I would like to address some of the questions raised on this session of “understanding the new type of major power relations” by focusing on what might be objective and expectation behind Beijing’s call for a NMMCR? How to understand the key components of it, particularly with the U.S.? How has this NMMCR initiative been manifested itself in the China the U.S. relations so far?

Although not explicitly clarified in official documents, Beijing’s initiative of NMMCR is focused on its relations with the U.S. I think the single most important objective or expectation behind this calling is to help set up a strategic vision, which China hope could be shared by the U.S. to shape the evolving trajectory of bilateral relations.

On the occasion of “shirt-sleeve” summit with President Obama at the Sunnylands, in south California in June 2013, President Xi Jingpin highlighted the key elements of NMMCR, namely "no conflict or confrontation", "mutual respect" and "win-win cooperation". These succinct but by far most authoritative narratives have summarized the fundamentals visualized by Chinese government on the NMMCR between China and the U.S. in the future.

Why such a strategic vision of NMMCR with the U.S. is so important? Number one. Strategic vision held by the leaders shapes specific choice and action. Given the extreme and increasing complexity of bilateral relations between the U.S. and China,the outcome of future trajectory of bilateral relations is not predestined by any set of structural factors, as many determinist view would predict, but rather profoundly influenced by strategic interaction of choices each side made.

Beijing’s initiative has got a quite positive response from the Washington since then. As then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton once put it that “Together the U.S. and China are trying to do something that is historically unprecedented, to write a new answer to the age-old question of what happens when an established power and a rising power meet.”

During the Sunnylands summit, President Obama responded to President Xi’s NMMCR that “… I ‘m very much looking forward to this being a strong foundation for the kind of new model of cooperation that we can establish for years to come.” Obviously, a mutually shared proactive vision by two leaders are conducive to ironing out the internal diverging views and interests respectively, to generate affirmative momentum, and to shape the trajectory of bilateral relations in a positive way more likely. 

Number two. The NMMCR initiative brings about some innovative ideas on big power relations at a very critical juncture. In the past few years, particularly as China’s GDP has surpassed Japan as the second largest economy in 2010, the opinions in America are even more attentive to and concerned about when and how China will outpace the U.S. The view that rising China will inevitably lead to conflicts and confrontation has somewhat gained its momentum across the Pacific. This determinist view has been largely enhanced in context of the U.S. “Pivot/Rebalance to AP” and growing tension in East Asia ranging from the maritime conflicts to the disputes of regional security and economic management. China’s NMMCR initiative, therefore, highlights an alternative and new scenario for bilateral relations, and seeks to “reverse negative projections of China-US relations… and build confidence in the future of China-US relations” on both sides.

Number three. For Beijing, the NMMCR initiative is an integral part of China’s pursuit of peaceful rise strategy. Whether and how to handle its relations with the U.S. will not only test the viability of Beijing’s NMMCR framework with other big countries but also of its peaceful rise strategy as a whole. In addition, by NMMCR with focus on the U.S., Beijing has shown more proactivity and initiative in shaping the positive agenda of bilateral relations, which has differentiated from Beijing’s relative passive style in the past.

Then how to understand these core components embodied in NMMCR and their interrelations? From Chinese perspective, the central question facing the bilateral relations in the future is how China and the U.S. can develop a relationship that would avoid significant, strategic and sustained conflict and that would promote cooperation to solve shared and global problems.

Therefore, “no conflict or confrontation” (NCC) is both a prerequisite and a goal for the NMMCR. By referring NCC as prerequisite for NMMCR between the U.S. and China, the Chinese government seeks to, through concerted effort with the U.S., bound the competition between two sides and to manage the bilateral disputes and differences, whether existing or potential ones, in mutually accommodating rather than zero-sum way for the purpose of avoid repetition of significant and strategic conflicts, a conventional pattern of relations between rising power vis-à-vis a established powers in the history. In this regard, NCC is the one of defining features of NMMCR.

Nevertheless, NCC per se is neither a low bar noran easily attainable objective for the U.S.-China relations. “There are powerful forces that make the conflicts and confrontations quite possible and perhaps, even likely, in the absence of a comprehensive strategy by both countries to resist them.”

For the purpose of realizing “NCC”, Chinese government attaches great importance to “mutual respect ” as “the basic principle” and “win-win cooperation” as the only way to turn the vision into reality. Literally speaking, the importance of “win-win cooperation” seems easy to understand, it calls for the cooperative spirit that China and the U.S. should work together despite the differences or even disputes over some areas of interests. They are many reasons to believe that the win-win cooperation is likely, including the lack of intense ideological competition, the absence of bilateral territorial disputes or imperial ambitions by either side, plus growing number of non-traditional challenges which no country could single handedly deal with. Those factors suggest ground for hope. In other words, both sides need to commit themselves to forging and accumulating the cooperative habit and keeping it as a thematic feature of the bilateral relations.

At the same time, Chinese side has long stressed the significance of “mutual respect” in international relations, particularly with the U.S. Why China so care about the principle of “mutual respect”? Some would argue hat it is related to China’s collective memory of “century of humiliation” rooted in much of the nineteenth century and into the twentieth when China has long experienced less respect or even no respect to its vital interests and fundamental concerns by the west powers at all. Some other view is that it is due to China’s increasing demand from the international community, particularly from the U.S., for an international status commensurate with its growing power and influence at the world arena.

There are some elements of truths behind them. But more importantly, the emphasis on mutual respect reflects Chinese’s conviction that today’s globalized and interdependent world is headed toward multiple versions of modernity, not a political homogeneity. Therefore, understanding of and respect for diversity and difference while pursuing national interest and shouldering common responsibility of promoting the prosperity and stability around the world should be the organizing principles applied to the international relations. It also manifests a spirit of upholding equality and having a spirit of putting oneself in other’s shoes when difference and disputes emerged among members of the international community. 

Mutual respect has rich connotations, including mutual respect for the choice of development path, vital interests and major concerns such as sovereignty and territorial integrity, and honoring the agreed commitments like bilateral and multilateral treaties. Mutual respect can increase predictability and reduce accidents. It is China’s hope that by cultivating a habit of mutual respect,China and the U.S. are able to address bilateral differences and disputes in a cautious and mutually accommodating way, especially regarding each other’s vital interests and major concerns.

Finally, I will turn to the question of where are we now for the NMMCR between China and the U.S?  The overall picture is mixed. We have achieved some visible and hard-earned progress since NMMCR initiated, particularly in last year.

Number one. The two governments have agreed to work together to build up for the NMMCR in the years ahead. At Sunnylands, two presidents have committed to push the bilateral relations on the track of NMMCR. Despite of some differing interpretations over priorities between two sides, Beijing and Washington have demonstrated their resolves to the world that China-U.S. relations need to be handled in a fresh and innovative manner. The Washington’s positive response has also mobilized the intellectual community in the U.S. Many think tanks including Brookings, Atlantic Council and Center for American Progress have since then launched many joint projects with their Chinese partners. Although it is still too early to say that by joint commitment of two governments to work for the NMMCR, the negative projection of bilateral relations within both countries will be reversed, it is definitely encouraging to see the discourse of how to build up the NMMCR has become the thematic topic in bilateral relations.

Number two. The military relations between two sides have much upgraded both in quantity and quality compared with the past. There have been more than 50 plus times of bilateral mil-to-mil exchanges at various levels since 2013, including quite frequent exchanges of visit of top defense officials between Beijing and Washington, as well as growing substantive engagement between two militaries ranging from more joint military exercises and more institutional dialogues. A new pattern of mil-to-mil relations is emerging and promising because this aspect has for a long time the most vulnerable part of overall relations. While we could not say for certain that this new pattern of mil-to-mil has been solidified enough and developed to the point of no return. We have to recognize that today’s big progress is made possible largely from a low starting level. Nonetheless it is obviously both significant and encouraging to see a shift of mil-to-mil relations from the role of the brake to the propel in the overall relations. Thus we should never underestimate any progress of mil-to-mil dimension conducive to the overall NMMCR building.

Number three. We also continue to see an expanding list of converging interests and cooperation on the wider spectrum, ranging the gamut from mutual commitment to accelerating the BIT negotiation, to intensified collaboration over regional hot spots like Korean Peninsular, Iran Nuke issue and Afghanistan security, to a number of global and non-traditional challenges, like energy security, climate changes, etc. The expanding list of existing and potential cooperative areas has been manifested each time on fact sheets issued by two governments after the Strategic and Economic Dialogue and will make the interests interdependence of two countries move beyond the just economic field to a more broad dimensions.

Having said that, we have to be fully aware of the critical juncture that China and the U.S. relations is now encountering, and understand the growing complexity and uncertainties of this cross roads. Two sides’ disputes over re-enhanced alliance system with the U.S. as core in East Asia-Pacific, maritime tension in East and South China Sea, differing views on anti-terrorism in Xin-Jiang, as well as rows over the topic of cyber security are just some of the most high profile differences in the past few years. I don’t want to elaborate many specific issues confronting bilateral relations. As a matter of fact, the initiative of NMMCR by Beijing and positive response by Washington themselves reflect a common concern with a sense of urgency over the scenario of sustained and strategic conflicts with a catastrophic consequences prodded by differing views of national interests, particularly core interests in the context of changing distribution of power. In other word, the dynamic of bilateral relations in years ahead would be more influenced by the changing perception of each other’s core interests and way of interaction.

In concluding, the fundamental question is not about whether there should be a NMMCR but how. Both China and the U.S. are still at very early stage of this grand program. Both Washington and Beijing has shared the objective as well as some basic principles, including “non conflicts or confrontations”. There are also differing view on the specific road map and priorities. For instance, Washington has been reluctant to accept if not totally reject Beijing’s call for “mutual respect”, particularly regarding China’s definition of its vital interests and concerns. If China and the U.S. are to avoid the worst scenario as both governments have committed, sustained and concerted effort plus creative thinking are most required.