Beyond “60 Minutes”: China-U.S. Relations Need Greater Understanding, Not a Battle of Ideas

Zhai Xiang is a Research Fellow at Xinhua Institute. He received his MA degree with a focus on China-U.S. relations from Stanford University and has previously worked at the Hoover Institution and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own.

Heated discussions on social media drew my attention to the CBS “60 Minutes” episode aired at the end of February 2024, featuring an interview with the U.S. Ambassador to China, Nicholas Burns. Ambassador Burns discussed topics including raids of certain American businesses in China, intellectual property, economic growth, foreign investment, the South China Sea, Taiwan, and the geopolitical and ideological challenges between the two countries, encompassing virtually all hot-button issues in current China-U.S. relations.

This “60 Minutes” interview provides its global audience with insight into the current dynamic between China and the U.S. However, I contend that seeking understanding and cooperation is more critical than competition, especially now, within this important bilateral relationship. To contribute to this dialogue, I offer detailed responses to the ambassador’s views. Through such analysis, I hope to provide a balanced perspective on the current state of China-U.S. relations from the vantage point of a Chinese scholar.

Topic #1: Inspections of American Businesses

Ambassador Burns mentioned surprise inspections of six or seven American businesses in China, voicing concerns about the broadness of the amendment to China’s counter-espionage law, suggesting that business practices legal and acceptable everywhere else in the world could be considered espionage in China. This insinuation may convey a potentially misleading and unjust portrayal.

In recent years, U.S. congressional legislation and executive orders from the White House have continually imposed restrictions on China-related mobile apps, land acquisitions, crane machinery, pharmaceuticals, and more, all in the name of national security. For instance, TikTok currently faces the prospect of being forced out of the American market, a situation that even Americans themselves find unsettling due to an excessive emphasis on national security.

Furthermore, some Chinese students and visiting scholars are subjected to interrogations and even deportations upon arriving in the U.S. On the Entity List issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security, I’ve observed that the current count of Chinese companies has surpassed 700, which, excluding Russia, exceeds the total of all other countries combined. This inevitably raises the question of how exactly the US delineates the boundaries of national security. Is there a scenario where, regardless of how diligently these companies comply with American laws, they still find themselves unable to operate routinely within the U.S.?  Furthermore, in the consulting industry, avoiding sensitive information related to national security is a cornerstone ethical guideline. Have these American companies been rigorously adhering to these standards in China? Maybe the U.S., not China, is seeking an excuse.

In fact, China’s newly amended counter-espionage law of 2023 provides more detailed regulations, clearly defining protected objects as “state secrets, intelligence, and other documents, data, materials, and items related to national security and interests.”

In the fall of 2020, Chinese leadership incorporated the coordination of development and security into national planning and has since repeatedly emphasized this concept on many occasions. Therefore, the investigations Ambassador Burns mentioned, if related to the collection and transmission of sensitive information concerning national security and interests, are based on clear rules.

Topic #2: Intellectual Property Disputes

Ambassador Burns also mentioned the issue of intellectual property theft faced by American companies in China. According to World Bank data , China paid the rest of the world 44.47 billion USD for the use of intellectual property in 2022, ranking among the top three nations in the world. I am curious about the number of cases the Ambassador was referring to and whether American companies have attempted to protect their rights and found the channels accessible and effective. I want to point out that China has made significant efforts in protecting IPR.

Thirty years ago, when I was very young, I saw counterfeit Nike and Adidas products on the streets of China and pirated American books on street stalls. Today, however, I no longer encounter these goods on the streets or in mainstream channels. Respect for and protection of intellectual property have long become social norms in China, and those who manufacture and sell such goods face severe penalties.

For example, starting in 2020, two Chinese citizens produced and sold counterfeit pet vaccines of American brands such as Nobivac. They were caught by the police in April of the following year and prosecuted in January 2022. The two were sentenced to eight and four years in prison, respectively, and fined 4 million and 3.6 million CNY. 

I recommend that Ambassador Burns should advise American businesses to report any violation of their IPR to the Chinese authorities. If their legitimate concerns fail to be adequately addressed, then perhaps this should be a focal point of “60 Minutes.”

Moreover, the validity of some of the IPR violations claimed by the United States is questionable. On February 27, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California found a Chinese company not guilty of charges brought by the U.S. Department of Justice in November 2018. The judge ruled that the prosecution failed to prove that the Chinese company misappropriated proprietary data from an American memory-chip maker. 

Topic #3: The Chinese Economy

Ambassador Burns commended China’s achievement in lifting 800 million people out of poverty. However, he also mentioned that China is reversing many of the market reforms that produced an economic miracle, alongside challenges posed by an aging population and decelerating economic expansion in the next decade.

China cannot forever stay in labor-intensive industries, and I believe it is aware of challenges such as the aging population, and is actively seeking solutions. The current economic pressure results from both external factors such as trade protectionism and a lackluster global economic recovery, as well as internal structural and long-term factors. China is currently deepening reforms to expedite the cultivation of new drivers for economic growth, promoting high-quality development, and using high-level institutional opening-up to resolve both internal and external difficulties that constrain its economic development. Overall, the fundamental outlook for this country’s long-term economic improvement remains unchanged.

Ambassador Burns noted that due to “the weakening economy and the harsh government tactics,” China lost a large amount of long-term foreign investment last year, leaving American companies uncertain about their future in China.

This shift is tied to multiple factors, including U.S. interest rate hikes and policy orientations toward China. The United States has employed various means to pressure businesses operating in China to relocate, compelling some companies to move to Southeast Asia or even Mexico. Yet, it’s also worth noting that in 2023, China established 53,766 new foreign-invested enterprises , a 39.7% year-over-year increase. Actual investments from France, the UK, Switzerland, and Australia grew by 84.1%, 81.0%, 21.4%, and 17.1% respectively, indicating foreign investors retain their confidence in the Chinese market.

In July of last year, China’s State Council released the “24 Articles on Foreign Investment,” outlining measures to ensure that foreign-invested enterprises can participate in government procurement activities in accordance with the law, enjoy equal access to policy support, and benefit from improved residence policies for their foreign employees. All these moves aim at further attracting foreign investment. The State Council executive meeting, held on February 23 this year, characterized foreign investment as “a vital force for the joint prosperity and development of China’s and the global economy,” highlighting the stabilization of foreign investment as a strategic focus for China’s economic agenda in 2024. In late February, the Ministry of Commerce convened a national foreign investment work conference and a roundtable discussion, announcing that a majority of the “24 Articles” had been effectively implemented or had seen substantial progress. China’s determination to continue reforming and opening up has been illustrated.

Topic #4: Satisfaction of American Businesses in China

Although Ambassador Burns acknowledged that most American companies have not left China and “they don’t want to leave,” he suggested that “they’re not making major investments until they can see exactly where the government is headed.” However, through exchanges with executives of many American enterprises in China, my colleagues and I have observed a different scenario. These businesses are not merely looking on passively as the Ambassador has suggested. Many companies have expressed that China’s development and innovation, workforce efficiency, and market size are highly attractive. They have also noticed that the conditions for market access are becoming more transparent and equitable. Their ongoing optimism about the Chinese market and confidence in China’s economic growth reflect a commitment to investing and expanding in China.

For instance, Dole has enjoyed multiple tax and fee reductions, as well as corporate contribution rewards for its operations in China, resulting in nearly a 20% increase in performance in 2023. Align Technology, an American medical device manufacturer with a 17-year history in China, has expressed confidence in China’s market-oriented, legalized, and internationalized business environment. DoTERRA, a retailer from Utah, believes that despite short-term fluctuations, China, in the long term, “still is a very, very bright spot in the global community.”

According to the “2024 China Business Climate Survey Report” released by AmCham China in February, its members hold increased optimism about the two-year business outlook for China. The majority of members across all sectors are not considering relocating manufacturing or sourcing outside of China. 50% of respondent companies now consider China among their top three global priorities. 37% of respondent companies anticipate modest increases of investment in China. Over half of the respondent companies consider that positive bilateral relations between the U.S. and China are “extremely important” to their business growth in China. Meanwhile, for the fourth consecutive year, rising tensions in U.S.-China relations remain a primary concern for members.

Topic #5: The South China Sea and Taiwan

As Ambassador Burns commented, the U.S. and China must live together, while an end to the economic relationship would mean “750,000 American families wouldn’t be able to put dinner on the table.”

The futures of the U.S. and China are intricately linked. The U.S. might need to reflect on how its policies have contributed to the tensions in the bilateral relationship, such as the trade war. Both nations need to proceed with caution, understanding each other’s legitimate demands through dialogue and cooperation, reducing unnecessary misunderstandings, and seeking fair and optimized solutions amid their differences.

Ambassador Burns mentioned a perceived increase in both China’s “air activity and naval activity” following former Speaker Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, describing these moves as “very intimidating.”

From my understanding, in 2022, at least five U.S. bomber sorties entered the South China Sea; the U.S. military continued to deploy reconnaissance aircraft and ships in the region for high-intensity surveillance, with approximately 1,000 sorties; and U.S. naval surveillance ships and oceanographic survey vessels conducted routine operations in the South China Sea, totaling 339 days at sea. The U.S. military’s presence in the South China Sea has essentially become the norm.

China’s actions to monitor, track, and, if necessary, warn or expel U.S. military aircraft and vessels that enter within the 12-nautical-mile territorial limit around its islands and reefs are measures of legitimate self-defense and represent a legal and appropriate response.

The Taiwan Strait has always been one of the most sensitive geopolitical hot spots in East Asia. Both China and the United States belonged to the Allies during World War II, and in the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Declaration, it was explicitly stated that Taiwan would be returned to China after the war. Therefore, Taiwan belongs to China not only because of historical factors that date back to ancient times but also as part of the post-World War II world order recognized by the Allied nations. Since 1949, the Chinese mainland and Taiwan have not officially declared an end to hostilities. The strait saw several naval clashes in the 1950s and 1960s, but since the late 1970s, the mainland ceased shelling Kinmen for peace considerations.

Nevertheless, in recent years, the Taiwanese authorities have intensified their “de-Sinicization” efforts, interfered with cross-strait exchanges and cooperation, and invited legislators from various countries, including the U.S., to visit. Such moves have broken the careful balance across the strait.

The three China-U.S. joint communiqués explicitly state that the United States “recognized the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, and it acknowledged the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China. Within that context, the two sides agreed that the people of the United States would continue to maintain cultural, commercial, and other unofficial relations with the people of Taiwan.” The U.S. Government “reiterates that it has no intention of infringing on Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity, or interfering in China’s internal affairs, or pursuing a policy of ‘two Chinas’ or ‘one China, one Taiwan.'”

Speaker Pelosi’s provocative visit clearly ran counter to the communiqués, and the Chinese government’s subsequent military drills and air patrols around Taiwan were a necessary and measured response, demonstrating China’s resolve to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The United States needs to understand that the value of unity has been embedded into the fabric of Chinese national identity. Throughout millennia of civilizational development, there has always been a continuous quest for national unity and ethnic solidarity. The actions of the Chinese government reflect the collective will and shared aspirations of the Chinese public. It has no other choice.

Hence, when interpreting the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait issues, we need a more comprehensive and balanced perspective. Attention should be given to the U.S. military activities in the South China Sea and the departure from the spirit of the three communiqués, to discern the elements that are genuinely escalating tensions.

Topic #6: Competition on the Global Stage

Ambassador Burns believes China wants to overtake the U.S. to become the dominant country globally, saying, “we don’t want that to happen. We don’t want to live in a world where the Chinese are the dominant country.”

 It seems that the Ambassador’s statement presupposes a conclusion that the United States will continue to lead the world. However, the world belongs not just to the United States, but to all of humanity. In a multipolar world, the concept of a single country dominating the global stage is increasingly outdated. Moreover, the United States is grappling with a series of domestic issues such as political division, social inequality, and aging infrastructure. These challenges divert the resources that could be directed on international affairs and may continue to affect its global leadership position until they are adequately addressed. At the same time, every country has its own pursuits. China’s goal is to elevate the standards of living of its billion-plus people, rather than to pursue global hegemony. Should the United States be concerned about the decreasing disparity with China, it would be more constructive to concentrate on bolstering its own capabilities to solidify its global standing, instead of attempting to contain China’s progress. Efforts to suppress a country that is simply committed to economic growth and the welfare of its citizens are likely to engender feelings of discontent and mistrust, escalating the likelihood for discord and confrontation. The real challenge for the United States is not an external country but, in its ability, to adapt to the evolving demands of the global stage and to sustain its prosperity and success amidst these changes.

At the end of the “60 Minutes” episode, Ambassador Burns invoked the concept of the “Cold War,” suggesting that there is “a competition of ideas, a battle of ideas” between the United States and China, and positing that American ideas will lead the world.

Though America’s democratic institutions are facing significant challenges, the United States undeniably has every right to defend its value system. However, this does not invalidate the merits and applicability of other nations’ development models and values. Moving beyond the duration of this “60 Minutes” episode, the U.S., in its contemplation of relations with China, should recognize that this cannot be reduced to a mere competition of ideologies but should instead commit to fostering greater understanding and cooperation. The Chinese have valued harmony since ancient times and have never sought to impose values and political systems upon others. There is no zero-sum competition between the two countries, and their ideas have the potential to coexist in harmony. The world is diversified with different cultures and different ideas. This reality requires a broader outlook and a more nuanced approach to appreciate fully.