Uri Dadush, Vera Eidelman, Taiya M. Smith
{
"authors": [
"Taiya M. Smith"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Asia"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Why Go Strategic?: The Value of a Truly Strategic Dialogue Between the United States and China
While the United States and China—the world’s two largest economies—are becoming increasingly interdependent, there is a growing risk of misunderstanding or even clashes. The two powers need a dialogue to provide strategic vision to their relationship.
While the United States and China—the world’s two largest economies—are becoming increasingly interdependent, there is a growing risk of misunderstanding or even clashes. In a new paper, Taiya Smith says the two powers need a dialogue to provide strategic vision to their relationship.
Smith, who led the U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue for Treasury Secretary Paulson, draws on examples from her experience to analyze the recent history of strategic dialogues and recommends steps for Washington and Beijing to take to improve the broader bilateral relationship.
Recommendations for policy makers to effectively benefit from the dialogue:
- Understand the purpose of strategic talks: The strategic relationship should not be overshadowed by today’s news and short-term bilateral issues.
- Ensure effective communication: Strong personal relationships between the leaders of the dialogue and their representatives are critical for building trust.
- Leverage the wider benefits: Discussions and enhanced ties should create new ways to fix key problems outside bureaucratic norms.
“What the U.S.-China relationship needs is a truly strategic discussion to steer a critically important, yet increasingly complex, bilateral relationship while still managing the time-sensitive issues of the day,” writes Smith.
About the Author
Former Senior Associate, Energy and Climate Program, Asia Program
Smith has spent the last decade working in international negotiations. Most recently, she served as a member of Secretary Hank Paulson’s senior management team from 2006 to 2009 as the deputy chief of staff and executive secretary for the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
- After CopenhagenArticle
- President Obama's Chances of Success in CopenhagenQ&A
William Chandler, Taiya M. Smith
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- How Far Can Russian Arms Help Iran?Commentary
Arms supplies from Russia to Iran will not only continue, but could grow significantly if Russia gets the opportunity.
Nikita Smagin
- Can the Disparate Threads of Ukraine Peace Talks Be Woven Together?Commentary
Putin is stalling, waiting for a breakthrough on the front lines or a grand bargain in which Trump will give him something more than Ukraine in exchange for concessions on Ukraine. And if that doesn’t happen, the conflict could be expanded beyond Ukraine.
Alexander Baunov
- Once Neutral on the Ukraine War, Arab States Increasingly Favor MoscowCommentary
Disillusioned with the West over Gaza, Arab countries are not only trading more with Russia; they are also more willing to criticize Kyiv.
Ruslan Suleymanov
- Signs of an Imminent End to the Ukraine War Are DeceptiveCommentary
The main source of Russian aggression is a profound mistrust of the West and the firm belief that it intends to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia. As long as this fear persists, the war will not end.
Tatiana Stanovaya
- Japan’s “Militarist Turn” and What It Means for RussiaCommentary
For a real example of political forces engaged in the militarization of society, the Russian leadership might consider looking closer to home.
James D.J. Brown