If China and the United States could identify specific collaborative projects, break the bottlenecks of international supply chains and provide assistance to countries suffering from shortages from food to energy, normal relations could be restored.

The most recent direct discussion between U.S. President Joseph Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping was dominated by the Taiwan issue—which has become increasingly volatile and has returned to a central point of tension in the relationship. The telephone conversation allowed each president to restate their respective positions. Hopefully such an exchange will contribute to restraint, non-provocations, and stability between Beijing and Washington (although Taipei has its own agency and can cause instability).

The recent conversation offered an opportunity to manage bilateral relations from a strategic height. But because of domestic political strife in the U.S, there will likely be no letup in attempts to amplify “China threat” rhetoric.

The U.S. president has failed to reverse the harmful effects of Donald Trump’s sanctions. In fact, by continuing them, especially in the high-tech arena, America has unleashed a vigorous wave of energy in China to catch up, which will only lead to a loss of U.S. market share.

Will the G20 foreign ministers meeting bring China-U.S. ties back on track? Only with continuous improvements in the overall bilateral atmosphere can any consensus on cooperation — and the stability of the world — be effectively guaranteed.

Restore normal diplomatic exchanges, avoid war and strengthen economic ties — these are at the top of the list. It’s clear that trade is increasing, not decreasing, and we should continue developing scientific and technological exchanges. While competition is inevitable, war is not.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi met on July 9 at a G-20 Foreign Ministers Meeting in Bali, Indonesia. They held lengthy discussions—but all subsequent indications suggest that no substantive progress was made on each sides’ concerns. Nonetheless, some consolation can be taken that such an exchange occurred at all.

U.S. announcements and actions show some new approaches. In short, trade plays second fiddle to the White House’s strategic objectives — meaning that commercial interests will be sacrificed whenever Washington has need. Trade with China is viewed through a geopolitical lens.

At the recent meeting in Luxembourg between China and the United States, the PRC emphasized two bedrock interests — Taiwan and the broader Asia-Pacific. America has been shifting its approach on both fronts. If it does not dial back its confrontational attitude, prosperity and peace in the region will not be attained.

The dominant narrative on the Chinese side is that this strategic competition between the two countries reflects the struggles for power, institutions, and perceptions, which will last throughout the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. In general, it is thus believed that competition and struggle have been adopted as key words for both Washington and Beijing in managing their relations.