responsible Editor: Zhou Xinyi_NB12002