The problem of an aging society afflicts both China and the United States, and there is plenty of room for cooperation to address common interests. As the demographic trend continues, the impact on their respective agendas will only become more pronounced.

As the Biden administration heads into the second stage, clear steps are visible: Clear out the negative Trump legacy, tighten global strategy, coordinate with allies to curb China and prioritize climate change in China-U.S. cooperation. Some things differ from Trump; others are the same or expanded.

Katherine Tai’s appointment as the top economic negotiator for the U.S. may signal America’s overall direction in trade relations with China, but Tai’s actions have yet to reveal clear steps forward.

China and the U.S. share misguided illusions of the other that remain unproductive and even dangerous. Both governments must strive to see each other clearly and cooperate in the face of increasing public hostility.

Using the buzzwords “compete, collaborate, confront” to express the U.S. approach to China is inadequate, as they fail to take nuances into account. In fact, the 3C framework has led to the Chinese view that Biden’s approach is too negative and has only added to the complexity of relations.

It would be a blessing to the world if China were simply supported in its peaceful development. But the opposite is happening. For months, the Biden administration’s approach has attempted to contain China’s rise. Troubling consequences are emerging.

It’s no easy task to expel the No. 2 economy in the world from the international arena. The U.S. president must start with the common denominator, which is that China is, in fact, influential around the world and other countries are loath to attack it. He must engage with China and let it sit at the table.

The perception of righteous values and a sense of inflated confidence is hurting relations between the U.S. and China.

As U.S. President Joe Biden contemplates course corrections after his first months in office, one change seems especially worthy of consideration: a shift to a more pragmatic, less ideological foreign policy.

When it comes to participation in international organizations, the objectives of the major powers are not entirely clear. Will there be competition for influence or can China and the United States develop opportunities for cooperation? Only the latter will promote a healthy model of global governance.