The theme of this conference is Common Security for Sustainable Prosperity, which I find very appealing. However, I want to emphasize that this is a long-term goal that needs to be achieved, not a current reality. The security situation is quite severe. As Professor Zhu Feng has noted, many negative factors stem from various causes, such as climate change, economic issues, various domestic conflicts and problems, and bottlenecks in technological development.

One very important reason for this is that great power competition has returned. In this context, major powers aim to enhance their security often at the expense of others, which illustrates a common security paradox. What is the security paradox? The security paradox occurs when one country tries to strengthen its security, causing other countries to feel their security is threatened. This leads them to bolster their security in response, which in turn makes other nations feel even more threatened. Consequently, countries continuously increase their military capabilities, creating a vicious cycle. As a result, the world has returned to great power competition, and the security dilemma is particularly pronounced, with no immediate solutions.

Why has our current situation regarding security or insecurity developed to this point? When I refer to great power competition, conflicts like those in Ukraine and the Middle East are key examples, as they involve rivalry between major powers, particularly the U.S. and China. The U.S.-China conflict has resulted in significant insecurity and many zero-sum scenarios, where neither side is willing to accept the other's position or ideas, fearing that the other’s policies will impact their own security. Why? The fundamental issue is the competition between rising powers and established ones. The U.S., as an established power, is facing challenges and competition from emerging nations.

I have lived in the U.S. for 14 years, and I feel that America has a contradictory view regarding what it perceives as a security threat from China. On the one hand, the U.S. sees itself as a very powerful country and has consistently aimed to maintain an order-based international system to achieve peace and stability. On the other hand, there is a persistent sense of insecurity and periodic fear. They worry that foreign forces might threaten the American way of life, contributing to this anxiety. There is also a deep concern that the U.S. will weaken and other countries might take advantage of this decline to undermine American interests. In response, they often seek out various scapegoats to alleviate their fears.

China is now a scapegoat. As a rising power, China has achieved significant success in many areas, and Americans believe that China has taken full advantage of U.S. generosity, particularly in technology investments, to further its own development. Now that China has advanced, there is a perception that the Chinese are attempting to steal technology from the U.S., which fuels America's ongoing sense of insecurity. Additionally, there is a belief that China's rise threatens the global security environment, with some even suggesting that China seeks to divide the U.S. and undermine it from within.

Therefore, the U.S. has implemented corresponding policies to prevent China from posing a challenge, which has been evident in its approaches over the past few years. They characterize the competition between the U.S. and China as a new cold war, insisting that the U.S. must come out on top. At the same time, the U.S. is making every effort to maintain its global leadership, seeking to slow down China's development and curb its technological progress to sustain its position. In this context, I believe that the U.S. has overreacted to the perceived threats from China and to its security, which is quite dangerous. A recent example occurred last February when a Chinese balloon flew over U.S. airspace. The U.S. referred to it as a spy balloon and sent fighter jets to shoot it down. The FBI conducted a detailed analysis and discovered that the sensors onboard were never activated, indicating that the balloon did not transmit any information or intelligence. Before retiring, the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the media that this was not a "spy balloon" and that the U.S. had overreacted. Consequently, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken's visit to China was postponed from February to June. Another example is the U.S. government's forced closure of many Confucius Institutes. These institutes were meant to promote understanding between the two sides, not to threaten U.S. security. As a result of these closures, many American universities now lack Chinese language teachers. This overreaction by the U.S. has harmed its interests and negatively impacted ours, making life very difficult for Chinese people in the U.S. The sense of insecurity and fear in the U.S. is reflected in its diplomatic policies toward China.

At the same time, I believe China may take some responsibility for this. I agree with Professor Zhu Feng's viewpoint that, from the U.S. perspective, they do not understand or accept China's rise and tend to demonize it. However, China has also demonized the U.S. When I returned to China, I met some friends who believed that the U.S. is unsafe, with gun violence everywhere, and that its national strength is declining. However, this is not the case. Although the U.S. faces economic challenges, it is not as bad as they claim. This perception of the U.S. does not accurately reflect reality and fosters a hostile view, which hinders security cooperation. We have many security issues that require collaboration, including both traditional and emerging threats. However, China often links these traditional and non-traditional threats together, making cooperation on specific issues more difficult.

We know that China endured a century of humiliation at the hands of Western powers, and many foreign forces still aim to undermine China while trying to curb its rise as a great power. However, this is not the current policy of the U.S. government. There are three main viewpoints in the ongoing debate about U.S. policy toward China. One is a cold war mentality focused on containing China, another is managing competition without engaging in a cold war, and the third is accommodating China's rise.

So, the cold war mentality is just one of the various policy perspectives the U.S. has regarding China. I believe the current government is not pursuing a cold war strategy against China; rather, it has adopted a stance of managing competition to prevent tensions from escalating into a cold war.

There is a great deal of mutual misunderstanding and misjudgment between the two sides. In this context, I worry that the two countries could inadvertently stumble into confrontation. Both leaders are unwilling to move toward conflict and war, but efforts must be made to prevent this from happening. We know that human history is shaped by people, so nothing is destined to occur. While natural disasters may be unavoidable, wars and security-related disasters are not inevitable; leaders can play a crucial role in this.

If leaders are willing to take a proactive approach, they must effectively address the perception of insecurity. It is essential to build mutual trust and find various ways to resolve conflicts of interest while identifying shared benefits. Only then can lasting prosperity and common security be achieved.

Zhao Suisheng, Director of the Center for China-US Cooperation, Professor, Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver, USA