Article
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
Other
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.
Published on Jul 28, 2010
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
Taiya M. Smith
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 Copenhagen
- 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
- Simmering U.S.-Iran Conflict Is Moscow’s Ideal OutcomeCommentary
Ongoing uncertainty in the Middle East allows Moscow to both increase its influence in Tehran and continue to enjoy the financial windfall of higher oil prices.
Nikita Smagin
- Multiple Wars Are Ruining Central Asia’s Efforts to Diversify Its Trade RoutesCommentary
This year’s wars have made alternative routes to transit through Russia no less risky for Central Asian countries.
Galiya Ibragimova
- How to Ensure That Europe-Russia Talks Do Not FailCommentary
Reestablishing a dialogue with Moscow is not a goal in its own right. The goal is to guarantee the independence of Ukraine and the peace and security of Europe.
Arkady Moshes
- Who Does Azerbaijan Want to See Win Armenia’s Elections?Commentary
By fueling the arguments of both supporters and opponents of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, Azerbaijan wants to ensure he is re-elected with a weaker mandate.
Bashir Kitachaev
- Is Belarus Really Set to Return to the Ukraine War?Commentary
By reminding the world that Lukashenko is a threat to NATO and Ukraine, Kyiv is trying to return the focus to why the Belarusian regime needs to be contained rather than rewarded.
Artyom Shraibman
