Dialogue, not coercion, the rational way forward for Sino-US economic relations: China Daily editorial

The economic and trade consultations between China and the United States, from Saturday to Wednesday, provide the world's two largest economies with an opportunity to further discuss issues of mutual concern. Both sides should implement the important common understandings reached during the meetings and phone calls between the two heads of state, which remain the guiding principles for managing the relationship.

The consultations are not merely a means for managing trade differences, but also a channel for reducing uncertainty in the two sides' broader economic relations and preventing frictions from derailing the overall bilateral relationship.

The previous rounds of consultations have demonstrated that practical progress is possible. The two countries have discussed tariff arrangements, nontariff barriers, agricultural trade and other issues, while maintaining communication on a framework for reciprocal tariff reductions covering products worth $30 billion from each side. Such mechanisms give businesses greater predictability and create room for mutually beneficial cooperation.

The resilience of bilateral trade also shows the depth of the economic relationship. China's foreign trade with the US increased for five consecutive months through August, with two-way trade reaching 2.76 trillion yuan ($412.1 billion) in the first eight months of this year, up 1.3 percent year-on-year. This is an economic relationship built over decades and involving businesses, workers and consumers on both sides.

Yet just one day before the consultations, Washington introduced new measures that risk complicating the atmosphere. The US side on Friday signed into law the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, which strengthens sanctions against Russia and Iran and authorizes tariffs of up to 100 percent on certain third countries importing Russian oil or natural gas.

China firmly opposes unilateral sanctions without United Nations authorization and a basis in international law, as well as so-called "secondary sanctions" targeting third countries. China's economic and trade cooperation with countries around the world, including Russia, is based on equality and mutual benefit, targets no third party and should not be subject to interference or coercion by any third party.

This is not simply a bilateral trade dispute. When one country's domestic laws are used to pressure other countries to alter their normal economic relations, the consequences can extend well beyond the countries directly involved. Such measures can raise costs, disrupt established trading arrangements and add uncertainty to already strained global industry and supply chains.

The Chinese Ministry of Commerce has called for the US to use the consultations to stabilize economic and trade relations, saying that China will closely follow subsequent US measures and reserves the right to take necessary steps to safeguard its sovereignty, development interests and the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies.

Washington should recognize that economic and trade issues are not weapons for securing negotiating advantages. Unilateral tariffs and sanctions increase costs for US companies and consumers, complicate supply chains and weaken the predictability on which international business depends. Turning economic interdependence into a tool of coercion risks undermining the very economic interests such measures are intended to protect.

This is particularly important as new areas of cooperation emerge. Artificial intelligence, for example, presents shared challenges. As major players in the global AI ecosystem, China and the US have reasons to communicate rather than allow technological competition to become another source of fragmentation.

Recent diplomatic contacts have also shown the value of maintaining engagement. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi's phone call with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday and continuing communication over high-level exchanges demonstrate that dialogue remains possible even when differences are substantial.

The choice before the two sides is therefore not between competition and cooperation. Competition will inevitably exist. The more important question is whether competition is managed through rules, communication and mutual restraint, or intensified through unilateral tariffs, arbitrary sanctions and other coercive measures. As history has repeatedly shown, China and the US stand to gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation.

The ongoing consultations offer another opportunity to consolidate the existing consensus, address respective concerns and manage differences. For the US, engaging in good faith is a practical recognition that in an increasingly interconnected world, stability cannot be imposed through unilateral pressure.

What the global economy needs most is not another escalation of economic confrontation, but greater certainty. China and the US should seize the opportunity of the consultations to promote a constructive Sino-US relationship of strategic stability.