As strategic competition between the United States and China intensifies, preventing a destabilizing arms race and lowering the risk of military, especially nuclear, confrontation is critical. The essays in this volume—based on a series of workshops convened by USIP’s Asia Center in late 2020—highlight both the striking differences and the commonalities between U.S. and Chinese assessments of the root causes of instability and the drivers of conflict in the nuclear, conventional missile and missile defense, space, cyberspace and artificial intelligence realms.

Flags at a U.S.-China bilateral meeting during the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan, in June 2019. (Erin Schaff/New York Times)
Flags at a U.S.-China bilateral meeting during the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan, in June 2019. (Erin Schaff/New York Times)

Summary

As strategic competition between the United States and China intensifies, the danger of a U.S.-China military confrontation is no longer a far-fetched scenario. Despite recognition in both capitals of the growing risks of major power conflict, the United States and China have few, if any, effective mechanisms to resolve their differences peacefully. Enhancing strategic stability by lowering the risks of military, and especially nuclear, conflict; managing emerging technologies and new frontiers of conflict such as those in space and cyberspace; and preventing a destabilizing arms race are now more critical than ever to ensure that the United States and China can compete without disastrous consequences.

As the essays in this volume make clear, U.S.-China relations are beset by a profound lack of trust and mutual skepticism of each other’s strategic intentions. Stark differences in the two states’ nuclear doctrines, policies and interests in arms control pose significant challenges to pursuing strategic risk reduction. In addition, an action-reaction dynamic is laying the foundation for a dangerous and costly arms race. U.S.-China strategic stability discussions are further complicated by the fact that they are not just bilateral in nature, but also have critical implications for third parties, especially U.S. allies, and are intertwined with other regional challenges. The sharp deterioration in the broader U.S.-China bilateral relationship and disappointment with past bilateral exchanges have impeded meaningful dialogue on security-related issues and diminished the political appetite for cooperative measures.

While each essay in this report advances distinct policy recommendations, the authors broadly recommend that to strengthen strategic stability in the near term, the United States and China should jointly affirm that nuclear war should never be fought and work together to reduce the dangers posed by nuclear weapons; initiate sustained and substantive official bilateral dialogues and parallel track 1.5 efforts to increase mutual understanding and begin exploring risk reduction and arms control measures; establish norms of behavior and transparency measures, especially to govern the use of emerging technologies and to regulate developments in space, cyberspace and AI; and engage other key states to strengthen global strategic stability.

About the Report

In winter 2020, the United States Institute of Peace convened a series of workshops with U.S. and Chinese security experts to discuss how Washington and Beijing can strengthen strategic stability amid growing strategic competition. This report presents essays by the twelve participants who examine the perception gaps, challenges and opportunities for enhancing stability in the nuclear, missile and missile defense, space, cyber and artificial intelligence realms.

About the Editor

Patricia M. Kim is a senior policy analyst on China at the United States Institute of Peace. Her areas of expertise include China’s foreign policy and regional security dynamics in East Asia. Previously, she was Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and a research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. She received her Ph.D. in politics from Princeton University.

Related Publications

China’s Security Force Posture in Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia

China’s Security Force Posture in Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia

Wednesday, December 15, 2021

By: John Bradford

China’s geo-economic influence is empowering the expansion of its security force posture in the Lower Mekong region, which should be of concern to both maritime Southeast Asia and the United States. While Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia—the geographic core of mainland Southeast Asia—are demonstrating resilience and sustaining some strategic autonomy, several trends indicate that their options may be increasingly limited. This report looks at China’s security force posture in these nations, the possible ramifications of that posture, and considerations for balancing U.S. policy and outreach. 

Type: Special Report

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

U.S. Diplomatic Boycott of Beijing Olympics: No Longer 'Business as Usual'

U.S. Diplomatic Boycott of Beijing Olympics: No Longer 'Business as Usual'

Thursday, December 9, 2021

By: Lauren Baillie;  Mirna Galic;  Rachel Vandenbrink

On Monday the Biden administration announced it would not send an official United States delegation to the Beijing Winter Olympic Games as a statement against China's "ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang," as well as other human rights abuses such as in Hong Kong. U.S. athletes will still be allowed to compete in the Games, which start in February. USIP’s Lauren Baillie, Mirna Galic and Rachel Vandenbrink discuss the rationale behind the decision, how the boycott fits into the U.S. strategy surrounding the Uyghur crisis and how China and U.S. allies are responding.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Global PolicyHuman Rights

Neither Summit, nor Sidebar: Assessing the Biden-Xi ‘Virtual Meeting’

Neither Summit, nor Sidebar: Assessing the Biden-Xi ‘Virtual Meeting’

Wednesday, November 17, 2021

By: Carla Freeman, Ph.D.;  Andrew Scobell, Ph.D.;  Jennifer Staats, Ph.D.

To address growing tensions between the United States and China, particularly over Taiwan, President Joe Biden and General Secretary Xi Jinping met virtually on Monday night (Tuesday morning in Beijing) for a three-hour discussion that covered a wide array of contentious issues. Both sides downplayed expectations for the session beforehand and have been relatively subdued albeit somewhat positive in their respective post-meeting statements and spins. Less formal than a summit and more structured than a sidebar, what if anything did the extended virtual top-level bilateral discussion achieve?

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Global Policy

How China Responds to Instability on Its Periphery: Lessons from Afghanistan and Myanmar

How China Responds to Instability on Its Periphery: Lessons from Afghanistan and Myanmar

Monday, November 1, 2021

By: Alison McFarland;  Andrew Scobell, Ph.D.

China’s timid rhetoric and underwhelming actions vis-à-vis recent political upheaval in two different neighboring countries belie the image of a confident and assertive Beijing. What explains this apparent paradox? Despite the ruling Chinese Communist Party’s outward bravado, combined with unprecedented expansion of China’s regional and global activities and presence, Xi Jinping and his Politburo colleagues remain wary when it comes to taking risks abroad. Certainly, when China believes its interests are being directly attacked, such as in recent disputes with Australia and India, the state has opted for riskier, more aggressive moves. But where Beijing is not a direct party to the conflict, caution can override its willingness to take action that would show its hand or put China in a situation where it is not guaranteed to avoid a messy exit, à la the United States in Afghanistan.

Global PolicyConflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications