Diplomatic Analysis: A shift from zero-sum competition towards ‘constructive strategic stability’ is vital to avoid escalating tensions and address global challenges.
Overview
The US-China relationship is currently defined by ‘strategic competition,’ a framework that, according to Michael D. Swaine’s analysis, has become self-reinforcing and increasingly dangerous. This approach, focused on dominance and containment, risks escalating tensions, hindering cooperation on critical global issues like climate change and AI governance, and potentially leading to conflict, even nuclear. Swaine argues that the current US National Defense Strategy, despite positive rhetoric, remains largely rooted in this competitive paradigm. He proposes a move toward “constructive strategic stability” – a framework built on mutual reassurance, reciprocal restraint, and lasting agreements – as a pathway to a more secure and beneficial relationship. This analysis explores the historical context, key actors, and implications of this proposed shift, assessing its potential risks and opportunities.
Historical Context
For decades, US policy toward China oscillated between engagement and hedging. Engagement, particularly during the post-Cold War era, fostered economic interdependence and normalized relations. Hedging acknowledged the potential for competition but sought to manage it through a balance of influence. However, over the past decade, the ‘strategic competition’ framework has risen to prominence, driven by concerns over China’s economic practices, military modernization, human rights record, and assertive foreign policy, especially in the South China Sea and regarding Taiwan. This shift intensified under the Trump administration and continues today, manifesting in trade wars, technology restrictions, and increased military deployments in the Indo-Pacific.
The 2016 US National Security Strategy explicitly identified China as a “strategic competitor,” and subsequent policies have been shaped by this designation. This approach has led to a securitization of various aspects of the relationship, transforming commercial interactions and scientific exchanges into potential national security threats. The incident involving then-Speaker Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in 2022 exemplifies how miscommunication and rigid positioning within this competitive framework can quickly escalate tensions, highlighting the dangers of operating under worst-case assumptions.
Key Actors & Positions
The primary actors are the United States, currently under the Trump administration, and the People’s Republic of China, led by General Secretary Xi Jinping.
The United States officially maintains that it does not seek to “dominate,” “strangle,” or “humiliate” China, aiming for a “decent peace” and a “favorable balance of power” in the Indo-Pacific. However, its actions, including military deployments and technology restrictions, often project a containment strategy. US policy is increasingly driven by concerns about maintaining its strategic advantage and protecting its allies in the region. Domestic political pressures also influence policy, with calls for a tougher stance on China gaining traction.
China, meanwhile, seeks to safeguard its sovereignty, territorial integrity (including Taiwan), and economic development. It views the US strategy as an attempt to contain its rise and impede its legitimate pursuit of national interests. China advocates for a “multipolar world” and greater representation of developing nations in international institutions. Xi Jinping has introduced the concept of “constructive strategic stability”, defining a relationship based on cooperation, manageable competition, and a durable peace, with an emphasis on fairness and reciprocity. However, China also continues to assert its claims in the South China Sea and remains resolute on the Taiwan issue.
Taiwan itself is a crucial, though not directly participating, actor. Its government seeks to maintain its de facto independence and preserve its democratic system, navigating a delicate balance between seeking support from the US and avoiding actions that could provoke a military response from China.
Analysis
Swaine’s central argument – that strategic competition has become an end in itself – is compelling. The focus on ‘winning’ obscures the necessity of establishing a sustainable and stable long-term relationship. The current trajectory risks a self-fulfilling prophecy where each side’s actions are interpreted through a hostile lens, leading to further escalation.
The proposed shift toward “constructive strategic stability” offers a potential alternative. The key lies in moving beyond simply avoiding conflict to actively building trust through verifiable reciprocal restraint. Initial steps, such as improved military communication and de-escalation measures in sensitive areas like the Taiwan Strait, could create a positive feedback loop. However, such a strategy faces significant challenges.
Firstly, achieving genuine reciprocity will be difficult. Deep-seated distrust and divergent interests may make it challenging for both sides to convincingly demonstrate a willingness to compromise. Secondly, domestic political constraints within both countries could hinder progress. Strong nationalist sentiments and hawkish voices may resist any perceived concessions. Thirdly, the lack of a clear, agreed-upon definition of “constructive strategic stability” could lead to differing interpretations and undermine the process. Defining and implementing clear verification mechanisms will be crucial.
Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of this approach are substantial. Reducing tensions could unlock cooperation on pressing global issues, such as climate change, pandemics, and nuclear proliferation. A more stable relationship would also benefit the global economy, reducing uncertainty and fostering greater trade and investment.
Outlook
The near-term outlook for US-China relations remains cautiously pessimistic. While both Washington and Beijing express a desire to avoid conflict, the underlying competitive dynamics are likely to persist. The Trump administration’s continued focus on “America First” and its willingness to challenge the existing international order could complicate efforts to build trust and establish a more stable relationship.
However, Swaine’s analysis suggests that a shift toward “constructive strategic stability” is not only desirable but also potentially achievable. The key will be a sustained commitment from both leaders to prioritize dialogue, seek common ground, and implement concrete measures to reduce tensions.
It is unlikely that there will be a dramatic overhaul of US-China policy in the immediate future. Instead, a gradual, incremental approach, focusing on specific areas of cooperation and reciprocal restraint, is more realistic. Success will depend on a willingness to move beyond zero-sum thinking and recognize that a stable and prosperous US-China relationship is ultimately in the interests of both countries, and indeed, the world.
Sources:
* Swaine, Michael D. “How China and America Can Move from Competition to Stability.” War on the Rocks, 12 October 2026, [https://warontherocks.com/2026/10/how-china-and-america-can-move-from-competition-to-stability/](https://warontherocks.com/2026/10/how-china-and-america-can-move-from-competition-to-stability/).
