Three major matters underpin the future of China-U.S. relations. First, there is no such thing as a destiny of doom as presented in the concept of the Thucydides trap. On the contrary, the future of the Sino-U.S. relationship is largely up to both countries to assess, determine and choose.

China needs to a better job in responding to Western scolding. It may need to express discontent, or even anger, from time to time. But mostly it must be able to deliver a positive, vivid and appealing Chinese narrative.

The United States and China are embroiled in a contest that might prove more enduring, more wide-ranging, and more intense than any other international competi­tion in modern history, including the Cold War. In both countries, fears have grown that the contest might escalate into open conflict.

China recently initiated a wave of diplomatic courtship of ASEAN nations, as both sides work to navigate the reality of China’s resurgent gravity in the Pacfic region.

Southeast Asia’s coalition of small-to-medium sized nations have hosted superpower conflicts, yet they are overshadowed by larger regional powers on the global stage time and time again. American leadership will struggle to find welcoming allies there without a drastic upgrade in its dealings with ASEAN member nations.

Efforts to placate both the United States and the PRC are proving ever more challenging, as the recent Group of Seven and NATO summits have shown.

G7 members created a firm front for confronting China, one of Biden's clear goals.

Britain’s approach to China is unrealistic. While seeking a positive trade and investment relationship, it also asserts that China threatens its security, prosperity and values. These two views are incompatible. Having one’s cake and eating it too is a daydream.

China, the United States and India have different strategic goals and so their interests conflict — so much so that strategic suspicion has fostered a negative kind of competition in which the other side is labeled as a primary rival. Of course there is a way to break the impasse. But it boils down to whether the parties really want to.

The U.S. exaggerates the Russian military threat while strengthening the military position of its allies, which shows the American double standard unambiguously. Russia’s proposals for reform of the Arctic Council were dismissed out of hand by Blinken, who insisted on an American approach.