No national interest is furthered by abandoning or conditioning this policy (One China Policy) on other issues. To do so would very likely end up increasing Taiwan’s vulnerabilities, destabilizing the Asia-Pacific region, and jeopardizing broad US interests.

As the transition process runs its due course, frictions may wax and wane, but China will respond to the evolving situation and adapt to the US political, economic and security policy changes to ensure that bilateral ties remain on an even keel.

In January 2017, China released a document that helps interpret the policy goals of President Xi Jinping, particularly his speech in May 2014 where he promoted, “New Asian security concept for new progress in security cooperation.” The Trump administration should take note of three points in the new document: China’s country relations, the South China Sea, and the conspicuous absence of certain information, as each will have a critical role in U.S.-China relations.

Trump’s nomination of Rex Tillerson has been criticized due to Tillerson’s amateurish understanding of U.S.-China relations, but other changes by the Trump administration present the major benefits and risks for China. While the administration’s closer ties with Russia and incentives to distract from domestic failure may pose a threat to China, the Chinese government has the opportunity to present itself as the more stable guardian of regional security.

Even before the election of Donald Trump or Xi Jinping’s debut at the World Economic Forum in Davos, two mutually contradictory frameworks for understanding China’s international economic and geopolitical influence, one emanating from increasingly hawkish U.S. pundits and the other from China’s top leaders, had taken shape. However, by recognizing and even embracing the complexity of China’s domestic and international political economy, new opportunities for productive engagement may replace growing strategic competition.

The inauguration of President Donald J. Trump on January 20, 2017 suggests that U.S. foreign policy is moving away from the Wilsonian liberal internationalism, which has guided American foreign policymaking since the end of World War II, toward the “America-first” Jacksonian populism.

A trade war, such as some are predicting, harms both countries, creates uncertainty for many other countries, and is an activity that does not belong anywhere in the interconnected global world of the 21st century. I believe this will be averted. Instead, I truly believe the two presidents are pragmatic and understanding of the stakes involved, and will start a communication and negotiation process that results in wins for both countries.

Like a slow motion train wreck, we can see what’s coming, but are powerless to stop it. No longer do facts matter. No longer is there appetite for cautious deliberation. No longer can we assume cooler heads will prevail. The guardrails and emergency brakes that prevented the relationship from running off the tracks in the past have fallen into disrepair. Where else to go, but into the abyss?

Few recent developments in Sino-US relations, preceding the 2016 presidential election, strained the imagination. Enter Donald Trump.

As the TPP trade pact fizzles away, China would happily expand its domain of influence in the Pacific Rim region while U.S. allies and friends inevitably look for a more reliable partner in the neighborhood. As these geopolitical realities set in, will Trump’s campaign promises to “Make America Great Again” eventually result in “Making China Great Again” and leave the U.S. much less relevant?