China–United States relations#Normalization

During the civil war, the communists petitioned the U.S. for support but were unsuccessful.{{Cite journal|last=Levine|first=Steven I.|date=1979|title=A New Look at American Mediation in the Chinese Civil War: The Marshall Mission and Manchuria|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/24910221|journal=Diplomatic History|volume=3|issue=4|pages=349–375|doi=10.1111/j.1467-7709.1979.tb00322.x|jstor=24910221|issn=0145-2096}}{{Cite journal|date=1957|title=U. S. Policy in China 1941-1949|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41392388|journal=Pakistan Horizon|volume=10|issue=4|pages=214–220|jstor=41392388|issn=0030-980X|access-date=27 January 2024|archive-date=27 January 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240127130905/https://www.jstor.org/stable/41392388|url-status=live}} Instead, the U.S. offered both military and financial support to the KMT, under the hopes that a united, democratic, coalition government would be formed in China.

In late 1935, the Communist International (Comintern) instructed the CCP to establish the broadest possible anti-fascist united front.{{Cite book|last=Li|first=Hongshan|title=Fighting on the Cultural Front: U.S.-China Relations in the Cold War|date=2024|publisher=Columbia University Press|isbn=9780231207058|location=New York, NY|doi=10.7312/li--20704|jstor=10.7312/li--20704}}{{Rp|page=15}} At a meeting in December 1935, the CCP Politburo resolved to reach understanding, seek compromise, and establish relations with all nations, parties, and individuals who opposed imperial Japan.{{Rp|page=15}} After the US entry into World War II, the communists sought military support from the US.{{Rp|page=15}} CCP Chairman Mao Zedong welcomed the American Military Observation Group in Yan'an and in 1944 invited the US to establish a consulate there.{{Rp|page=15}}

The defeat of Japan in 1945, caused the U.S. to reevaluate their position in Asia. President Truman was worried that the collapse of the Japanese empire would cause a power vacuum which could be filled by the Soviet Union. However, the Soviet Union acted cautiously in the conflict, eventually withdrawing in May 1946, which left the U.S. feeling as though there was not a serious Soviet threat in the region.

On 5 August 1949, the Truman administration released a white paper on relations with China.{{Rp|page=80}} Responding to domestic arguments about responsibility for the perceived loss of China to communism, Secretary of State Dean Acheson placed blame on Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist government for losing the confidence of its military and the Chinese people and stated that the United States could not have prevented the outcome of the Chinese Civil War.{{Rp|page=80}} This position failed to satisfy domestic critics.{{Rp|page=80}} It also harmed the prospect of diplomacy with the communists and outraged Mao Zedong, who wrote a series of articles criticizing the white paper.{{Rp|page=80}} Mao criticized the Truman administration for providing huge amounts of support to Nationalist forces which the administration deemed demoralized and unpopular, stating that the only rational basis must have therefore been the Truman administration's imperialist ambitions and desire to hurt the Chinese people by needlessly prolonging the civil war.{{Rp|page=80}}

Amidst successive PRC victories, the U.S. ambassador to China John Leighton Stewart left China in August 1949.{{Cite journal|last=Shaw|first=Yu-ming|date=1982|title=John Leighton Stuart and U. S.-Chinese Communist Rapprochement in 1949: Was There Another "Lost Chance in China"?|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/653622|journal=The China Quarterly|volume=89|issue=89|pages=74–96|doi=10.1017/S0305741000000060|jstor=653622|s2cid=145689836|issn=0305-7410|access-date=27 January 2024|archive-date=27 January 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240127130904/https://www.jstor.org/stable/653622|url-status=live}} CCP Chairman Mao Zedong penned an article directly addressing the ambassador, entitled "Farewell, Leighton Stewart!", writing that his departure represented "the complete defeat of the U.S. policy of aggression" and was "worth celebrating".{{Cite web|title=FAREWELL, LEIGHTON STUART!|url=https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-4/mswv4_67.htm#bm12|access-date=2024-01-27|website=www.marxists.org|archive-date=17 January 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240117131622/https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-4/mswv4_67.htm#bm12|url-status=live}}{{Cite news|last=Barboza|first=David|date=2008-11-19|title=John Leighton Stuart, China Expert, Is Buried There at Last|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/world/asia/20china.html|access-date=2024-01-27|work=The New York Times|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}

The People's Republic of China was formed after the communist People's Liberation Army (PLA) won the Chinese Civil War against the Kuomintang nationalists (KMT) and officially established on 1 October 1949. The defeated KMT fled to Taiwan, which they occupied under martial law until 1987, while the PLA secured control of mainland China.{{Cite web|date=2023-04-07|title=Taiwan: Explaining the U.S.-China dispute and why it matters|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/taiwan-us-china-dispute-why-it-matters-flashpoint-democracy-rcna78458|access-date=2024-01-27|website=NBC News|language=en}}{{Cite web|last=Ott|first=Haley|date=2023-03-31|title=China-Taiwan tension is soaring and the U.S. is directly involved. Here's what to know. |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/china-taiwan-us-tension-what-to-know/|access-date=2024-01-27|website=CBS News|language=en-US}} Following the civil war, America only recognized the KMT-controlled Republic of China in Taiwan as a legitimate government, not the communist People's Republic of China.

{{Main|Korean War}}

On 25 June 1950, the China-aligned state of North Korea invaded America-aligned South Korea.{{Cite journal|last=Chen|first=Jian|date=1992|title=China's Changing Aims during the Korean War, 1950—1951|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/23613365|journal=The Journal of American-East Asian Relations|volume=1|issue=1|pages=8–41|jstor=23613365|issn=1058-3947|access-date=28 January 2024|archive-date=9 January 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240109153552/https://www.jstor.org/stable/23613365|url-status=live}} In response, the United States and its allies pushed the United Nations Security Council to pass Resolution 82, which authorized military action against North Korea. Although the Soviet Union had veto power, at the time it was boycotting Security Council proceedings over the UN's recognition of the ROC instead of the PRC as the representative of China.{{Cite web|url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations-Security-Council/History|title=United Nations Security Council - Cold War, Peacekeeping, Veto Power | Britannica|website=www.britannica.com|access-date=29 September 2023|archive-date=12 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210512213111/https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations-Security-Council/History|url-status=live}}

Initially, the U.S. government saw Chinese intervention as unlikely. The People's Republic was barely a year old, and it needed time to rollout new policies to begin its communist transformation. Furthermore, it appeared that, if China was going to engage in warfare, it would be in KMT-controlled Taiwan, not Korea.{{Cite journal|last=Rawnsley|first=Gary D.|date=2009|title='The Great Movement to Resist America and Assist Korea': how Beijing sold the Korean War|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26000394|journal=Media, War & Conflict|volume=2|issue=3|pages=285–315|doi=10.1177/1750635209345186|jstor=26000394|s2cid=143193818|issn=1750-6352|access-date=28 January 2024|archive-date=28 January 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240128121855/https://www.jstor.org/stable/26000394|url-status=live}}

However, the PRC was not just focused on internal matters. They had been invaded via the China-North Korea border by Japan twice before. It was possible that, if the U.S. secured control of the Korean peninsula, they could do the same.{{Cite book|last=Cha|first=Victor D.|url=http://archive.org/details/impossiblestaten0000chav_j2c1|title=The Impossible State: North Korea, Past and Future|publisher=Ecco|year=2013|isbn=978-0-06-199850-8|location=New York|pages=315–345|language=en|lccn=2012009517|oclc=1244862785|via=Internet Archive}} The US was also opposed to the PRC's interests in Taiwan. Within two days of the North invading the South, the US deployed forces to the Taiwan strait.{{Cite web|date=2011-06-21|title=Chinese intervention in Korean War|url=https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2024/01/160_89323.html|access-date=2024-01-26|website=Korea Times|language=en|archive-date=26 January 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240126043700/https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2024/01/160_89323.html|url-status=live}}

After their defeat in the Chinese Civil War, parts of the Nationalist army had retreated south and crossed the border into Burma.{{Cite book|last=Han|first=Enze|title=The Ripple Effect: China's Complex Presence in Southeast Asia|date=2024|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-769659-0|location=New York, NY}}{{Rp|page=65}} The United States supported these Nationalist forces because the United States hoped they would harass the People's Republic of China from the southwest, thereby diverting Chinese resources from the Korean War.{{Rp|page=65}}

It seemed to the new Chinese leadership that stopping American encroachment into Asia was an important issue. In a speech to the CCP Politburo in August, Mao stated, "if the American imperialists are victorious, they will become dizzy with success, and then be in a position to threaten us."{{Cite journal|last=Morris-Suzuki|first=Tessa|date=2015|title=Prisoner Number 600,001: Rethinking Japan, China, and the Korean War 1950-1953|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/43553591|journal=The Journal of Asian Studies|volume=74|issue=2|pages=411–432|doi=10.1017/S0021911814002253|jstor=43553591|issn=0021-9118|access-date=28 January 2024|archive-date=26 January 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240126063227/https://www.jstor.org/stable/43553591|url-status=live}} PRC Premier Zhou Enlai echoed this sentiment in a speech in September: "the Chinese people can never tolerate foreign invasion, nor allow the imperialist to invade our neighbour at will without response". Chinese leadership under CCP Chairman Mao Zedong could not tolerate an American-occupied state directly on its border:Hao Yufan, and Zhai Zhihai, "China's decision to enter the Korean War: History revisited." China Quarterly (1990): 94-115 [https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.695.5440&rep=rep1&type=pdf online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211210221049/https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.695.5440&rep=rep1&type=pdf|date=10 December 2021}}. Chinese premier and foreign minister Zhou Enlai warned that China would intervene in the war on national security grounds; this warning was dismissed by President Truman.{{cite book|last=Stokesbury|first=James L|title=A Short History of the Korean War|publisher=Harper Perennial|year=1990|isbn=978-0688095130|location=New York|page=83}}

{{cite book|last=Offner|first=Arnold A.|title=Another Such Victory: President Truman and the Cold War, 1945–1953|publisher=Stanford University Press|year=2002|isbn=978-0804747745|location=Stanford, CA|page=390}}

On 30 September 1950, the UN offensive (for all intents and purposes under the direction of the United States) crossed the 38th parallel into North Korea.{{Cite web|last1=Lee|first1=Michael|last2=Cho|first2=Jung-woo|date=2023-09-14|title=Incheon landing was turning point for war, nation and world|url=https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/2023-09-14/national/diplomacy/Incheon-landing-was-turning-point-for-war-nation-and-world/1869467|access-date=2024-01-26|website=Korea JoongAng Daily|language=en}} Kim Il-Sung held an emergency meeting with Chinese officials, appealing for their urgent entry into the conflict. The UN authorized the reunification of Korea, meaning that the entire peninsula could fall into US control.James I. Matray, "Truman's Plan for Victory: National Self-Determination and the Thirty-Eighth Parallel Decision in Korea." Journal of American History 66.2 (1979): 314-333 [https://www.jstor.org/stable/1900879 online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211223123501/https://www.jstor.org/stable/1900879|date=23 December 2021}}. In October 1950, China attempted to make contact with the United States by way of its embassy in India.{{Cite book|last=Hammond|first=Ken|title=China's Revolution and the Quest for a Socialist Future|publisher=1804 Books|year=2023|isbn=9781736850084|location=New York, NY|pages=}}{{Rp|page=42}} The United States did not respond.{{Rp|page=42}} On 19 October 1950, Chinese forces crossed into North Korea.{{Cite web|last=Lendon|first=Brad|date=2020-06-25|title=The US Army once ruled Pyongyang and 5 other things you might not know about the Korean War|url=https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/24/asia/korean-war-70th-anniversary-intl-hnk/index.html|access-date=2024-01-26|website=CNN|language=en|archive-date=26 January 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240126063225/https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/24/asia/korean-war-70th-anniversary-intl-hnk/index.html|url-status=live}}

In response to the PRC's entry into the conflict, the US froze all Chinese assets in America.{{Rp|page=50}} The United States also prohibited transfers funds from the United States to recipients within the PRC, which also cut off funding for American-influenced institutions in the PRC, such as Christian Colleges.{{Rp|page=50}} In December 1950, the PRC seized all American assets and properties, totaling $196.8 million.Charles Ford Redick, "The Jurisprudence of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission: Chinese Claims." The American Journal of International Law, vol. 67, no. 4 (Oct. 1973) p. 728 The PRC also began efforts to remove American cultural influence from China, including by nationalizing cultural institutions affiliated with the United States.{{Rp|page=3}} The United States banned American citizens from traveling to the PRC.{{Rp|page=50}}

In late October 1950, China began its intervention with the Battle of Onjong. During the Battle of the Ch'ongch'on River, the People's Volunteer Army overran or outflanked the UN forces, leading to the defeat of the US Eighth Army.{{cite book|last1=Cohen|first1=Eliot A|last2=Gooch|first2=John|title=Military Misfortunes: The Anatomy of Failure in War|publisher=Free Press|year=2005|pages=165–95|isbn=978-0-7432-8082-2}} A ceasefire presented by the UN to the PRC shortly after Ch'ongch'on River, on 11 December it was rejected by the Chinese, who were now convinced of their ability to defeat the UN forces, and wanted to demonstrate China's military power by driving them out of Korea altogether.{{citation|last=Zhang|first=Shu Guang|title=Mao's Military Romanticism: China and the Korean War, 1950–1953|pages=119–126|year=1995|location=Lawrence, Kansas|publisher=University Press of Kansas|isbn=0-7006-0723-4}}{{citation

| last = Alexander

| first = Bevin R.

| author-link = Bevin Alexander

| year = 1986

| title = Korea: The First War We Lost

| publisher = Hippocrene Books, Inc

| location = New York

| isbn = 978-0-87052-135-5

| pages = 371–376

}} The Chinese achieved further victory at the Third Battle of Seoul and the Battle of Hoengsong, but UN forces recovered, pushing the front back to lands around the 38th parallel by July. A stalemate followed.Andrew James, The Korean War: Years of Stalemate, July 1951-July 1953 (US Army Center for Military History, 2000). Even though the US Air Force would spend the entire war with total air supremacy, dropping over 635,000 tons of bombs and other ordinance on North Korea and killing millions of Koreans, the strategic impasse ultimately lasted until the Korean Armistice Agreement that ended the fighting was signed on 27 July 1953. Since then, a divided Korea has continued to feature in US-China relations, with large American forces still stationed in the South.James I. Matray, "Beijing and the Paper Tiger: The Impact of the Korean War on Sino-American Relations." International Journal of Korean Studies 15.1 (2011): 155-186.

In 1952, in the midst of the Korean War, the American army surveyed Chinese prisoners of war (POWs) asking them why they believed the PRC was involved in the conflict. Of 238 respondents, 60% agreed it was for the defense of China against the US, while only 17% said it was to defend North Korea."Beliefs of Enemy Soldiers about the Korean War", International Public Opiniom Research Inc. and Operations Research Office at Johns Hopkins University, (1952) p. 53

{{Main|Vietnam War}}

The People's Republic of China provided resources and training to North Vietnam, and in the summer of 1962, Mao agreed to supply Hanoi with 90,000 rifles and guns free of charge. After the launch of America's Operation Rolling Thunder in 1965, China sent anti-aircraft units and engineering battalions to North Vietnam to repair the damage caused by American bombing, rebuild roads and railroads, and perform other engineering work, freeing additional hundreds of thousands North Vietnamese Army units for combat against American forces supporting South Vietnam.Xiaorong Han, "Spoiled guests or dedicated patriots? The Chinese in North Vietnam, 1954–1978." International Journal of Asian Studies 6.1 (2009): 1-36.Chen Jian, "China's Involvement in the Vietnam War, 1964–69." China Quarterly 142 (1995): 356-387 [https://web.archive.org/web/20200206025446/https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1dc1/33fcfe61f1967f65be068ba4195d1437e74e.pdf online]

The Chinese presence in North Vietnam was well known to US officials. The Johnson administration sought to conceal China's involvement from the United States public, on the rationale that domestic backlash might compel the administration to expand the war to China or withdraw precipitously.{{Cite book|last=Lampton|first=David M.|title=Living U.S.-China Relations: From Cold War to Cold War|date=2024|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|isbn=978-1-5381-8725-8|location=Lanham, MD|author-link=David M. Lampton}}{{Rp|page=23}} American planners accounted for China's involvement, with President Lyndon B. Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara opted not to invade North Vietnam, favoring a strategy of supporting South Vietnam in defending itself instead. The possibility of direct Chinese intervention in the Korean War was also ambiguous throughout the course of the war and remained in question as well. While Mao Zedong reportedly told journalist Edgar Snow in 1965 that China had no intention of fighting to save the Hanoi regime and would not engage the US military unless it crossed into Chinese territory, American officials nevertheless continued to remain alert for any potential changes in plan from China. Furthermore, Mao also made additional statements where he declared belief that the People's Liberation Army would win a confrontation with United States forces should the two enter military conflict with one another, citing the Korean War as one such reason he held this belief. Regardless of whatever intentions the China may have had, United States troops ultimately exited Vietnam as domestic opposition to American deployment in Vietnam increased, ending United States involvement in the Vietnam War.Kwan Ha Yim, China & the US, 1964-72 (1975) pp 57-82.Frank E. Rogers,"Sino-American Relations and the Vietnam War, 1964–66." China Quarterly 66 (1976): 293-314 [http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Rogers%20Sino%20American%20Vietnam.pdf online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221210160007/http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Rogers%20Sino%20American%20Vietnam.pdf|date=10 December 2022}}.

{{see also|PRC-US Ambassadorial Talks}}

Between 1949 and 1971, US–China relations were uniformly hostile, with frequent propaganda attacks in both directions. At the 1954 Geneva Conference, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles forbade any contact with the Chinese delegation, refusing to shake hands with Zhou Enlai, the lead Chinese negotiator.Richard H. Immerman, "The United States and the Geneva Conference of 1954: A New Look." Diplomatic History 14.1 (1990): 43-66. [https://www.academia.edu/download/79161257/j.1467-7709.1990.tb00075.x20220120-8250-1nl8qa4.pdf online]{{Dead link|date=December 2023|bot=InternetArchiveBot|fix-attempted=yes}} Relations deteriorated further under President John F. Kennedy (1961–1963).Nicholas Anthony Autiello, "Taming the Wild Dragon: John F. Kennedy and the Republic of China, 1961–63." Cold War History DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14682745.2018.1550077. [https://issforum.org/reviews/PDF/AR955.pdf online review] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200603080939/https://issforum.org/reviews/PDF/AR955.pdf|date=3 June 2020}}Noam Kochavi, "Kennedy, China, and the Tragedy of No Chance." Journal of American-East Asian Relations 7.1/2 (1998): 107–116 [https://www.jstor.org/stable/23613311 online]. Before the Cuban Missile Crisis, policymakers in Washington were uncertain whether or not China would break with the Soviet Union on the basis of ideology, national ambitions, and readiness for a role in guiding communist activities in many countries. New insight came with the Sino-Indian border war in November 1962 and Beijing's response to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Kennedy administration officials concluded that China was more militant and more dangerous than the Soviet Union, making better relations with Moscow desirable, with both nations trying to contain Chinese ambitions. Diplomatic recognition of China remained out of the question, as a crucial veto power on the UN Security Council was held by America's ally on Taiwan. The United States continued to work to prevent the PRC from taking China's seat in the United Nations and encouraged its allies not to deal with the PRC. The United States placed an embargo on trading with the PRC, and encouraged allies to follow it.Sean M. Turner, ""A Rather Climactic Period": The Sino–Soviet Dispute and Perceptions of the China Threat in the Kennedy Administration." Diplomacy & Statecraft 22.2 (2011): 261–280.

The PRC developed nuclear weapons in 1964 and, as later declassified documents revealed, President Johnson considered preemptive attacks to halt its nuclear program. He ultimately decided the measure carried too much risk, and it was abandoned. Instead, Johnson looked for ways to improve relations. The American public seemed more open to the idea of expanding contacts with China, such as the relaxation of the trade embargo. But the War in Vietnam was raging, with China aiding North Vietnam. Mao's Great Leap Forward had failed in its goal to properly industrialize China and sparked a famine, and his Cultural Revolution exercised hostility to the US. In the end, Johnson made no move to change the standoff.Victor S. Kaufman, "A Response to Chaos: The United States, the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution, 1961—1968." Journal of American-East Asian Relations 7.1/2 (1998): 73-92 [https://www.jstor.org/stable/23613308 online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200603092529/https://www.jstor.org/stable/23613308|date=3 June 2020}}.

Despite official non-recognition, the United States and the People's Republic of China held 136 meetings at the ambassadorial level beginning in 1954 and continuing until 1970, first in Geneva and in 1958–1970 in Warsaw.Steven M. Goldstein, "Dialogue of the Deaf?: The Sino-American Ambassadorial-Level Talks, 1955–1970." in {{cite book|author1=Robert S. Ross|author2=Changbin Jiang|title=Re-examining the Cold War: U.S.-China Diplomacy, 1954–1973|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LUcbNCUoWSMC&pg=PA200|year=2001|publisher=Harvard Univ Asia Center|pages=200–37|isbn=9780674005266}}

The Cultural Revolution brought about near-complete isolation of China from the outside world and vocal denunciations of both US imperialism and Soviet revisionism.

Beginning in 1967, the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission established the China Claims Program, in which American citizens could denominate the sum total of their lost assets and property following the Communist seizure of foreign property in 1950. American companies were reluctant to invest in China despite (future top leader) Deng Xiaoping's reassurances of a stable business environment.Pamela G. Hollie "Thaw in China-U.S. Ties May Unfreeze '49 Assets." The New York Times. 1 October 1979. p. D1

{{see also|1972 visit by Richard Nixon to China}}

The end of the 1960s brought a period of transformation. For China, when American President Johnson decided to wind down the Vietnam War in 1968, it gave China the impression that the US had no interest in expanding throughout the Asia-Pacific anymore. Meanwhile, relations with the USSR rapidly worsened. This gave Richard Nixon—running for president in 1968—the idea of using that rivalry to improve Washington's relations with Moscow and Beijing, while each rival would cut back support for Hanoi.Evelyn Goh, "Nixon, Kissinger, and the 'Soviet card' in the US opening to China, 1971–1974." Diplomatic History 29.3 (2005): 475-502. [http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Goh%20Soviet%20Card%20Opening%20to%20China.pdf online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220302163757/http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Goh%20Soviet%20Card%20Opening%20to%20China.pdf|date=2 March 2022}}

This became an especially important concern for the People's Republic of China after the Sino-Soviet border conflict of 1969. The PRC was diplomatically isolated and the leadership came to believe that improved relations with the United States would be a useful counterbalance to the Soviet threat. Zhou Enlai, the Premier of China, was at the forefront of this effort with the committed backing of Mao Zedong, Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party. In 1969, the United States initiated measures to relax trade restrictions and other impediments to bilateral contact, to which China responded. However, this rapprochement process was stalled by the Vietnam War, where China was supporting the enemies of the United States. Communication between Chinese and American leaders, however, was conducted through Romania, Pakistan{{cite web|url=https://www.nixonfoundation.org/exhibit/the-opening-of-china/|title=The Week that Chenged the World|website=Richard Nixon Foundation|date=18 January 2017|access-date=2 November 2018|archive-date=27 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180927192245/https://www.nixonfoundation.org/exhibit/the-opening-of-china/|url-status=live}} and Poland as intermediaries.{{Rp|page=36}}

File:Kissinger Mao.jpg

In the United States, academics such as John K. Fairbank and A. Doak Barnett pointed to the need to deal realistically with the Beijing government, while organizations such as the National Committee on United States–China Relations sponsored debates to promote public awareness.{{Rp|pages=36–37}} Many saw the specter of Communist China behind communist movements in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, but a growing number concluded that if the PRC would align with the US it would mean a major redistribution of global power against the Soviets. Mainland China's market of nearly one billion consumers appealed to American businesses. Senator J. William Fulbright, Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, held a series of hearings on the matter.Goh, Evelyn, Constructing the US Rapprochement with China, 1961–1974: From 'Red Menace' to 'Tacit Ally' , Cambridge University Press, 2005

Richard M. Nixon mentioned in his inaugural address that the two countries were entering an era of negotiation after an era of confrontation. Although Nixon, during his 1960 presidential campaign, had vociferously supported Chiang Kai-Shek, by the second half of the decade, he increasingly began to speak of there "being no reason to leave China angry and isolated". Nixon's election as president in 1968 was initially met with hostility by Beijing—an editorial in the People's Daily denounced him as "a chieftain whom the capitalist world had turned to out of desperation".{{cite book|editor-last=Leffler|editor-first=Melvyn P.|title=The Cambridge history of the Cold War.|year=2010|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge, UK|isbn=978-0-521-83720-0|page=373|edition=1. publ.|editor-last2=Westad|editor-first2=Odd Arne}} Nixon believed it was in the American national interest to forge a relationship with China, even though there were enormous differences between the two countries.{{cite web|last=Dube|first=Clayton|title=Getting to Beijing: Kissinger's Secret 1971 Trip|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2483|publisher=USC US-China Institute|access-date=24 July 2011|archive-date=10 November 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131110190513/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2483|url-status=live}} He was assisted in this by his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger.{{Cite book |last=Li |first=Xiaobing |title=The Cold War in East Asia |date=2018 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-138-65179-1 |location=Abingdon, Oxon}}{{Rp|page=3}} Both Nixon and Kissinger believed that relations with China would help the United States exit the Vietnam War and obtain long-term strategic benefits in confrontations with the Soviet Union.{{Rp|page=3}}

In 1971, an unexpectedly friendly encounter between the American and Chinese ping-pong athletes called Glenn Cowan and Zhuang Zedong in Japan opened the way for a visit to China, which Chairman Mao personally approved.{{cite web|last=Dube|first=Clayton|title=Sports diplomacy and back-channel negotiations|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2470|work=Talking Points, July 22 – August 3, 2011|publisher=USC US-China Institute|access-date=24 July 2011|archive-date=10 November 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131110200234/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2470|url-status=live}} In April 1971, the athletes became the first Americans to officially visit China since the communist takeover. The smooth acceptance of this created the term ping-pong diplomacy and gave confidence to both sides. Ping-pong diplomacy became one of the most prominent examples of people's diplomacy in China-US relations.{{Rp|page=9}} The ping-pong diplomacy allowed reporters into the country as well, opening up communication to both sides and breaking a barrier that had been there previously. This smoothed out the start of the trade partnership that was going to happen later.{{Cite web|title=Timeline: U.S. Relations With China 1949–2020|url=https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-relations-china|access-date=2021-03-09|website=Council on Foreign Relations|language=en|archive-date=16 August 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220816002922/https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-relations-china|url-status=live}} China's approach to keeping these early exchanges unofficial and conduct them through non-governmental agencies was generally well received by U.S. civil society groups and academics.{{Rp|page=310}}

In July 1971, Henry Kissinger feigned illness while on a trip to Pakistan and did not appear in public for a day. He was actually on a top-secret mission to Beijing to negotiate with Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai.

Kissinger and his aides did not receive a warm welcome in Beijing, and the hotel they stayed in was equipped with pamphlets excoriating US imperialism. However, the meeting with Zhou Enlai was productive, and the Chinese premier expressed his hope for improved China-US relations. He commented that the US had intentionally isolated China, not vice versa, and any initiative to restore diplomatic ties had to come from the American side. Zhou spoke of the late President Kennedy's plans to restore relations with China and told Kissinger, "We are willing to wait as long as we need to. If these negotiations fail, in time another Kennedy or another Nixon will come along."{{Cite web|url=https://kisslibrary.com/book/7138CDB42A74355EA5B6?search=2011+American+Business+in+China+White+Paper&a_aid=ddmidovv&a_bid=11110007|title=2011 American Business in China White Paper by American Chamber of Commerce in China / KissLibrary: Affordable Ebooks|website=kisslibrary.com|access-date=6 December 2018}}

On 15 July 1971, President Richard Nixon revealed the mission to the world and that he had accepted an invitation to visit the PRC.Magaret MacMillan, Nixon and Mao: The Week That Changed The World (2008)

This announcement{{cite web|last=Nixon|first=Richard|title=Announcement of the President's Trip to China|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2258|work=US-China documents collection|publisher=USC US-China Institute|access-date=24 July 2011|archive-date=11 November 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131111171025/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2258|url-status=live}} caused immediate shock around the world. In the United States, some hard-line anti-communists (most notably libertarian Republican Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater) denounced the decision, but most public opinions supported the move and Nixon saw the jump in the polls he had been hoping for. Since Nixon had sterling anti-communist credentials he was all but immune to being called "soft on communism". Nixon and his aides wanted to ensure that press coverage offered dramatic imagery.See [http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2705 "Getting to know you: The US and China shake the world"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131111171032/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2705|date=11 November 2013}} and [http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2672 "The Week that Changed the World"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141021072557/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=2672|date=21 October 2014}} for recordings, documents, and interviews. Nixon was particularly eager for strong news coverage.

File:President and Mrs. Nixon visit the Great Wall of China and the Ming tombs - NARA - 194421.tif walk with the American delegation and their Chinese hosts on the Great Wall of China.]]

File:Nixon and Zhou toast.jpg toast during Nixon's 1972 visit to China]]

Within the PRC there was also opposition from left-wing elements. This effort was allegedly led by Lin Biao, head of the military, who died in a mysterious plane crash over Mongolia while trying to defect to the Soviet Union. His death silenced most internal dissent over the visit.

Internationally, reactions varied. In the communist world, the Soviets were very concerned that two major enemies seemed to have resolved their differences, and the new world alignment contributed significantly to the policy of détente. Romania's president Nicolae Ceaușescu praised the US initiative as a "move for world peace".{{Quote without source|date=April 2018}} Several communist nations, including Cuba, Albania, and North Vietnam, accused China of "capitulationism to the imperialists".{{Quote without source|date=April 2018}} North Korea proclaimed that it was the reverse and that the US had been forced to capitulate to China, having failed to isolate it.

America's NATO allies were pleased by the initiative, especially since many of them had already recognized the PRC. Throughout the Asia-Pacific, the reaction was far more mixed. Japan was annoyed that it had not been told of the announcement until fifteen minutes before it had been made, and feared that the Americans were abandoning them in favor of the PRC. A short time later, Japan also recognized the PRC and committed to substantial trade with the continental power. South Korea and South Vietnam were both concerned that peace between the United States and the PRC could mean an end to American support for them against their communist enemies. Throughout the period of rapprochement, both countries had to be regularly assured that they would not be abandoned. Taiwan's Chiang Kai-Shek criticized the move, saying: "Today any international appease movement to evil power to seek for political power balance would never helpful for the world peace, instead it elongated the hardship of our 700 million people, and expand the disaster of the world."{{cite web|url=http://www.ccfd.org.tw/ccef001/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=751:0003-54&catid=199:2014-06-12-03-10-05&Itemid=256|author=Kai-Shek, Chiang|title=對國民大會第五次會議開幕典禮致詞|trans-title=Speech for the Opening Ceremony of the National Assembly Fifth Meeting|website=中正文教基金會 (Chungcheng Cultural and Educational Foundation)|date=20 February 1972|access-date=3 June 2021|language=zh|quote=所以今天國際間任何與惡勢力謀求政治權力均衡的姑息舉動，絕不會有助於世界和平，而適以延長我七億人民的苦難，增大全世界的災禍！|archive-date=3 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210603081801/http://www.ccfd.org.tw/ccef001/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=751:0003-54&catid=199:2014-06-12-03-10-05&Itemid=256|url-status=live}}

From 21 to 28 February 1972, President Nixon traveled to Beijing, Hangzhou, and Shanghai. At the conclusion of his trip, the US and the PRC issued the Shanghai Communiqué, a statement of their respective foreign policy views. In the Communiqué, both nations pledged to work toward the full normalization of diplomatic relations. This did not lead to immediate recognition of the People's Republic of China but 'liaison offices' were established in Beijing and Washington.{{cite book|last=Dunbabin|first=J.P.D.|title=International relations since 1945|year=1996|publisher=Longman|location=London [u.a.]|isbn=978-0-582-49365-0|page=258|edition=[Nachdr.].}} The US acknowledged the PRC position that all Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain that there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The statement enabled the US and PRC to temporarily set aside the issue of Taiwan and open trade and communication. Also, the US and China both agreed to take action against 'any country' that is to establish 'hegemony' in the Asia-Pacific. On several issues, such as the ongoing conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, and Israel, the US and China were unable to reach a common understanding.

The rapprochement with the United States benefited the PRC immensely and greatly increased its security for the rest of the Cold War. It has been argued that the United States, on the other hand, saw fewer benefits than it had hoped for, inasmuch as China continued to back America's enemies in Hanoi and Pyongyang. Eventually, however, the PRC's suspicion of Vietnam's motives led to a break in China-Vietnamese cooperation and, upon the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia in 1979, the Sino-Vietnamese War. Both China and the United States backed combatants in Africa against Soviet and Cuban-supported movements. The economic benefits of normalization were slow as it would take decades for American products to penetrate the vast Chinese market. While Nixon's China policy is regarded by many as the highlight of his presidency, others such as William Bundy have argued that it provided very little benefit to the United States.{{citation needed|date=February 2015}}

File:President Ford makes remarks in the People's Republic of China - NARA - 7062599.jpg

In May 1973, in an effort to build toward formal diplomatic relations, the US and the PRC established the United States Liaison Office (USLO) in Beijing and a counterpart PRC office in Washington D.C.{{Rp|page=153}} From 1973 to 1978, such distinguished Americans as David K. E. Bruce, George H. W. Bush, Thomas S. Gates, Jr., and Leonard Woodcock served as chiefs of the USLO with the personal rank of ambassador. China made clear that it considered the Soviet Union its chief adversary and urged the United States to be powerful, thereby distracting Moscow. Liaison officer George Bush concluded, "China keeps wanting us to be strong, wanting us to defend Europe, wanting us to increase our defense budgets, etc."{{cite book|editor1-first=Jeffrey A.|editor1-last= Engel|title=The China Diary of George H. W. Bush: The Making of a Global President|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jRvdwoKQOgQC&pg=PA356|year=2011|publisher=Princeton UP|page=356|isbn=978-1400829613}} Bush concluded that American engagement was essential to support markets, allies, and stability throughout the Asia Pacific and around the world.{{cite book|first=Jon|last=Meacham|title=Destiny and Power: The American Odyssey of George Herbert Walker Bush|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iMgOCAAAQBAJ&pg=PT219|year=2015|page=219|publisher=Random House Publishing|isbn=9780812998207}}

President Gerald Ford visited the PRC in 1975 and reaffirmed American interest in normalizing relations with Beijing. Shortly after taking office in 1977, President Jimmy Carter again reaffirmed the goals of the Shanghai Communiqué. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, Carter's National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, and senior staff member of the National Security Council Michel Oksenberg encouraged Carter to seek full diplomatic and trade relations with China. Although Brzezinski sought to quickly establish a security relationship with Beijing to counter the Soviet Union, Carter sided with Vance in believing that such a deal would threaten existing U.S.-Soviet relations, including the SALT II negotiations. Thus, the administration decided to cautiously pursue political normalization and not military relations.{{cite book|last1=Vance|first1=Cyrus|title=Hard Choices|url=https://archive.org/details/hardchoicescriti0000vanc|url-access=registration|date=1983|publisher=Simon and Schuster|pages=[https://archive.org/details/hardchoicescriti0000vanc/page/78 78]–79|isbn=9780671443399}} Vance, Brzezinski, and Oksenberg traveled to Beijing in early 1978 to work with Leonard Woodcock, then head of the liaison office, to lay the groundwork to do so. The United States and the People's Republic of China announced on 15 December 1978,{{Rp|page=86}} that the two governments would establish diplomatic relations on 1 January 1979.

{{see also|Visit by Deng Xiaoping to the United States|U.S.–China Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technology}}

File:Jimmy Carter and Deng Xiaoping participate in a meeting with U.S. and Chinese officials. - NARA - 183191.tif, and other US officials meet in the White House Cabinet Room with Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, 29 January 1979]]

In the Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations, dated 1 January 1979, the United States transferred diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing. The US reiterated the Shanghai Communiqué's acknowledgment of the Chinese position that there is only one China, and that Taiwan is a part of China; Beijing acknowledged that the American people would continue to carry on commercial, cultural, and other unofficial contacts with the people of Taiwan.Jim Mann, About face: A history of America's curious relationship with China, from Nixon to Clinton (1999).

Taiwan, although fully expecting this step, nonetheless expressed disappointment at having not been consulted first. The reaction of the communist world was similar to 1972, with the Soviet Union and its allies in Eastern Europe mostly being noncommittal, Romania welcoming the move, and Cuba and Albania being strongly against it. North Korea issued a statement congratulating "our brotherly neighbors for ending long-hostile relations with the US".{{Quote without source|date=April 2018}}

Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping's January 1979 visit to Washington initiated a series of important, high-level exchanges which continued until the spring of 1989. This resulted in many bilateral agreements, including the January 31, 1979 Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technology.{{Rp|page=|pages=90–91}} Scientific cooperation greatly increased thereafter.{{Cite book|last=Minami|first=Kazushi|title=People's Diplomacy: How Americans and Chinese Transformed US-China Relations during the Cold War|date=2024|publisher=Cornell University Press|isbn=9781501774157|location=Ithaca, NY}}{{Rp|pages=86–87}} Since early 1979, the United States and the PRC have initiated hundreds of joint research projects and cooperative programs under the Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technology, the largest bilateral program.{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1196|title=US-China Institute :: news & features :: china in u.s. campaign politics: part 6 of election '08 and the challenge of china|publisher=China.usc.edu|date=16 October 1964|access-date=2 December 2010|archive-date=5 March 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140305213847/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1196|url-status=live}}

On 1 March 1979, the two countries formally established embassies in each other's capitals. In 1979, outstanding private claims were resolved and a bilateral trade agreement was completed. Vice President Walter Mondale reciprocated Vice Premier Deng's visit with an August 1979 trip to China. This visit led to agreements in September 1980 on maritime affairs, civil aviation links, and textile matters, as well as a bilateral consular convention.

The threats of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia were major factors that brought Washington and Beijing closer than ever before.{{cite book|first=Frederick S.|last=Starr|title=Xinjiang: China's Muslim Borderland|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GXj4a3gss8wC&pg=PA157|year=2004|publisher=M.E. Sharpe|isbn=978-0-7656-3192-3|pages=157–158|access-date=8 December 2018|archive-date=11 February 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240211032209/https://books.google.com/books?id=GXj4a3gss8wC&pg=PA157#v=onepage&q&f=false|url-status=live}} In June 1979, US Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Josephn A. Califano Jr. led an American delegation to China; the trip resulted in the long-term institutionalization of health and education links between the two countries.{{Rp|page=103}} US-China military cooperation increased over the course of 1979 and 1980.{{Cite book|last=Crean|first=Jeffrey|title=The Fear of Chinese Power: an International History|date=2024|publisher=Bloomsbury Academic|isbn=978-1-350-23394-2|edition=|series=New Approaches to International History series|location=London, UK}}{{Rp|page=139}} In 1980, China allowed the United States to establish electronic listening stations in Xinjiang so the United States could monitor Soviet rocket launches in Central Asia.{{Cite book|last=Zhao|first=Suisheng|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781503634152|title=The Dragon Roars Back: Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy|date=2022|publisher=Stanford University Press|isbn=978-1-5036-3415-2|pages=54|doi=10.1515/9781503634152|access-date=1 January 2023|archive-date=13 April 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230413153307/https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503634152/html|url-status=live}} In exchange, the United States authorized the sale of dual-use civilian and military technology and nonlethal military equipment to China.

Chinese demands for advanced technology from the US were not always met, in part due to opposition from Congressmen who either distrusted technology transfer to a communist nation out of principle or concern that there was no guarantee that such technology would not end up in the hands of unfriendly third parties. In 1983, the US State Department changed its classification of China to "a friendly, developing nation",{{Quote without source|date=April 2018}} thereby increasing the amount of technology and armaments that could be sold. The skepticism of some US Congressmen was not entirely unmerited as China, during the 1980s, continued to sell arms to Iran and other states that were openly hostile to American interests.

File:Carter DengXiaoping (cropped).jpg Jimmy Carter]]

As a consequence of high-level and working-level contacts initiated in 1980, US dialogue with the PRC broadened to cover a wide range of issues, including global and regional strategic problems, political-military questions, including arms control, UN, and other multilateral organization affairs, and international narcotics matters. New York City and Beijing became sister cities.Michel Oksenberg, "Reconsiderations: A Decade of Sino-American Relations." Foreign Affairs 61.1 (1982): 190.

High-level exchanges continued to be a significant means for developing US–PRC relations in the 1980s. President Ronald Reagan and Premier Zhao Ziyang made reciprocal visits in 1984. Reagan's visit to Beijing went well, however, a speech he made criticizing the Soviet Union and praising capitalism, democracy, and freedom of religion was not aired on Chinese state television. In July 1985, Chinese President Li Xiannian traveled to the United States, the first such visit by a PRC head of state. Vice President Bush visited the PRC in October 1985 and opened the US Consulate General in Chengdu, the US's fourth consular post in the PRC. Further exchanges of cabinet-level officials occurred between 1985 and 1989, capped by President Bush's visit to Beijing in February 1989.

File:Zhao Ziyang cropped.jpg during his visit to the White House on 10 January 1984.]]

Shortly after being elected president in 1980, Ronald Reagan made a speech criticizing the PRC and welcoming restoration of ties with Taiwan. These remarks aroused initial concern in Beijing, but Reagan's advisers quickly apologized for his comments, and the president-elect soon retracted them. Reagan's first two years in office saw some deterioration in US-China relations due to the president's vociferous anti-communism, as well as the inability of the two nations to come to a common understanding over the Korean conflict, the Israel–Palestine conflict, or the Falklands War. In 1982, Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, in a reiteration of Mao Zedong's "Three Worlds" theory, criticized both the US and Soviet Union for imperialism. In 1983, there were quarrels over a Chinese tennis player, Hu Na, who defected to the US, and over an incident where an Olympic parade float in New York City displayed the flag of Taiwan rather than the PRC's flag. Relations in the early part of 1984 were strained over the issue of United States arms sales to Taiwan, but later improved.{{Rp|page=142}}

By the late 1980s, China was the US's largest partner for science and technology, which had become the largest type of government-to-government exchange between the two countries.{{Rp|page=88}}

In the period before the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, a growing number of cultural exchange activities gave the American and Chinese peoples broad exposure to each other's cultural, artistic, and educational achievements. Numerous mainland Chinese professionals and official delegations visited the United States each month. Many of these exchanges continued after the suppression of the Tiananmen protests.Robert Suettinger, Beyond Tiananmen: The Politics of US-China Relations, 1989–2000 (Brookings Institution Press, 2004).

In the first decade after normalization, the US's policy towards China was largely driven by the Executive Branch of the United States, with the notable exception of the Taiwan Relations Act.{{Rp|page=207}} As a result of the Executive-branch driven approach during this period, China concluded that United States Presidents primarily raised Congressional issues as a negotiating tool and that Congress was not itself a significant force in China-US relations.{{Rp|page=208}} Consequently, China was slow to develop its Congressional liaison capacity.{{Rp|page=208}}

{{Main|Foreign policy of the George H. W. Bush administration}}

Americans who had been optimistic about the emergence of democratic characteristics in response to the rapid economic growth and China were stunned and disappointed by the brutal crackdown of the pro-democratic Tiananmen Square protests in 1989.Eric A. Hyer, "Values Versus Interests: The US Response to the Tiananmen Square Massacre" (Georgetown Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, 1996. [https://www.academia.edu/download/55264904/Values_Versus_Interests_The_U.S._Response_to_the_Tiananmen_Square_Massacre.pdf online]{{dead link|date=July 2022|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}} The US and other governments enacted a number of measures against China's violation of human rights. The US suspended high-level official exchanges with the PRC and weapons exports from the US to the PRC. The US also imposed a number of economic sanctions. In the summer of 1990, at the G7 Houston summit, the West called for renewed political and economic reforms in mainland China, particularly in the field of human rights.Robert Suettinger, Beyond Tiananmen: The Politics of US-China Relations, 1989–2000 (Brookings Institution Press, 2004.)

The Tiananmen event disrupted the US-China trade relationship, and US investors' interest in mainland China dropped dramatically. Tourist traffic fell off sharply.Wesley S. Roehl, "Travel agent attitudes toward China after Tiananmen Square." Journal of Travel Research 29.2 (1990): 16–22. The Bush administration denounced the repression and suspended certain trade and investment programs on 5 and 20 June 1989, however Congress was responsible for imposing many of these actions, and the White House itself took a far less critical attitude of Beijing, repeatedly expressing hope that the two countries could maintain normalized relations.David Skidmore and William Gates. "After Tiananmen: The struggle over US policy toward China in the Bush administration." Presidential Studies Quarterly (1997): 514–39. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/27551766 in JSTOR] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170219024303/http://www.jstor.org/stable/27551766|date=19 February 2017}} Generally, Bush's preference was for sanctions which were not formalized in law in order to provide flexibility for altering or removing them.{{Rp|page=210}} Some sanctions were legislated while others were executive actions. Examples include:

• The US Trade and Development Agency (TDA): new activities in mainland China were suspended from June 1989 until January 2001, when President Bill Clinton lifted this suspension.
• Overseas Private Insurance Corporation (OPIC): new activities have been suspended since June 1989.
• Development Bank Lending/International Monetary Fund (IMF) Credits: the United States does not support development bank lending and will not support IMF credits to the PRC except for projects that address basic human needs.
• Munitions List Exports: subject to certain exceptions, no licenses may be issued for the export of any defense article on the US Munitions List. This restriction may be waived upon a presidential national interest determination.
• Arms Imports – import of defense articles from the PRC was banned after the imposition of the ban on arms exports to the PRC. The import ban was subsequently waived by the administration and reimposed on 26 May 1994. It covers all items on the BATFE's Munitions Import List. During this critical period, J. Stapleton Roy, a career US Foreign Service Officer, served as ambassador to Beijing.{{cite web|title=The Future of U.S. – China Relations|url=http://www.china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=61#keynote|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140305215110/http://www.china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=61#keynote|archive-date=5 March 2014|access-date=31 August 2008|website=USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism}}

Debate within the United States also began on whether China should continue to receive the annual presidential waiver for most favored nation trading status under the Jackson-Vanik Amendment.{{Rp|page=211}}

US-China military ties and arms sales were terminated in 1989 and as of 2024 have never been restored. Chinese public opinion became more hostile to the United States after 1989, as typified by the 1996 manifesto China Can Say No. The authors called for Beijing to take more aggressive actions against the United States and Japan in order to build a stronger international position. The Chinese government at first endorsed the manifesto, then repudiated it as irresponsible.Yuwu Song, ed., Encyclopedia of Chinese-American Relations (2009) pp 56–57.

The end of the Cold War and dissolution of the Soviet Union removed the original motives underlying rapprochement between China and the United States.{{Cite book|last=Zhao|first=Suisheng|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781503634152|title=The Dragon Roars Back: Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy|date=2022|publisher=Stanford University Press|isbn=978-1-5036-3415-2|pages=51|doi=10.1515/9781503634152|access-date=1 January 2023|archive-date=13 April 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230413153307/https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503634152/html|url-status=live}} Motivated by concerns that the United States might curtail support for China's modernization, Deng adopted a low-profile foreign policy to live with the fact of United States hegemony and focus primarily on domestic development.

File:Clinton and jiang-1.jpg and Chinese leader Jiang Zemin holding a joint press conference at the White House, 29 October 1997.]]

{{Main|Foreign policy of the Bill Clinton administration}}

Running for president in 1992, Bill Clinton sharply criticized his predecessor George H. W. Bush for prioritizing profitable trade relationships over human rights issues in China.Kerry Dumbaugh, and Richard C. Bush, Making China Policy: Lessons from the Bush and Clinton Administrations (Rowman & Littlefield, 2001). Clinton's May 28, 1993 Executive Order 128950 linked future extension of China's most favored nation trading status to China's progress on U.S.-defined human rights measures.{{Rp|page=222}} China made virtually no effort to comply with the U.S. conditions and in mid-1994 Clinton changed his position,{{Rp|page=223}} de-linking the China's most favored nation status from human rights issues.{{Cite book|last=Zhao|first=Suisheng|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1332788951|title=The dragon roars back : transformational leaders and dynamics of Chinese foreign policy|date=2023|publisher=Stanford University Press|isbn=978-1-5036-3415-2|location=Stanford, California|pages=63|oclc=1332788951}}

Congressional pressure, especially from the Republican Party, prompted Clinton to approve arms sales to Taiwan, despite the strong displeasure voiced by Beijing.Yuwu Song, ed., Encyclopedia of Chinese-American Relations (McFarland Publishing, 2009) p 63.John W. Dietrich, "Interest groups and foreign policy: Clinton and the China MFN debates." Presidential Studies Quarterly 29.2 (1999): 280-296.Jean A. Garrison, Making China Policy: From Nixon to GW Bush (Lynne Rienner, 2005)

In July 1993, a symbolic United States Congressional resolution opposed China's efforts to be selected as the host country for the 2000 Summer Olympics.{{Rp|page=153}} The resolution became a major grievance among the Chinese public, which generally viewed the Resolution as an effort to humiliate China.{{Rp|pages=153–154}}

File:United States trade with china history.gif

In July 1993, the US Navy stopped the Yinhe, a Chinese container ship, en route to Kuwait in international waters, cut off its GPS so that it lost direction and was forced to anchor, and held it in place for twenty-four days. The United States incorrectly alleged that the Yinhe was carrying precursors of chemical weapons for Iran. It eventually forced an inspection of the ship in Saudi Arabia, but found no chemical precursors. The United States refused China's request for a formal apology and refused to pay compensation. This incident was viewed in China as international bullying by the United States.{{cite book|url=http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/archives/107/72348.pdf|title=After Hainan: Next Steps for US–China Relations: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific of the Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives, One Hundred Seventh Congress, First Session, April 25, 2001|place=Washington|publisher=United States Government Publishing Office|page=45|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080813034751/http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/archives/107/72348.pdf|archive-date=13 August 2008}} Nonetheless, Chinese leader Jiang Zemin adopted a diplomatic posture of goodwill and a "sixteen-characters formula" to working with the United States: "enhancing confidence, avoiding troubles, expanding cooperation, and avoiding confrontation".

File:Anti-American Protests in Nanjing, 1999 (flickr 2543499638).jpg, 1999]]

In 1996, the People's Liberation Army conducted military exercises in the Taiwan Strait in an apparent effort to intimidate the Republic of China electorate before the pending presidential elections, triggering the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis. The United States dispatched two aircraft carrier battle groups to the region. Subsequently, tensions in the Taiwan Strait diminished and relations between the US and the PRC improved, with increased high-level exchanges and progress on numerous bilateral issues, including human rights, nuclear proliferation, and trade.

China's leader Jiang Zemin visited the United States in the fall of 1997, the first state visit to the US by a paramount leader since 1979. In connection with that visit, the two sides came to a consensus on implementation of their 1985 agreement on Peaceful Nuclear Cooperation, as well as a number of other issues.Lucian W. Pye, "The United States and Asia in 1997: nothing dramatic, just incremental progress." Asian Survey 38.1 (1998): 99–106 [https://as.ucpress.edu/content/ucpas/38/1/99.full.pdf online]. President Clinton visited the PRC in June 1998. He traveled extensively in mainland China, and had direct interaction with the Chinese people, including live speeches and a radio show which allowed the President to convey a sense of American ideals and values. In a speech at Peking University, he referred to the 21st century as "your century",{{Cite web|title=President Clinton's Beijing University speech, 1998 US-China Institute|url=https://china.usc.edu/president-clintons-beijing-university-speech-1998|access-date=2023-04-16|website=china.usc.edu|language=en|archive-date=16 April 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230416074949/https://china.usc.edu/president-clintons-beijing-university-speech-1998|url-status=live}} and expressed his view that technology, including the internet, would help ease any tensions China's economic growth might cause.{{Cite book|last=Moore|first=Scott|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1316703008|title=China's next act : how sustainability and technology are reshaping China's rise and the world's future|date=2022|isbn=978-0-19-760401-4|location=New York, NY|pages=1|oclc=1316703008|access-date=25 July 2022|archive-date=24 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220724225154/https://www.worldcat.org/title/chinas-next-act-how-sustainability-and-technology-are-reshaping-chinas-rise-and-the-worlds-future/oclc/1316703008|url-status=live}}{{Citation|title=President Clinton at Peking University (1998)| date=9 July 2013|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IpJZihF0Lw|access-date=2023-04-16|language=en}} President Clinton was criticized by some, however, for failing to pay adequate attention to human rights abuses in mainland China.Eckholm When Clinton visited Shanghai, he declared the "three nos" for United States foreign policy towards China: (1) not recognizing two Chinas, (2) not supporting Taiwanese independence, and (3) not supporting Taiwanese efforts to join international organizations for which sovereignty is a membership requirement.

Relations were damaged for a time by the United States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade on May 7, 1999,{{Cite book|last=Zhao|first=Suisheng|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781503634152|title=The Dragon Roars Back: Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy|date=2023|publisher=Stanford University Press|isbn=978-1-5036-3415-2|pages=63–64|doi=10.1515/9781503634152|access-date=1 January 2023|archive-date=13 April 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230413153307/https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503634152/html|url-status=live}} which was stated by the White House to be miscoordination between intelligence and the military. The bombing created outrage among Chinese people, who did not accept the United States claim that the bombing was accidental. For several days, Beijing was rocked by massive anti-US demonstrations. Deeming the importance of the bilateral relationship too great to be harmed by the embassy bombing, Chinese leader Jiang Zemin sought to calm the Chinese public outrage. By the end of 1999, relations began to gradually improve. In October 1999, the two countries reached an agreement on compensation for families of those who were victims, as well as payments for damages to respective diplomatic properties in Belgrade and China. US-China relations in 1999 were also damaged by accusations that a Chinese-American scientist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory had given US nuclear secrets to Beijing.

File:Bushhujintao.jpg, and Chinese leader Hu Jintao with first ladies Laura Bush, and Liu Yongqing wave from the White House in April 2006.]]

{{Main|Foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration}}

As a presidential candidate in 2000, George W. Bush repeatedly criticized the Clinton-Gore administration for being too friendly with China, which he warned was a strategic competitor.

In the Hainan Island incident of April 1, 2001, a United States US EP-3 surveillance aircraft collided mid-air with a Chinese Shenyang J-8 jet fighter over the South China Sea.{{Cite book|last=Zhao|first=Suisheng|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781503634152|title=The Dragon Roars Back: Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy|date=2023|publisher=Stanford University Press|isbn=978-1-5036-3415-2|location=Stanford, California|pages=64|doi=10.1515/9781503634152|access-date=1 January 2023|archive-date=13 April 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230413153307/https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503634152/html|url-status=live}} China sought a formal apology, and accepted United States Secretary of State Colin Powell's expression of "very sorry" as sufficient. The incident nonetheless created negative feelings towards the United States by the Chinese public and increased public feelings of Chinese nationalism.

Early on as President Bush increased arms sales to Taiwan, including 8 submarines. Bush's hostile position toward China was suddenly reversed after the September 11 terrorist attacks, and his friendly attitude toward Taiwan became a casualty. Soon he was calling China a strategic partner in the war on terror and postponing deals with Taiwan.Guy Roberts, "Circling the Middle Kingdom: George W. Bush and China 1999 – 2003" Australasian Journal of American Studies (2011) 30#1 pp 57-71.

Two PRC citizens died in the attacks on the World Trade Center.{{cite book|author=Chi Wang|title=George W. Bush and China: Policies, Problems, and Partnerships|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=z_EBv8aeaRoC|year=2008|publisher=Lexington Books|isbn=9780739131640}} Chinese leader Jiang Zemin sent a telegram to Bush within hours of the attack expressing China's condolences and opposition to terror; Bush responded with a phone call the next day stating that he looked forward to working with Jiang and other world leaders to oppose terrorism. Chinese companies and individuals also sent expressions of condolences to their American counterparts. The PRC, itself troubled by Muslim separatists in Xinjiang, offered strong public support for the War on Terror in APEC China 2001. The PRC voted in favor of UNSCR 1373, publicly supported the coalition campaign in Afghanistan,{{cite web|url=https://2009-2017.state.gov/outofdate/bgn/china/29871.htm|title=U.S. State Department – China (03/03)|publisher=state.gov|access-date=6 June 2011|archive-date=25 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190525030335/https://2009-2017.state.gov/outofdate/bgn/china/29871.htm|url-status=live}} and contributed $150 million of bilateral assistance to Afghan reconstruction following the defeat of the Taliban. Shortly after the 11 September terrorist attacks, the US and PRC also commenced a counterterrorism dialogue. In a March 2002 trip to Beijing, Bush articulated his desire for a "constructive, cooperative, and candid" relationship with China. The third round of that dialogue was held in Beijing in February 2003.

In the United States, the threat of terrorist attacks by al-Qaeda greatly changed the nature of its security concerns. It was no longer plausible to argue, as the Blue Team had earlier asserted, that the PRC was the primary security threat to the United States, and the need to focus on the Middle East and the War on Terror made the avoidance of potential distractions in East Asia a priority for the United States.

There were initial fears among the PRC leadership that the war on terrorism would lead to an anti-PRC effort by the US, especially as the US began establishing bases in Central Asian countries like Uzbekistan and Tajikistan and renewed efforts against Iraq. The Chinese government was relieved after the United States tied up major national resources with its 2003 invasion of Iraq.{{Cite book|last=Zhao|first=Suisheng|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781503634152|title=The Dragon Roars Back: Transformational Leaders and the Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy|date=2023|publisher=Stanford University Press|isbn=978-1-5036-3415-2|location=Stanford, California|pages=65|doi=10.1515/9781503634152|access-date=1 January 2023|archive-date=13 April 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230413153307/https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503634152/html|url-status=live}} China believed that the United States' Middle East meant that the United States would need China's help on issues such as counterterrorism, Middle Eastern stability, and nuclear non-proliferation and viewed the United States' focus as conducive to China's emphasis on stability and domestic development.

China and the United States worked closely on regional issues, including those pertaining to North Korea and its nuclear weapons program. China has stressed its opposition to North Korea's decision to withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, its concerns over North Korea's nuclear capabilities, and its desire for a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula. It also voted to refer North Korea's noncompliance with its International Atomic Energy Agency obligations to the UN Security Council.

In 2001, a presidential plane built in the United States for Chinese leader Jiang Zemin was found to have listening devices installed.{{Cite book|last=Brown|first=Kerry|title=China Incorporated: The Politics of a World Where China is Number One|date=2023|publisher=Bloomsbury Academic|isbn=978-1-350-26724-4|location=London|author-link=Kerry Brown (historian)}}{{Rp|page=53}} Chinese authorities located at least 20 devices, including one in the headboard of the presidential bed.{{Cite web|date=2002-01-19|title=Jiang's U.S.-Built Plane Is Reportedly Bugged|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-jan-19-mn-23654-story.html|access-date=2023-11-03|website=Los Angeles Times|language=en-US|archive-date=3 November 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231103135639/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-jan-19-mn-23654-story.html|url-status=live}} The listening devices were capable of being operated via satellite.

In the mid-2000s, the United States focused relatively less on China issues.{{Rp|page=158}} This approach was reinforced by the economic benefits to the United States from its relations with China, including cheaper consumer products like clothing and electronics.{{Rp|page=158}} During this period, the United States also issued significant debt to fund its military interventions and China became the largest foreign purchaser of U.S. government debt.{{Rp|page=158}}

Taiwan remained a volatile issue, but one that remained under control. The United States policy toward Taiwan involved emphasizing the Four Noes and One Without. On occasion the United States rebuked Republic of China (Taiwan) President Chen Shui-bian for provocative pro-independence rhetoric. As Bush made his opposition to Taiwan independence clear, the PRC saw the United States as playing a positive role in restraining the separatist movement. In 2005, the PRC passed the Anti-Secession Law which stated that the PRC would be prepared to resort to "non-peaceful means" if Taiwan declared formal independence. Many critics of the PRC, such as the Blue Team, argue that the PRC was trying to take advantage of the US war in Iraq to assert its claims on Republic of China's territory. In 2008, Taiwan voters elected Ma Ying-jeou. Ma, representing the Kuomintang, campaigned on a platform that included rapprochement with mainland China. His election has significant implications for the future of cross-strait relations.{{cite web|date=31 March 2008|title=US-China Institute :: USCI Symposium Explores The Taiwan Vote|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=986|access-date=2 December 2010|publisher=USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism|archive-date=5 March 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140305213140/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=986|url-status=live}}

The 2003 United States invasion of Iraq and the failure of the United States to find evidence of weapons of mass destruction decreased China's respect for America's power and realism.{{Rp|page=334}}

China's paramount leader Hu Jintao visited the United States in April 2006.{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=442|title=Text of Pres. Bush's welcome|publisher=China.usc.edu|access-date=2 December 2010|archive-date=11 February 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090211110418/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=442|url-status=live}} Bush visited Beijing in August for four days to attend the 2008 Summer Olympics. The president and his wife Laura were accompanied by Bush's father, the former president, and his mother Barbara.Jean Edward Smith, Bush (2016) pp 646-649.

{{Main|Foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration}}

File:Wang Qishan ,Obama Basketball S&ED.jpg, center, holds the autographed basketball given to him by President Obama following their Washington meeting 28 July 2009, to discuss the outcomes of the first US–China Strategic and Economic Dialogue. Looking on at left is State Councilor Dai Bingguo.{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1557|title=Details and video from the meeting|publisher=China.usc.edu|access-date=2 December 2010|archive-date=1 March 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140301024717/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1557|url-status=live}}]]

The 2008 US presidential election centered on issues of war and economic recession, but candidates Barack Obama and John McCain also spoke extensively regarding US policy toward China.Video and documents: Obama and China [http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1198] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090330035029/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1198|date=30 March 2009}}; McCain and China [http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1197] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140305213052/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1197|date=5 March 2014}}. Both favored cooperation with China on major issues, but they differed with regard to trade policy. Obama expressed concern that the value of China's currency was being deliberately set low to benefit China's exporters. McCain argued that free trade was crucial and was having a transformative effect in China. Still, McCain noted that while China might have shared interests with the US, it did not share American values.The Economist 8 June 2013

The election of Barack Obama in 2008 generated positive reactions from most locals and state-run media outlets in China.{{Cite news|last=Malcolm Moore|date=November 2008|title=Chinese entrepreneurs get Obama-mania|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/3397615/Chinese-entrepreneurs-get-Obama-mania.html|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/3397615/Chinese-entrepreneurs-get-Obama-mania.html|archive-date=12 January 2022|url-access=subscription|url-status=live|access-date=2020-11-23|website=The Daily Telegraph|language=en-GB}}{{cbignore}}{{Cite news|date=October 2008|title=POLITICS-US: Online Poll Shows Obama a Hit in China|url=http://www.ipsnews.net/2008/10/politics-us-online-poll-shows-obama-a-hit-in-china/|access-date=2020-11-23|website=Inter Press Service|archive-date=7 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201107121258/http://www.ipsnews.net/2008/10/politics-us-online-poll-shows-obama-a-hit-in-china/|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|date=2016-06-29|title=Obama's international image remains strong in Europe and Asia|url=https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2016/06/29/2-obamas-international-image-remains-strong-in-europe-and-asia/|access-date=2020-11-23|website=Pew Research Center|language=en-US|archive-date=24 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201124161345/https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2016/06/29/2-obamas-international-image-remains-strong-in-europe-and-asia/|url-status=live}} His presidency fostered hopes for increased co-operation and heightened levels of friendship between the two nations. On 8 November 2008, Chinese leader Hu Jintao and Obama shared a phone conversation in which Hu congratulated Obama on his election victory. During the conversation both parties agreed that the development of Sino-American relations is not only in the interest of both nations, but also in the interests of the international community.{{cite web|url=http://www.enghunan.gov.cn/wwwHome/200811/t20081109_146216.htm|title=President Hu Jintao and US President-elect Barack Obama Discuss over Telephone – Hunan Government|publisher=Enghunan.gov.cn|date=9 November 2008|access-date=2 December 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110721164349/http://www.enghunan.gov.cn/wwwHome/200811/t20081109_146216.htm|archive-date=21 July 2011}}{{Cite news|date=11 November 2008|title=No call from Obama seen as slight to India|url=http://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Asia/Story/A1Story20081111-99718.html|access-date=2 December 2010|website=Asiaone.com, The Statesman (India)|archive-date=25 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210225042727/https://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Asia/Story/A1Story20081111-99718.html|url-status=live}}{{Cite news|url=http://www.asianewsnet.net/news.php?id=2540&sec=1|title=Asia News Network – Xchange Tool|url-status=usurped|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110615161849/http://www.asianewsnet.net/news.php?id=2540&sec=1|archive-date=15 June 2011}}

During the Obama administration, the US signed more bilateral agreements with China than it had during any other US administration, particularly with regard to addressing climate change.{{Cite book|last=Lewis|first=Joanna I.|title=Cooperating for the Climate: Learning from International Partnerships in China's Clean Energy Sector|date=2023|publisher=The MIT Press|isbn=978-0-262-54482-5|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts}}{{Rp|page=2}} The two countries signed seven clean energy agreements on November 17, 2009, during Obama's visit to China, including an agreement establishing the U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center (CERC).{{Rp|page=|pages=122–123}} CERC was the most ambitious clean energy technology cooperation mechanism between the two.{{Rp|page=117}} The many technical exchanges on climate issues during the Obama era helped both sides of the relationship to better understand each other's emissions models and data, leading to increased mutual trust.{{Rp|page=105}}

File:Obama and Wen Jiabao.jpg and members of the Chinese delegation after a bilateral meeting at the United Nations in New York City in September 2010.]]

Following the 2008 financial crisis, both US and Chinese governments addressed the economic downturn with massive stimulus initiatives. The Chinese expressed concern that "Buy American" components of the US plan discriminate against foreign producers, including those in China.{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1329|title=US-China Institute :: news & features :: making american policy toward china – scholars and policy makers on economics, security, and climate change|publisher=China.usc.edu|access-date=2 December 2010|archive-date=8 July 2012|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120708034849/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1329|url-status=live}}

As the two most influential and powerful countries in the world, there have been increasingly strong suggestions within American political circles of creating a G-2 (Chimerica) relationship for the United States and China to work out solutions to global problems together.{{cite web|author=Boston Study Group on Middle East Peace|url=http://www.fpa.org/topics_info2414/topics_info_show.htm?doc_id=912530|title=Foreign Policy Association: Resource Library: Viewpoints: Moving the G-2 Forward|publisher=Fpa.org|access-date=2 December 2010|archive-date=9 September 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210909221729/https://www.fpa.org/topics_info2414/topics_info_show.htm?doc_id=912530|url-status=live}}

The Strategic Economic Dialogue initiated by then-US President Bush and Hu and led by US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi in 2006 was broadened by the Obama administration into the U.S.–China Strategic and Economic Dialogue.{{Rp|page=288}} It was then led by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and US Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner for the United States and Vice Premier Wang Qishan and Chinese State Councilor Dai Bingguo for China. The focus of the first set of meetings in July 2009 was in response to the economic crisis, finding ways to cooperate to stem global warming and addressing issues such as the proliferation of nuclear weapons and humanitarian crises.{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1557|title=Economic Crisis, Looming Environmental Threats, and Growing Nuclear Weapons Worries -- All in a Day's Work at the Strategic and Economic Dialogue 中美战略与经济对话|publisher=China.usc.edu|access-date=2 December 2010|archive-date=1 March 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140301024717/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1557|url-status=live}}

File:P011911SA-0499 (5376833854).jpg in January 2011]]

Obama visited China on 15–18 November 2009 to discuss economic worries, concerns over nuclear weapon proliferation, and the need for action against climate change.The aims and challenges of the trip were summarized by the USC US-China Institute: [http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1902] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140305214438/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1902|date=5 March 2014}}, [http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1873] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140305214703/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1873|date=5 March 2014}}.{{cite web|title=Instant Analysis: Reporting on US Presidents in China|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1895|access-date=2 December 2010|publisher=China.usc.edu|archive-date=28 May 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100528104746/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1895|url-status=live}}

In January 2010, the US proposed a $6.4 billion arms sale to the Republic of China (Taiwan). In response, the PRC threatened to impose sanctions on US companies supplying arms to Taiwan and suspend cooperation on certain regional and international issues.{{cite news|date=30 January 2010|title=China hits back at US over Taiwan weapons sale|work=BBC News|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8488765.stm|access-date=2 December 2010|archive-date=18 November 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101118221635/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8488765.stm|url-status=live}}

On 19 February 2010, Obama met with the Dalai Lama, accused by China of "fomenting unrest in Tibet." After the meeting, China summoned the US ambassador to China, Jon Huntsman,{{Cite news|last=Macartney|first=Jane|date=19 February 2010|title=China summons US Ambassador over Dalai Lama's meeting with Obama|work=The Times|location=London|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7033132.ece|access-date=12 July 2010}}{{dead link|date=September 2024|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}} but Time has described the Chinese reaction as "muted", speculating that it could be because "the meeting came during the Chinese New Year... when most officials are on leave". Some activists criticized Obama for the relatively low profile of the visit.{{Cite news|url=http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1966629,00.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100220230852/http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1966629,00.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=20 February 2010|title=In China, Muted Reaction to Dalai Lama's Visit|first=Austin|last=Ramzy|publisher=Time magazine|date=19 February 2010|access-date=12 July 2010}}

File:Secretary Kerry and Chinese Premier Li Shake Hands Before Their Meeting (10170270646).jpg speaks with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, 9 October 2013.]]

In 2012, the PRC criticized Obama's new defense strategy, which it said was aimed at isolating China in East Asia.Lee, Mj. [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71233.html "China fires at new U.S. defense plan."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120109211758/http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71233.html|date=9 January 2012}} Politico, 9 January 2012. Obama is looking to increase US military influence in the area with a rotating presence of forces in friendly countries.Whitlock, Craig. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/philippines-may-allow-greater-us-presence-in-latest-reaction-to-chinas-rise/2012/01/24/gIQAhFIyQQ_story.html "Philippines may allow greater US military presence in reaction to China's rise."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170715212230/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/philippines-may-allow-greater-us-presence-in-latest-reaction-to-chinas-rise/2012/01/24/gIQAhFIyQQ_story.html|date=15 July 2017}} The Washington Post, 25 January 2012.

In March 2012, China suddenly began cutting back its purchases of oil from Iran, which along with some signs on sensitive security issues like Syria and North Korea, showed some coordination with the Obama administration.{{cite news|title=U.S. Sees Positive Signs From China on Security Issues|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/27/world/asia/us-is-seeing-positive-signs-from-chinese.html|access-date=9 November 2012|newspaper=The New York Times|date=26 April 2012|author=Mark Landler and Steven Lee Myers|archive-date=12 May 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120512221307/http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/27/world/asia/us-is-seeing-positive-signs-from-chinese.html|url-status=live}}

In March 2013, the US and China agreed to impose stricter sanctions on North Korea for conducting nuclear tests, which sets the stage for UN Security Council vote. Such accord might signal a new level of cooperation between the US and China.{{cite news| url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-07/china-u-s-accord-sets-un-vote-on-north-korea-sanctions.html| work=Bloomberg| title=China-U.S. Accord Sets UN Vote on North Korea Sanctions| access-date=6 March 2017| archive-date=5 September 2014| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140905161716/http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-07/china-u-s-accord-sets-un-vote-on-north-korea-sanctions.html| url-status=live}}

File:Vice President Biden Raises a Toast in Honor of Chinese President Xi at a State Luncheon at the State Department (21723827681).jpg with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, 25 September 2015.]]

In an effort to build a "new model" of relations, Obama met Chinese leader Xi Jinping for two days of meetings, between 6 and 8 June 2013, at the Sunnylands estate in Rancho Mirage, California.{{cite news|last=Calmes|first=Jackie and Steven Lee Myers|title=U.S. and China Move Closer on North Korea, but Not on Cyberespionage|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/world/asia/obama-and-xi-try-building-a-new-model-for-china-us-ties.html|access-date=11 June 2013|newspaper=The New York Times|date=8 June 2013|archive-date=10 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130610230446/http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/world/asia/obama-and-xi-try-building-a-new-model-for-china-us-ties.html|url-status=live}} The summit was considered "the most important meeting between an American president and a Chinese Communist leader in 40 years, since President Nixon and Chairman Mao," according to Joseph Nye, a political scientist at Harvard University.{{cite news|last=Sanger|first=David E.|title=Obama and Xi Try to Avoid a Cold War Mentality|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/world/asia/obama-and-xi-try-to-avoid-a-cold-war-mentality.html|newspaper=The New York Times|date=9 June 2013|access-date=6 February 2017|archive-date=24 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161224123355/http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/world/asia/obama-and-xi-try-to-avoid-a-cold-war-mentality.html|url-status=live}} The leaders concretely agreed to combat climate change and also found strong mutual interest in curtailing North Korea's nuclear program. However, the leaders remained sharply divided over cyber espionage and US arms sales to Taiwan. Xi was dismissive of American complaints about cyber security.{{cite news|last=McGregor|first=Richard|title=Obama-Xi summit presented as a walk in the park|url=http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a47cc686-d118-11e2-be7b-00144feab7de.html#axzz2VwWJHEKV|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221210201220/https://www.ft.com/content/a47cc686-d118-11e2-be7b-00144feab7de#axzz2VwWJHEKV|archive-date=10 December 2022|url-access=subscription|access-date=11 June 2013|newspaper=Financial Times|date=10 June 2013|url-status=live}} Tom Donilon, the outgoing US National Security Adviser, stated that cyber security "is now at the center of the relationship", adding that if China's leaders were unaware of this fact, they know now.

File:Xi Jinping and Barack Obama toast at White House state dinner September 2015.jpg

Obama supported the One-China policy."[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-taiwan-obama-idUSKBN13S013?il=0 White House: no change to 'one China' policy after Trump call with Taiwan] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180711091802/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-taiwan-obama-idUSKBN13S013?il=0|date=11 July 2018}}". Reuters. 2 December 2016. In 2014, Obama stated that "We recognize Tibet as part of the People's Republic of China. We are not in favor of independence.""[https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/12/remarks-president-obama-and-president-xi-jinping-joint-press-conference Remarks by President Obama and President Xi Jinping in Joint Press Conference] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170122023504/https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/12/remarks-president-obama-and-president-xi-jinping-joint-press-conference|date=22 January 2017}}". 23 November 2014.

Beginning in 2015, China's People's Liberation Army Air Force began patrolling the South China Sea, including the disputed Paracel and Spratly Islands.{{Cite book|last=Li|first=Xiaobing|title=China under Xi Jinping: A New Assessment|publisher=Leiden University Press|year=2024|isbn=9789087284411|editor-last=Fang|editor-first=Qiang|chapter=Beijing's Military Power and East Asian-Pacific Hot Spots|editor-last2=Li|editor-first2=Xiaobing}}{{Rp|page=273}} In China's view, these disputed areas are within its Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ).{{Rp|page=273}} The United States Air Force does not accept this view, and flies its military planes through the area without informing China.{{Rp|page=273}}

In May 2015, U.S. Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter warned China to halt its rapid island-building in the South China Sea."[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/05/27/defense-secretarys-warning-to-china-u-s-military-wont-change-operations/ Defense secretary's warning to China: U.S. military won't change operations] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181030131220/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/05/27/defense-secretarys-warning-to-china-u-s-military-wont-change-operations/|date=30 October 2018}}". The Washington Post. 27 May 2015.

Obama hosted Xi for a bilateral meeting on the margins of the Nuclear Security Summit on 31 March 2016.{{cite web|url=https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/03/24/statement-press-secretary-bilateral-meeting-president-xi-jinping-peoples|work=whitehouse.gov|title=Statement by the Press Secretary on Bilateral Meeting with President Xi Jinping of the People's Republic of China|via=National Archives|date=24 March 2016|access-date=1 March 2021|archive-date=10 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210310161939/https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/03/24/statement-press-secretary-bilateral-meeting-president-xi-jinping-peoples|url-status=live}}

{{see also|Foreign policy of the first Donald Trump administration#China, Taiwan, and the South China Sea|First Trump tariffs|China–United States trade war}}

File:President Xi Jinping Greets Secretary Tillerson (33139050550).jpg shakes hands with Chinese leader Xi Jinping upon arrival in Beijing, 19 March 2017.]]

File:Secretary Pompeo Meets With Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing (40985611020).jpg shakes hands with Chinese leader Xi Jinping upon arrival in Beijing, 14 June 2018.]]

The presidency of Donald Trump led to a negative shift in US relations with China.{{Cite news| last1=Allen-Ebrahimian| first1=Bethany| title=Special report: Trump's U.S.-China transformation| url=https://www.axios.com/trump-china-policy-special-report-154fa5c2-469d-4238-8d72-f0641abc0dfa.html| date=January 19, 2021| work=Axios| access-date=January 31, 2021| archive-date=29 January 2021| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210129173516/https://www.axios.com/trump-china-policy-special-report-154fa5c2-469d-4238-8d72-f0641abc0dfa.html| url-status=live}}

President-elect Trump's telephone conversation with the president of Taiwan Tsai Ing-wen on 2 December 2016 was the first such contact with Taiwan by an American president-elect or president since 1979. It provoked Beijing to lodge a diplomatic protest ("stern representations").{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-taiwan/trump-speaks-to-taiwans-president-financial-times-idUSKBN13R2NT|title=China lodges protest after Trump call with Taiwan president|date=4 December 2016|newspaper=Reuters|access-date=17 November 2017|archive-date=17 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171117174647/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-taiwan/trump-speaks-to-taiwans-president-financial-times-idUSKBN13R2NT|url-status=live}}{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-china/trump-says-u-s-not-necessarily-bound-by-one-china-policy-idUSKBN1400TY|title=Trump says U.S. not necessarily bound by 'one China' policy|date=12 December 2016|newspaper=Reuters|access-date=17 November 2017|archive-date=14 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171114231730/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-china/trump-says-u-s-not-necessarily-bound-by-one-china-policy-idUSKBN1400TY|url-status=live}} Trump went on to clarify his move: "I fully understand the 'one China' policy, but I don't know why we have to be bound by a 'one China' policy unless we make a deal with China having to do with other things, including trade."

On President Trump's inauguration day, an official from the China's People's Liberation Army wrote on the official website that the American military build-up in East Asia and the Asia Pacific, and its push to arm South Korea with the THAAD missile-defense system were provocative "hot spots getting closer to ignition" and that the chances of war had become "more real."{{Cite news|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-military-official-war-2017-1|title=Chinese military official warns that war with US under Trump is becoming a 'practical reality'|website=Business Insider|access-date=7 February 2017|archive-date=8 February 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170208133600/http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-military-official-war-2017-1|url-status=live}}{{Cite news|url=http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2065799/china-steps-preparedness-possible-military-conflict-us|title=China 'steps up preparedness for possible military conflict with US'|date=26 January 2017|access-date=31 January 2017|archive-date=27 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190227055308/https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2065799/china-steps-preparedness-possible-military-conflict-us|url-status=live}}

On taking office, the Trump administration stopped negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty with China which had begun in 2008.{{Rp|page=312}} According to Michael Froman, the lead negotiator during the preceding four years, the effort to reach an agreement was "more than 90 percent complete."{{Rp|page=312}}

On 23 January, speaking about China's claims to sovereignty over the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, White House spokesman Sean Spicer said, "It's a question of if those islands are in fact in international waters and not part of China proper, then yeah, we're going to make sure that we defend international territories from being taken over by one country."{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-southchinasea/u-s-says-will-prevent-china-taking-over-territory-in-international-waters-idUSKBN1572M4|title=China says will protect South China Sea sovereignty|date=24 January 2017|newspaper=Reuters|access-date=17 November 2017|archive-date=17 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171117175042/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-southchinasea/u-s-says-will-prevent-china-taking-over-territory-in-international-waters-idUSKBN1572M4|url-status=live}}

File:President Trump's Trip to Asia (37575409684).jpg

On 4 January, on a visit to Japan, US Defense Secretary James Mattis reaffirmed Washington's commitment under the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan to defending Japan, including the Senkaku Islands (the East China Sea) that are claimed by China.{{Cite news|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/03/asia/us-defense-secretary-mattis-japan-visit/|title=Mattis: US will defend Japanese islands claimed by China|first=Brad|last=Lendon|date=4 February 2017|work=CNN|access-date=7 February 2017|archive-date=13 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180813123854/https://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/03/asia/us-defense-secretary-mattis-japan-visit/|url-status=live}}

On 9 February, Trump spoke with China's leader Xi Jinping over the phone discussing a wide range of issues; Trump was said to have re-iterated the United States' commitment to the status quo 'one-China' policy.{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-38927891|title=Trump climbdown on 'One China' threats|work=BBC News|date=10 February 2017|access-date=22 June 2018|archive-date=28 May 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180528200157/http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-38927891|url-status=live}}

In a 3 July 2017 telephone conversation with Trump, Xi stated, "China-US relations have made great progress in recent days, but they have also been affected by some negative factors."{{cite news|last=Bodeen|first=Christopher|title=China's Xi warns Trump of 'negative factors' hurting US ties|language=en|publisher=Associated Press|date=3 July 2017|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/chinas-xi-points-negative-factors-affecting-us-ties-071957481--politics.html|access-date=5 July 2017|archive-date=19 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170719095004/https://www.yahoo.com/news/chinas-xi-points-negative-factors-affecting-us-ties-071957481--politics.html|url-status=dead}} By "negative factors", Geng Shuang, a Chinese government spokesmen, explained in a televised briefing: "Under the pretext of navigational freedom, the American side once again sent military vessels into the Chinese territorial waters of Xisha (Paracel) Islands. It has violated Chinese and international law, infringed upon Chinese sovereignty, and disrupted order, peace and security of the relevant waters and put in jeopardy facilities and personnel on the relevant Chinese islands. It is a serious political and military provocation. The Chinese side is strongly dissatisfied with and firmly opposed to the relevant actions by the US."

In 2017, the Trump administration terminated the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT) between China and the United States.{{Rp|pages=287–288}} The JCCT had met annually from 1983 to 2016 and had been a generally effective mechanism to address various trade issues between the two countries.{{Rp|pages=287–288}} The Trump administration also terminated the Strategic and Economic Dialogue after holding the June 2017 meeting under the name "Comprehensive Economic Dialogue."{{Rp|page=288}}

File:President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump at the G20 Summit (45233172795).jpg in November 2018]]

China enforced punitive tariffs on 128 categories of American goods on 1 April 2018 in retaliation for the Trump administration's national-security levies on steel and aluminum imports the previous month. The Chinese Government's response is measured, affecting $3 billion in annual trade or about 2% of US goods exports to China. By late September 2018, the Trump administration had placed tariffs (25% tax increase) on $250 billion worth of Chinese goods, in an attempt to offset the trade imbalance between the two major economic world powers.

In what put additional strain on US-China relations, Huawei's vice-chair and CFO Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada on 1 December 2018 at the behest of US authorities.{{Cite news|url=https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/tech/huawei-cfo-arrested-canada/index.html|title=Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou arrested in Canada|author=Julia Horowitz|website=CNN|date=5 December 2018|access-date=25 October 2019|archive-date=4 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200304064656/https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/tech/huawei-cfo-arrested-canada/index.html|url-status=live}} US Senator Ben Sasse accused China of undermining U.S. national security interests, often "using private sector entities" to by-pass US sanctions against the sale of telecom equipment to Iran.{{cite news|title=Huawei finance chief Meng Wanzhou arrested in Canada|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46462858|work=BBC News|date=6 November 2018|access-date=6 December 2018|archive-date=6 December 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181206170423/https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46462858|url-status=live}}

According to political analyst, Andrew Leung, "China is perceived as the antagonist and rival of the United States," and that China's economic growth is seen as a "threat to the world order underpinned by American dominance or American values."Al Jazeera Inside Story, 8 December 2018, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bga1nIstT5Q Why is China's biggest technology company being targeted?], Minutes 12:55; 14:10-ff. He claimed, moreover, that the arrest of the CFO of Huawei on 1 December 2018 corresponded with the suspicious death on that same day of a leading Chinese national quantum physicist and venture capitalist at Stanford University, Shoucheng Zhang, who was on a H-1B visa, giving rise to conspiracy theories. In August 2018, the US government signed an update to legislation for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., broadening governmental scrutiny to vetting VC-backed, and especially Chinese state-funded, investments in US tech startups.{{cite news|last=Ren|first=Shuli|date=9 December 2018|title=Beyond Huawei, Scientist's Death Hurts China's Technology Quest|language=en|work=Bloomberg|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/beyond-huawei-scientists-death-hurts-chinas-technologyquest/2018/12/09/a59bf62a-fc2a-11e8-a17e-162b712e8fc2_story.html|url-status=dead|access-date=8 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181210072316/https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/beyond-huawei-scientists-death-hurts-chinas-technologyquest/2018/12/09/a59bf62a-fc2a-11e8-a17e-162b712e8fc2_story.html|archive-date=10 December 2018}}

File:Hong Kong IMG 20190831 155344 (48659677441).jpg in 2019]]

File:Signing Ceremony Phase One Trade Deal Between the U.S. & China (49391434906).jpg Liu He sign the Phase One Trade Deal in January 2020]]

Both sides signed the US–China Phase One trade deal on 15 January.{{cite news|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-15/u-s-china-sign-phase-one-of-trade-deal-trump-calls-remarkable|title=U.S. and China Sign Phase One of Trade Deal|last1=Donnan|first1=Shawn|last2=Wingrove|first2=Josh|date=15 January 2020|newspaper=Bloomberg.com|last3=Mohsin|first3=Saleha|access-date=20 January 2020|archive-date=19 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200119030159/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-15/u-s-china-sign-phase-one-of-trade-deal-trump-calls-remarkable|url-status=live}} Unlike other trade agreements, the agreement did not rely on arbitration through an intergovernmental organization like the World Trade Organization, but rather through a bilateral mechanism.{{Cite news| last1=Davis| first1=Bob| title=U.S.-China Deal Could Upend the Way Nations Settle Disputes| url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-china-deal-could-upend-the-way-nations-settle-disputes-11579211598| date=16 January 2020| work=The Wall Street Journal| access-date=21 January 2020}}{{Cite news| last1=Lawder| first1=David| title=In U.S.-China Phase 1 trade deal, enforcement may end in 'We quit'| url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-enforcement/in-u-s-china-phase-1-trade-deal-enforcement-may-end-in-we-quit-idUSKBN1ZE2T1| date=15 January 2020| work=Reuters|via=reuters.com| access-date=21 January 2020}}

{{see also|Second Cold War}}

Michael D. Swaine warned in 2019, "The often positive and optimistic forces, interests, and beliefs that sustained bilateral ties for decades are giving way to undue pessimism, hostility, and a zero-sum mindset in almost every area of engagement."Michael D Swaine, [https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2019/01/a-relationship-under-extreme-duress-us-china-relations-at-a-crossroads?lang=en "A Relationship Under Extreme Duress: U.S.-China Relations at a Crossroads" Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Jan. 16, 2019)]

{{blockquote|The U.S.-China relationship is confronting its most daunting challenge in the forty years since the two countries established diplomatic ties. Current trends portend steadily worsening relations over the long term, with increasingly adverse consequences for all actors involved. Specifically, Beijing and Washington are transitioning from a sometimes contentious yet mutually beneficial relationship to an increasingly antagonistic, mutually destructive set of interactions. The often positive and optimistic forces, interests, and beliefs that sustained bilateral ties for decades are giving way to undue pessimism, hostility, and a zero-sum mindset in almost every area of engagement.Michael D Swaine, [https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2019/01/a-relationship-under-extreme-duress-us-china-relations-at-a-crossroads?lang=en "A Relationship Under Extreme Duress: U.S.-China Relations at a Crossroads" Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Jan. 16, 2019)] }}

According to two experts on US-China relations, Rosemary Foot and Amy King, the consensus of experts is that:

:The relationship began to deteriorate in the second decade of the 21st century, and that the Trump administration has accelerated the deterioration. Explanations...have ranged over a large number of factors, all of which have played some role. Some relate to changes in official personnel in both the United States and China, others to the shifts and relative power between the two countries after the 2008 financial crisis, and yet others to China's greater determination to reform global governance institutions and to play more of a global leadership role.{{Cite journal|last1=Foot|first1=Rosemary|last2=King|first2=Amy|date=1 June 2019|title=Assessing the deterioration in China–U.S. relations: U.S. governmental perspectives on the economic-security nexus|journal=China International Strategy Review|volume=1|issue=1|pages=39–50|doi=10.1007/s42533-019-00005-y|issn=2524-5635|doi-access=free}}

Foot and King emphasize China's aggressive efforts in developing cutting-edge technologies with significant military and commercial implications, while the United States sees the need to defend itself aggressively against technological theft.Foot and King, "Assessing the deterioration in China–US relations: US governmental perspectives on the economic-security nexus." (2019)

U.S. academics have made various policy prescriptions for the United States within the context of its deteriorating relationship with China.{{cite news|last1=Walt|first1=Stephen M|title=Yesterday's Cold War Shows How to Beat China Today|url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/07/29/yesterdays-cold-war-shows-how-to-beat-china-today/|agency=Foreign Policy|publisher=FP|date=29 July 2019|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=22 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200922181821/https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/07/29/yesterdays-cold-war-shows-how-to-beat-china-today/|url-status=live}}{{cite news|last1=Dobriansky|first1=Paula J.|title=An Allied Plan to Depend Less on China|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/an-allied-plan-to-depend-less-on-china-11588288513|agency=The Wall Street Journal|work=The Wall Street Journal|date=30 April 2020|quote=Washington and its partners in Asia should set up new supply chains, restructure trade relations, and start to create an international economic order that is less dependent on China. A multilateral "coalition of the willing" approach would better align trading ties with political and security relationships. It would also help India and nations in Southeast Asia develop more rapidly, becoming stronger U.S. partners.|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=3 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200803161319/https://www.wsj.com/articles/an-allied-plan-to-depend-less-on-china-11588288513|url-status=live}}{{cite news|last1=Friedberg|first1=Aaron L.|title=An Answer to Aggression|url=https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-08-11/ccp-answer-aggression|agency=Foreign Affairs|publisher=Foreign Affairs|date=September–October 2020|quote=The aims of this approach should be twofold: first, to deny Beijing its immediate objectives, imposing costs, slowing the growth of China's power and influence, and reducing the threat it can pose to democracies and to an open international system; and second, by demonstrating the futility of China's current strategy, to change the calculations of its ruling elite, forcing them to eventually rethink both their foreign and their domestic policies. This will take time, and given Xi's obvious predispositions and commitments, success may well depend on changes in the top leadership of the CCP.|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=10 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200910170234/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-08-11/ccp-answer-aggression|url-status=live}}

According to Lawrence J. Lau, a major cause of the deterioration is the growing battle between China and the United States for global economic and technological dominance. More generally, he argues, "It is also a reflection of the rise of populism, isolationism, nationalism and protectionism almost everywhere in the world, including in the US."Lawrence J. Lau, "The China–US Trade War and Future Economic Relations." China and the World (Lau Chor Tak Institute of Global Economics and Finance, 2019): 1–32. quote p. 3 [http://www.igef.cuhk.edu.hk/igef_media/working-paper/IGEF/igef%20working%20paper%20no.%2072%20english%20version.pdf online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200624111818/https://www.igef.cuhk.edu.hk/igef_media/working-paper/IGEF/igef%20working%20paper%20no.%2072%20english%20version.pdf|date=24 June 2020}} According to Ian Bremmer, the US and China are in a technology cold war{{cite news|last1=Swaminathan|first1=Aarthi|title=US and China heading towards a cold war: Ian Bremmer|url=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-and-china-heading-towards-a-cold-war-ian-bremmer-182045322.html|agency=Yahoo News|date=28 May 2020|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=17 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200717105629/https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-and-china-heading-towards-a-cold-war-ian-bremmer-182045322.html|url-status=live}} and Trump's technology war against the PRC has been his administration's biggest foreign policy win, saying, "on the issue of tech decoupling that it was America out front with most allies on board."{{cite magazine|title=Trump's Biggest Foreign Policy Win So Far|url=https://time.com/5868095/trumps-biggest-foreign-policy-win/|magazine=Time|date=20 July 2020|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=9 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200909213711/https://time.com/5868095/trumps-biggest-foreign-policy-win/|url-status=live}} According to Greg Autry, an academic at the University of Southern California, Trump's China policy was working, pointing to increased revenue intakes by the Treasury Department and offshoring by US manufacturing supply chains from China, and crediting the administration for being the first to fully recognize that globalization had not delivered for Americans and that China was an existential threat.{{cite news|title=Opinion: President Trump's China policy is working, but you'd never know that from media reports|url=https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-09-19/trump-china-tariffs-recession-peter-navarro-trade|agency=Los Angeles Times|work=Los Angeles Times|date=20 September 2019|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=26 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200926001645/https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-09-19/trump-china-tariffs-recession-peter-navarro-trade|url-status=live}}

Former Obama administration officials Samantha Power and Susan Rice have criticized China's actions on trade, over the Meng Wenzhou affair and in Hong Kong while simultaneously criticizing the Trump administration for inadequate pushback.{{cite news|last1=Galloway|first1=Anthony|date=24 November 2019|title='I fear something worse': Obama adviser on the danger of China and the need to stick by the US|work=Sydney Morning Herald|url=https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/i-fear-something-worse-obama-adviser-on-the-danger-of-china-and-the-need-to-stick-by-the-us-20191121-p53cpr.html|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=28 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200828194412/https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/i-fear-something-worse-obama-adviser-on-the-danger-of-china-and-the-need-to-stick-by-the-us-20191121-p53cpr.html|url-status=live}}{{cite news|date=3 November 2019|title=Susan Rice on Trump, impeachment and why Canada shouldn't back down to China|publisher=CBC News|url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/susan-rice-the-national-interview-trump-impeachment-canada-china-huawei-1.5346230|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=28 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200828141649/https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/susan-rice-the-national-interview-trump-impeachment-canada-china-huawei-1.5346230|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=Team Biden's Policies on China and Taiwan|url=https://thediplomat.com/2020/07/team-bidens-policies-on-china-and-taiwan/|agency=The Diplomat|date=16 July 2020|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=7 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200907165804/https://thediplomat.com/2020/07/team-bidens-policies-on-china-and-taiwan/|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=China's leadership is 'not scared of Donald Trump' on trade: Susan Rice|url=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/susan-rice-on-trump-and-china-125627961.html|agency=Yahoo Finance|date=18 October 2019|access-date=9 September 2020|archive-date=26 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210126180037/https://finance.yahoo.com/news/susan-rice-on-trump-and-china-125627961.html|url-status=live}}

In 2018, the US Department of Justice initiated a "China Initiative" to "combat economic espionage".{{Cite web|last=Demers|first=John|date=February 11, 2020|title=Report on the China Initiative, 2018-2019|url=https://china.usc.edu/us-department-justice-china-initiative-2018-2019|access-date=August 10, 2020|website=USC U.S.-China Institute|archive-date=30 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211130095918/https://china.usc.edu/us-department-justice-china-initiative-2018-2019|url-status=live}} DOJ ended the program on 23 February 2023.{{Cite web|last=Gerstein|first=Josh|title=DOJ shuts down China-focused anti-espionage program|url=https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/doj-shuts-down-china-focused-anti-espionage-program-00011065|access-date=2023-04-08|website=Politico|date=23 February 2022|language=en|archive-date=15 June 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220615063648/https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/doj-shuts-down-china-focused-anti-espionage-program-00011065|url-status=live}} No one was charged or convicted of spying in any China Initiative case.{{Cite news|date=2021-12-14|title=China Initiative Set Out to Catch Spies. It Didn't Find Many|language=en|work=Bloomberg.com|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-12-14/doj-china-initiative-to-catch-spies-prompts-fbi-misconduct-racism-claims|access-date=2023-04-08|archive-date=14 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211214134354/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-12-14/doj-china-initiative-to-catch-spies-prompts-fbi-misconduct-racism-claims|url-status=live}}

The Director of Policy Planning at the United States Department of State, Kiron Skinner drew international attention in April 2019 for stating at a foreign policy forum that the US competition with China would be especially bitter, because unlike the Cold War with the Soviet Union which is "a fight within the Western family", "it's the first time that we will have a great-power competitor that is not Caucasian".{{Cite news|website=Foreign Policy|url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/02/the-slip-that-revealed-the-real-trump-doctrine/|title=The Slip That Revealed the Real Trump Doctrine|date=2 May 2019|first=Paul|last=Musgrave|access-date=1 July 2021|archive-date=7 August 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190807120404/https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/02/the-slip-that-revealed-the-real-trump-doctrine/|url-status=live}}{{cite news|newspaper=Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/04/because-china-isnt-caucasian-us-is-planning-clash-civilizations-that-could-be-dangerous/|title=Because China isn't 'Caucasian,' the U.S. is planning for a 'clash of civilizations.' That could be dangerous.|date=4 May 2019|first=Steven|last=Ward|access-date=1 July 2021|archive-date=25 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210525092227/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/04/because-china-isnt-caucasian-us-is-planning-clash-civilizations-that-could-be-dangerous/|url-status=live}}

In 2019, prominent Americans, including some with ties to the administration, formed the Committee on the Present Danger: China (CPDC) to advocate for a more hawkish foreign policy against China.{{Cite news|last=Swanson|first=Ana|date=2019-07-20|title=A New Red Scare Is Reshaping Washington|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/20/us/politics/china-red-scare-washington.html|access-date=2019-07-21|newspaper=The New York Times|archive-date=20 July 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190720234508/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/20/us/politics/china-red-scare-washington.html|url-status=live}}{{cite news|last1=Rogin|first1=Josh|date=10 April 2019|title=China hawks call on America to fight a new Cold War|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/10/china-hawks-call-america-fight-new-cold-war/|access-date=12 July 2020|newspaper=The Washington Post|archive-date=17 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200617214429/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/10/china-hawks-call-america-fight-new-cold-war/|url-status=live}}{{cite news|last1=Wu|first1=Wendy|date=26 March 2019|title=Cold War is back: Bannon helps revive U.S. committee to target 'aggressive totalitarian foe' China|url=https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/26/steve-bannon-china-1238039|access-date=12 July 2020|newspaper=Politico|archive-date=12 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200712185050/https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/26/steve-bannon-china-1238039|url-status=live}}

On 29 January 2020, the Interior Department's fleet of more than 800 Chinese-made drones, including those by DJI, were grounded, citing security concerns.{{Cite news|title=Interior Department Grounds Chinese-Made Drones, Months After It Approved Them|url=https://www.npr.org/2020/01/29/800890201/interior-department-grounds-all-of-its-drones-citing-cybersecurity-other-concern|access-date=2020-11-17|newspaper=NPR|date=29 January 2020|language=en|last1=Chappell|first1=Bill|archive-date=28 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201028110830/https://www.npr.org/2020/01/29/800890201/interior-department-grounds-all-of-its-drones-citing-cybersecurity-other-concern|url-status=live}}{{Cite news|last1=Friedman|first1=Lisa|last2=McCabe|first2=David|date=2020-01-29|title=Interior Dept. Grounds Its Drones Over Chinese Spying Fears|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/29/technology/interior-chinese-drones.html|access-date=2020-11-17|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=29 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200129191125/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/29/technology/interior-chinese-drones.html|url-status=live}}

On 18 February 2020, the US government announced five Chinese state media firmsXinhua News Agency, China Global Television Network, distribution company of China Daily newspaper, and the distribution company of The People's Daily would be designated "foreign missions", requiring them to be legally registered with the US government as a foreign government entity.{{cite news|last=Naranjo|first=Jesse|title=U.S. to treat 5 Chinese media firms as 'foreign missions'|work=Politico|date=18 February 2020|url=https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/18/us-chinese-media-foreign-missions-115882|access-date=20 February 2020|archive-date=5 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200705195122/https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/18/us-chinese-media-foreign-missions-115882|url-status=live}} On the following day, China took action against three American journalists with The Wall Street Journal by revoking their press credentials over a coronavirus opinion column which their paper had run. According to China, the column was racist and libelous; the CEO of the company that published the WSJ defended the article, as did the State department.{{cite news|last=Hjelmgaard|first=Kim|title=China expels Wall Street Journal reporters over 'racist' headline on coronavirus op-ed|work=USA Today|date=19 February 2020|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-expels-wall-street-journal-095750363.html|access-date=20 February 2020|archive-date=20 February 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200220004033/https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-expels-wall-street-journal-095750363.html|url-status=live}} A March 2020 article by Reuters said that Washington slashed the number of journalists allowed to work at US offices of major Chinese media outlets to 100 from 160 due to Beijing's "long-standing intimidation and harassment of journalists". In response, China expelled about a dozen American correspondents with The New York Times, News Corp's Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, which prompted criticism from the State Department.{{cite news|title=China to restrict US journalists from three major newspapers|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51938035|agency=BBC|date=18 March 2020|access-date=11 August 2020|archive-date=24 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211124050623/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51938035|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=U.S. designates four major Chinese media outlets as foreign missions|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-media-restrictions/us-designates-four-major-chinese-media-outlets-as-foreign-missions-idUSKBN23T2Y8|work=Reuters|date=22 June 2020|access-date=11 August 2020|archive-date=17 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200817173749/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-media-restrictions/us-designates-four-major-chinese-media-outlets-as-foreign-missions-idUSKBN23T2Y8|url-status=live}} On 8 May, the US moved Chinese citizens at non-American news outlets from open-ended work visas to extendable 90-day work visas{{cite news|last1=Wang|first1=Vivian|last2=Wong|first2=Edward|title=U.S. Hits Back at China With New Visa Restrictions on Journalists|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/us/politics/china-journalists-us-visa-crackdown.html|access-date=10 May 2020|work=The New York Times|date=9 May 2020|archive-date=10 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200510002702/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/us/politics/china-journalists-us-visa-crackdown.html|url-status=live}} and in June the State Department designated a further four Chinese media outlets as foreign embassies.

File:Deputy Secretary Blinken Meets With Chinese Executive Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Yesui (16313876818).jpg's foreign policy adviser Tony Blinken described China as a "strategic competitor".{{cite news|title=Former Obama Advisor on Iran: "We're in a Much Worse Place"|url=https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/former-obama-advisor-on-iran-were-in-a-much-worse-place/|work=PBS|date=August 1, 2020|archive-date=November 9, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201109040120/https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/former-obama-advisor-on-iran-were-in-a-much-worse-place/|url-status=live}}]]

By May 2020 relations had deteriorated as both sides were accusing the other of guilt for the worldwide coronavirus pandemic. Washington has mobilized a campaign of investigations, prosecutions and export restrictions. Beijing, meanwhile, has stepped up military activities in the contested South China Sea, and launched denunciations of American Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and publicly speculating that the American military deliberately unleashed the virus in China. In the growing aspersion, on 15 May 2020, the US blocked shipments of semi-conductors to Huawei, while China, for its part, has threatened to place Apple, Boeing, and other US firms on "unreliable entities" lists,{{cite news|last1=Vallejo|first1=Justin|title=US cuts off semiconductor shipments to Huawei, China vows to retaliate|work=The Independent|date=15 May 2020|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-cuts-off-semiconductor-shipments-205138512.html|access-date=17 May 2020|archive-date=21 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200621102135/https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-cuts-off-semiconductor-shipments-205138512.html|url-status=live}}{{cite news|last1=Evans|first1=Zachary|title=China Threatens to Place Apple, Boeing, and Other U.S. Firms on 'Unreliable Entities' List|work=National Review|date=15 May 2020|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-threatens-place-apple-boeing-171146613.html|access-date=17 May 2020|archive-date=17 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200517001255/https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-threatens-place-apple-boeing-171146613.html|url-status=live}} and has blamed the US government of using state power under the excuse of national security, and of abusing export control measures to continuously oppress and contain specific enterprises of other countries.{{cite news|title=China warns US of 'all necessary measures' over Huawei rules|agency=Associated Press|date=17 May 2020|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-warns-us-necessary-measures-104613919.html|access-date=17 May 2020|archive-date=19 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200619181209/https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-warns-us-necessary-measures-104613919.html|url-status=live}} Orville Schell, the director of the Center on US-China Relations at the Asia Society, summed up the situation as follows: "The consequences of the breakdown in US-China relations is going to be very grave for the world and for the global economy because the ability of the US and China to work together was the keystone of the whole arch of globalization and global trade. With that pulled out, there's going to be a tremendous amount of disturbance", often compared to the Cold War. However Tony Blair noted there is "an interconnectedness, economically and in trade terms between the US and China that just wasn't there in the US-Soviet Cold War" that makes it an imperfect analogy. He further felt the China-U.S. relations would be the "determining geopolitical relationship of the 21st century."{{cite news|last1=Lamarque|first1=Kevin|last2=Haltiwanger|first2=John|title=The US and China are on the brink of a new Cold War that could devastate the global economy|publisher=Reuters via Business Insider|date=13 May 2020|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-china-brink-cold-war-163108094.html|access-date=14 May 2020|archive-date=19 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200619211233/https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-china-brink-cold-war-163108094.html|url-status=live}}

In June 2020, US Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft sent a letter to the U.N. secretary general explaining the US position on China's "excessive maritime claims".{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/13/world/asia/south-china-sea-pompeo.html|title=U.S. Says Most of China's Claims in South China Sea Are Illegal|first1=Edward|last1=Wong|first2=Michael|last2=Crowley|date=July 13, 2020|work=The New York Times|access-date=25 June 2021|archive-date=17 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210617002433/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/13/world/asia/south-china-sea-pompeo.html|url-status=live}}

On 17 June 2020, President Trump signed the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act,{{cite news|date=30 June 2020|title=Trump signed a law to punish China for its oppression of the Uighur Muslims. Uighurs say much more needs to be done|work=Business Insider|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/uighur-china-detention-centers-activists-urge-accountability-2020-2|access-date=5 July 2020|archive-date=14 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201214213003/https://www.businessinsider.com/uighur-china-detention-centers-activists-urge-accountability-2020-2|url-status=live}} which authorizes the imposition of U.S. sanctions against Chinese government officials responsible for detention camps holding more than 1 million members of the country's Uyghur Muslim minority.{{cite news|title=U.S. Congress urges Trump administration to get tougher on China's Xinjiang crackdown|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-xinjiang-congress/u-s-congress-urges-trump-administration-to-get-tougher-on-chinas-xinjiang-crackdown-idUSKBN24334S|work=Reuters|date=2 July 2020|access-date=5 July 2020|archive-date=3 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201103122838/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-xinjiang-congress/u-s-congress-urges-trump-administration-to-get-tougher-on-chinas-xinjiang-crackdown-idUSKBN24334S|url-status=live}} On 9 July 2020, the Trump administration imposed sanctions and visa restrictions against senior Chinese officials, including Chen Quanguo, a member of China's powerful Politburo.{{Cite news| url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53355697| title=US sanctions Chinese officials over Xinjiang 'violations'| work=www.bbc.com| date=9 July 2020| access-date=10 July 2020| archive-date=10 July 2020| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200710005130/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53355697| url-status=live}}

A research paper by the Begin–Sadat Center for Strategic Studies said that Chinese state-controlled media enthusiastically covered the protests and rioting attending the Murder of George Floyd, comparing the American protests to the protests in Hong Kong and used the rioting and violence in the United States as evidence that the democratic system was hypocritical and morally bankrupt.{{Cite web|last=Yellinek|first=Roie|date=14 July 2020|title=The Chinese Media's Take on US Unrest|url=https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/us-unrest-china-media/|access-date=21 July 2020|website=Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies|language=en-US|archive-date=15 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200715062155/https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/us-unrest-china-media/|url-status=live}} A report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute said that racial tensions in the United States was a key area of focus for "a campaign of cross-platform inauthentic activity, conducted by Chinese-speaking actors and broadly in alignment with the political goal of the People's Republic of China (PRC) to denigrate the standing of the US."{{cite web|title=Covid-19 Disinformation & Social Media Manipulation|url=https://www.aspi.org.au/report/covid-19-disinformation|website=ASPI|access-date=4 August 2020|archive-date=27 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200827182923/https://www.aspi.org.au/report/covid-19-disinformation|url-status=live}}

In July 2020, FBI Director Christopher Wray called China the "greatest long-term threat" to the United States. He said that "the FBI is now opening a new China-related counterintelligence case every 10 hours. Of the nearly 5,000 active counterintelligence cases currently under way across the country, almost half are related to China."{{cite news|title=FBI director: China is 'greatest threat' to US|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53329755|work=BBC News|date=8 July 2020|access-date=12 July 2020|archive-date=12 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210212013511/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53329755|url-status=live}}

In July 2020, the Trump administration ordered the closure of the Chinese consulate in Houston. In response, the Chinese government ordered the closure of the US consulate in Chengdu.

On 20 July 2020, the United States sanctioned 11 Chinese companies, restricting any trade deal with America for what the US government said was their involvement in human rights violations in Xinjiang, accusing them specifically of using Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities in forced labor.{{Cite news|title=US sanctions 11 Chinese companies over human rights abuses in Xinjiang|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/21/business/us-sanctions-china-companies-xinjiang-intl-hnk/index.html|access-date=21 July 2020|website=CNN International|date=21 July 2020|archive-date=21 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200721112056/https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/21/business/us-sanctions-china-companies-xinjiang-intl-hnk/index.html|url-status=live}}

On 23 July 2020, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the end of what he called "blind engagement" with the Chinese government. He also criticized CCP general secretary Xi Jinping as "a true believer in a bankrupt totalitarian ideology".{{Cite news|last=Re|first=Gregg|title=Pompeo announces end of 'blind engagement' with communist China: 'Distrust but verify'|url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pompeo-announces-end-blind-engagement-communist-china|date=23 July 2020|access-date=23 July 2020|website=Fox News|language=en|archive-date=23 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200723230318/https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pompeo-announces-end-blind-engagement-communist-china|url-status=live}}

In August 2020, Washington imposed sanctions on 11 Hong Kong and Chinese officials over what it said was their role in curtailing political freedoms in Hong Kong through the imposition{{cite news|title=China imposes sanctions on US officials in retaliation for Hong Kong measures|url=https://www.ft.com/content/c2d78da3-1fcf-4678-b65d-e1d02aa48ae6|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221210/https://www.ft.com/content/c2d78da3-1fcf-4678-b65d-e1d02aa48ae6|archive-date=10 December 2022|url-access=subscription|url-status=live|agency=FT|date=10 August 2020}} of the Hong Kong national security law; China retaliated by sanctioning 6 Republican lawmakers and 5 individuals at non-profit and rights groups.{{cite news|title=U.S. imposes sanctions on Hong Kong's Lam, other officials over crackdown|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-hong-kong-sanctions/us-imposes-sanctions-on-hong-kongs-lam-other-officials-over-crackdown-idUSKCN253215|work=Reuters|date=7 August 2020|access-date=11 August 2020|archive-date=10 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200810002326/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-hong-kong-sanctions/us-imposes-sanctions-on-hong-kongs-lam-other-officials-over-crackdown-idUSKCN253215|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=China imposes sanctions on Republican U.S. lawmakers over Hong Kong|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-hongkong-sanctions/china-imposes-sanctions-on-republican-u-s-lawmakers-over-hong-kong-idUSKCN2560RN|work=Reuters|date=10 August 2020|access-date=11 August 2020|archive-date=11 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200811092920/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-hongkong-sanctions/china-imposes-sanctions-on-republican-u-s-lawmakers-over-hong-kong-idUSKCN2560RN|url-status=live}}

In September 2020 the United States had under a 29 May presidential proclamation revoked more than 1,000 visas for PRC students and researchers visas who the US government said had ties to the Chinese military in order to prevent them from stealing and otherwise appropriating sensitive research.{{cite news|title=US revokes visas for 1,000 Chinese under Trump order|publisher=AFP|date=10 September 2020|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-revokes-visas-1-000-230810765.html|access-date=10 September 2020|archive-date=11 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210111031859/https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-revokes-visas-1-000-230810765.html|url-status=dead}}{{cite news|last=Pamuk|first=Humeyra |title=U.S. says revoked more than 1,000 visas of Chinese nationals over military links|publisher=Reuters (via Yahoo finance)|date=9 September 2020|url=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-says-revoked-more-1-204050377.html|access-date=10 September 2020}}

On 26 September 2020, the US Commerce Department put restrictions on Chinese chip maker, Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC), following which the suppliers were required to have an export license for exporting the chip. The restrictions were imposed after the US concluded that an "unacceptable risk" equipment supplied to SMIC could potentially be used for military purposes.{{Cite news|url=https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/26/21457350/us-tightens-trade-restrictions-china-chipmaker-smic|title=US tightens trade restrictions on Chinese chipmaker SMIC|access-date=26 September 2020|website=The Verge|date=26 September 2020|archive-date=10 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211110004329/https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/26/21457350/us-tightens-trade-restrictions-china-chipmaker-smic|url-status=live}}{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-smic/u-s-imposes-curbs-on-exports-to-chinas-top-chipmaker-smic-idUSKBN26H0LN|title=U.S. tightens exports to China's chipmaker SMIC, citing risk of military use|access-date=26 September 2020|website=Reuters|date=26 September 2020|archive-date=26 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200926160337/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-smic/u-s-imposes-curbs-on-exports-to-chinas-top-chipmaker-smic-idUSKBN26H0LN|url-status=live}}

On 6 October 2020, Germany's ambassador to the UN, on behalf of the group of 39 countries including Germany, the U.K. and the U.S., made a statement to denounce China for its treatment of ethnic minorities and for curtailing freedoms in Hong Kong.{{cite news|last1= Wainer|first1= David| title= Western Allies Rebuke China at UN Over Xinjiang, Hong Kong|url= https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-06/u-s-allies-step-up-china-rebuke-at-un-over-xinjiang-hong-kong|access-date=6 October 2020|newspaper=Bloomberg.com|date= 6 October 2020|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20201007050829/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-06/u-s-allies-step-up-china-rebuke-at-un-over-xinjiang-hong-kong| archive-date=7 October 2020}}

File:Uyghur boycott 20Sept2020.jpg province, New York, 2020. The US officially recognized the Chinese government's treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang as a genocide.]]

On 9 October 2020, the Department of Justice disallowed the use of its fund to purchase DJI drones, which the DoJ classified as a "Covered Foreign Entity".{{Cite web|last=McNabb|first=Miriam|date=2020-10-09|title=No Department of Justice Funds for DJI Drones: DOJ Makes the Ban Official, but Some Federal Agencies May Suffer|url=https://dronelife.com/2020/10/09/no-federal-funds-for-dji-drones-doj-makes-the-ban-official-but-some-federal-agencies-may-suffer/|access-date=2020-11-17|website=DRONELIFE|language=en-US|archive-date=17 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201117152204/https://dronelife.com/2020/10/09/no-federal-funds-for-dji-drones-doj-makes-the-ban-official-but-some-federal-agencies-may-suffer/|url-status=live}}

On October 21, 2020, the US approved arms sales of $1.8 billion to Taiwan.{{cite news|title=Taiwan welcomes latest U.S. arms sales|work=Focus Taiwan|url=https://focustaiwan.tw/politics/202010220008|access-date=26 October 2020|archive-date=26 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201026205117/https://focustaiwan.tw/politics/202010220008|url-status=live}} It involved three packages that included high technology weapons such as SLAM-ER missiles, HIMARS M142 Launchers and Recce Pods. On 26 October 2020, China announced its intentions to impose sanctions on US businesses and individuals, including Boeing, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.{{cite news|url=https://in.reuters.com/article/usa-china-taiwan/china-to-impose-sanctions-on-u-s-firms-over-taiwan-arms-sales-idINKBN27B0P0|title=China to impose sanctions on U.S. firms over Taiwan arms sales|access-date=26 October 2020|website=Reuters|date=26 October 2020|archive-date=26 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201026095700/https://in.reuters.com/article/usa-china-taiwan/china-to-impose-sanctions-on-u-s-firms-over-taiwan-arms-sales-idINKBN27B0P0|url-status=dead}} Taiwan welcomed the arms sales and disapproved of the sanctions.{{cite news|title=Taiwan 'deeply regrets' China's threat against U.S. arms suppliers|work=Focus Taiwan|url=https://focustaiwan.tw/politics/202010260019|access-date=26 October 2020|archive-date=30 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201030041124/https://focustaiwan.tw/politics/202010260019|url-status=live}} Taiwan also said it would continue buying arms from America.

In a December 2020 report, US intelligence officials claimed that China had supervised a bounty program that paid Afghan militants to kill US soldiers deployed in the country.{{cite news|date=31 December 2020|title=China offered Afghan militants bounties to attack US soldiers: reports|work=Deutsche Welle|url=https://www.dw.com/en/china-offered-afghan-militants-bounties-to-attack-us-soldiers-reports/a-56103735|access-date=31 January 2021|archive-date=26 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211026172900/https://www.dw.com/en/china-offered-afghan-militants-bounties-to-attack-us-soldiers-reports/a-56103735|url-status=live}}

On 5 December 2020, the US State Department ended five cultural exchange programs with China, which are - "the Policymakers Educational China Trip Program, the U.S.-China Friendship Program, the U.S.-China Leadership Exchange Program, the U.S.-China Transpacific Exchange Program and the Hong Kong Educational and Cultural Program." They described these programs as soft power propaganda tools of Chinese government.{{cite news|url= https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-china-exchange-program-idUKKBN28F05Y|title= U.S. ends exchange programs with China, calling them 'propaganda'|access-date= 5 December 2020|website= Reuters|date= 5 December 2020|last1= Satter|first1= Raphael|archive-date= 5 December 2020|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20201205053101/https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-china-exchange-program-idUKKBN28F05Y|url-status= live}}

In December 2020, an investigation by Axios was published that detailed the suspected activities of Christine Fang, a Chinese national who has been suspected by US officials of having conducted political espionage for the Chinese Ministry of State Security (MSS) while she was in the United States from 2011 to 2015.{{cite news|last1=Allen-Ebrahimian|first1=Bethany|last2=Dorfman|first2=Zach|title=Exclusive: Suspected Chinese spy targeted California politicians|url=https://www.axios.com/china-spy-california-politicians-9d2dfb99-f839-4e00-8bd8-59dec0daf589.html|work=Axios|date=December 8, 2020|access-date=22 December 2020|archive-date=10 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201210121643/https://www.axios.com/china-spy-california-politicians-9d2dfb99-f839-4e00-8bd8-59dec0daf589.html|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=Eric Swalwell Report Fits Bill of China Spy Pattern Identified By FBI|url=https://www.newsweek.com/eric-swalwell-report-fits-bill-china-spy-pattern-fbi-1554281|agency=Newsweek|date=December 11, 2020|access-date=22 December 2020|archive-date=22 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201222232436/https://www.newsweek.com/eric-swalwell-report-fits-bill-china-spy-pattern-fbi-1554281|url-status=live}} While Fang's suspected activities prior to the Axios investigation had already drawn scrutiny from federal law enforcement agencies, the subsequent reactions to its publication drew further scrutiny from politicians and the media.{{cite news|title=17 House GOP members send letter to Pelosi urging Swalwell's removal from Intel Committee|url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-gop-letter-to-pelosi-swalwells-intel-committee|work=Fox News|date=December 17, 2020|access-date=22 December 2020|archive-date=22 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201222023501/https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-gop-letter-to-pelosi-swalwells-intel-committee|url-status=live}}{{cite news|last1=Murray|first1=Paul|title=There are 'many ways' in which China 'gets what it wants'|url=https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6215959913001|agency=Sky News Australia|date=December 13, 2020|access-date=22 December 2020|archive-date=14 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201214023611/https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6215959913001|url-status=live}}{{cite news|date=December 18, 2020|title=EDITORIAL: Chinese infiltration: Taiwan can help|work=Taipei Times|url=https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2020/12/18/2003748913|access-date=22 December 2020|archive-date=12 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210112210729/https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2020/12/18/2003748913|url-status=live}}

{{See also|Foreign policy of the Joe Biden administration#China}}

Following his election, relations with the new Biden administration in 2021 included heightened tensions over trade, technology, and human rights, particularly regarding Hong Kong, and the treatment of minorities in China. In addition international tensions regarding control of the South China Sea remained high. Biden has largely continued the China policies of his predecessor, Donald Trump.{{Rp|page=148}} However, the Biden and Xi administrations agreed to collaborate on long-term projects regarding climate change, nuclear proliferation, and the global COVID-19 pandemic.Sha Hua and Andrew Jeang, "U.S. and China Discuss Enhancing Beijing's Climate Commitments

Climate envoy John Kerry says meetings with counterparts in Shanghai were productive" [https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-and-china-discuss-enhancing-beijings-climate-commitments-11618726162?page=1 Wall Street Journal, April, 19, 2021] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210422105848/https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-and-china-discuss-enhancing-beijings-climate-commitments-11618726162?page=1|date=22 April 2021}}

On 20 January 2021, China imposed sanctions against outgoing US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former secretary of health and human services Alex Azar, former under secretary of state Keith J. Krach, outgoing US ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft, and 24 other former Trump officials.{{Cite news|url = https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/24/world/asia/china-taiwan-strait-exercise-biden.html|title = China Sends Warplanes to Taiwan Strait in a Show of Force to Biden|newspaper = The New York Times|date = 24 January 2021|last1 = Ramzy|first1 = Austin|access-date = 7 June 2021|archive-date = 17 June 2021|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20210617223559/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/24/world/asia/china-taiwan-strait-exercise-biden.html|url-status = live}} Biden's National Security Council called the sanctions "unproductive and cynical".{{cite news|url= https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-sanctions-idUSKBN29Q09B|access-date= 21 January 2021|website= Reuters|title= Biden administration calls China sanctions on Trump officials 'unproductive and cynical'|date= 21 January 2021|last1= Martina|first1= Michael|archive-date= 9 October 2021|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20211009130703/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-sanctions-idUSKBN29Q09B|url-status= live}} In his nomination hearing, Blinken endorsed Pompeo's report that China is committing a genocide against Uyghurs, reaffirming Biden's campaign stance.{{Cite news|last=Bernstein|first=Brittany|date=20 January 2021|title=Incoming Secretary of State Backs Pompeo's Uyghur Genocide Designation|work=National Review|url=https://www.nationalreview.com/news/incoming-secretary-of-state-backs-pompeos-uyghur-genocide-designation/|access-date=31 January 2021|archive-date=30 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211030013954/https://www.nationalreview.com/news/incoming-secretary-of-state-backs-pompeos-uyghur-genocide-designation/|url-status=live}}

The new US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, called-out China on its treatment of the ethnic Uighurs.{{cite news|last=Brennan|first=Margaret|title=Biden administration facing pressure after China's treatment of Uighurs ruled genocide|language=en|work=CBS News|date=28 January 2021|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-administration-facing-pressure-chinas-005237837.html|access-date=28 January 2021|archive-date=28 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210128130353/https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-administration-facing-pressure-chinas-005237837.html|url-status=live}} President Biden, in his first foreign policy address, labeled China as "the most serious competitor" to the US.{{cite news|last=Churchill|first=Owen|title=In first foreign policy address, President Biden calls China the 'most serious competitor' to the US|language=en|publisher=South China Morning Post (via Yahoo! Finance)|date=5 February 2021|url=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/first-foreign-policy-address-president-093000266.html|access-date=7 February 2021|archive-date=6 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210206165418/http://finance.yahoo.com/news/first-foreign-policy-address-president-093000266.html|url-status=live}} During his first visit to the Pentagon on 9 February 2021, Biden urged the United States Department of Defense to review its national security policy concerning China.{{cite news|url=https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-biden-cabinet-lloyd-austin-coronavirus-pandemic-43210adc097451c97a400cfe6d35be15|title=Biden calls for China review during first Pentagon visit|first1=Robert|last1=Burns|first2=Lolita C.|last2=Baldor|first3=Aamer|last3=Madhani|publisher=Associated Press|date=10 February 2021|access-date=21 September 2021|archive-date=17 September 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210917174738/https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-biden-cabinet-lloyd-austin-coronavirus-pandemic-43210adc097451c97a400cfe6d35be15|url-status=live}}

On March 12, 2021, Huawei, ZTE, Hytera, Hikvision, and Dahua Technology were designated as national security threats by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/five-chinese-companies-pose-threat-us-national-security-fcc-2021-03-12/|title=Five Chinese companies pose threat to U.S. national security -FCC|newspaper=Reuters|date=12 March 2021|via=www.reuters.com|last1=Shepardson|first1=David}}{{cite news|title=U.S. FCC adds Russia's Kaspersky, China telecom firms to national security threat list|url=https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/us-fcc-adds-ao-kaspersky-lab-china-telecom-firms-national-security-threat-list-2022-03-25|work=Reuters|access-date=28 July 2022|archive-date=27 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220727070822/https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/us-fcc-adds-ao-kaspersky-lab-china-telecom-firms-national-security-threat-list-2022-03-25/|url-status=live}}

From March 18–19, 2021, bilateral talks in Alaska took place. Blinken and national security advisor Jake Sullivan met with CCP Politburo member Yang Jiechi and Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi. The Americans unleashed heated attacks on China's policies regarding human rights, cyberattacks, Taiwan, and its crackdown in Xinjiang and Hong Kong. The Chinese side countered by attacking the U.S's standing in the world and defending China's sovereign rights and model of development.{{Cite news|title=Bitter Alaska Meeting Complicates Already Shaky U.S.-China Ties|last=Mauldin|first=William|newspaper=The Wall Street Journal|date=19 March 2021|access-date=20 March 2021|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitter-alaska-meeting-complicates-already-shaky-u-s-china-ties-11616185669|archive-date=4 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211004005658/https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitter-alaska-meeting-complicates-already-shaky-u-s-china-ties-11616185669|url-status=live}}{{Cite news|date=2021-03-19|title=US and China trade angry words at high-level Alaska talks|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56452471|access-date=2021-03-20|archive-date=11 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211011120555/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56452471|url-status=live}} In the week ahead of the talks, the administration met with US allies in Asia and imposed sanctions on senior Chinese officials amidst Beijing's contemporaneous crackdown on Hong Kong.

On March 22, 2021, in conjunction with the European Union, United Kingdom and Canada, the United States imposed sanctions against Chinese officials in relation to the human rights violations in Xinjiang. The sanctions marked the first time the Biden administration took such coordinated action against Beijing.{{cite news|title=West sanctions China over Xinjiang abuses, Beijing hits back at EU|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/china/west-sanctions-china-over-xinjiang-abuses-beijing-hits-back-eu-2021-03-22|work=Reuters|access-date=28 July 2022|archive-date=28 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220728160345/https://www.reuters.com/world/china/west-sanctions-china-over-xinjiang-abuses-beijing-hits-back-eu-2021-03-22/|url-status=live}}

On April 8, 2021, the US Commerce Department added seven Chinese supercomputing entities to its Entity List on national security grounds. This was the first action taken by the Biden administration to restrict Chinese access to US technology.{{cite news|title=US blacklists seven Chinese supercomputer groups|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56685136|agency=BBC|access-date=28 July 2022|archive-date=28 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220728160359/https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56685136|url-status=live}}

On June 3, 2021, Biden signed Executive Order 14032 which saw the expansion of Executive Order 13959 signed by the Trump administration as preventing American investors from investing in Chinese companies identified by the US government as having ties to China's military or surveillance industry.{{Cite web|date=2021-06-03|title=Executive Order on Addressing the Threat from Securities Investments that Finance Certain Companies of the People's Republic of China|url=https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/06/03/executive-order-on-addressing-the-threat-from-securities-investments-that-finance-certain-companies-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china/|access-date=2021-06-05|website=The White House|language=en-US|archive-date=2021-06-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210607102928/https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/06/03/executive-order-on-addressing-the-threat-from-securities-investments-that-finance-certain-companies-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china/|url-status=live}}

On June 13, 2021, leaders from the G7 democracies sharply criticized China for a series of abuses. The G7 nations—the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Canada and Japan—had been hesitant about acting separately. Pressured by US President Joe Biden, they unanimously agreed on a sharp criticism, followed the next day by a similar strong unanimous attack by NATO members. The criticisms focused on the mistreatment of the Muslim Uyghur minority, the systematic destruction of democracy in Hong Kong, repeated military threats against Taiwan, unfair trade practices, and lack of transparency regarding the origins of COVID-19. China rejected the criticism as interference in what it considers to be its internal policy matters.{{Cite news|date=2021-06-13|title=US and Europe converge on historic rebuke of China|url=https://www.politico.eu/article/us-europe-rebuke-china-economic-practices-g7-human-rights-xinjiang-coronavirus/|access-date=2022-03-29|website=POLITICO|language=en-US|archive-date=7 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211007180917/https://www.politico.eu/article/us-europe-rebuke-china-economic-practices-g7-human-rights-xinjiang-coronavirus/|url-status=live}}James T. Areddy, "Back-to-Back Rebukes of China Mark a Turning Point: Criticism from G-7 and NATO members represent a shift toward collective action to confront Beijing" [https://www.wsj.com/articles/back-to-back-rebukes-of-china-mark-a-turning-point-11623710320 Wall Street Journal June 15, 2021] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210921161510/https://www.wsj.com/articles/back-to-back-rebukes-of-china-mark-a-turning-point-11623710320|date=21 September 2021}}Sabine Siebold, Steve Holland and Robin Emmott, "NATO adopts tough line on China at Biden's debut summit with alliance" [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nato-welcomes-biden-pivotal-post-trump-summit-2021-06-14/ Reuters June 14, 2021] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211115132233/https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nato-welcomes-biden-pivotal-post-trump-summit-2021-06-14/|date=15 November 2021}}Karla Adam et al., "G-7 takes stronger stand against China, at US urging" [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/queen-elizabeth-biden-g7/2021/06/13/078574de-c7cf-11eb-8708-64991f2acf28_story.html Washington Post June 13, 2021] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211003104122/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/queen-elizabeth-biden-g7/2021/06/13/078574de-c7cf-11eb-8708-64991f2acf28_story.html|date=3 October 2021}}.

In August 2021, China tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile, hypothesized as part of a Fractional Orbital Bombardment System, that circled the globe before speeding towards its target.{{cite news|title=Biden airs hypersonic missile fears as probable ambassador labels China 'untrustworthy'|url=https://www.dw.com/en/biden-airs-hypersonic-missile-fears-as-probable-ambassador-labels-china-untrustworthy/a-59568428|work=Deutsche Welle|date=20 October 2021|access-date=24 October 2021|archive-date=28 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211028041828/https://www.dw.com/en/biden-airs-hypersonic-missile-fears-as-probable-ambassador-labels-china-untrustworthy/a-59568428|url-status=live}} The Financial Times reported that "the test showed that China had made astounding progress on hypersonic weapons and was far more advanced than US officials realized."{{cite news|title=China successfully tested hypersonic weapon in August: report|url=https://www.space.com/china-hypersonic-weapon-test-august|work=Space.com|date=17 October 2021|access-date=24 October 2021|archive-date=24 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211024180017/https://www.space.com/china-hypersonic-weapon-test-august|url-status=live}}

On August 18, while discussing the larger ramifications of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan on cross-strait relations, Biden said that the two cases were incomparable as the United States had an Article Five commitment to defend Taiwan. The remarks, which were the first by Biden to touch directly on US policy towards Taiwan, were interpreted as signalling a shift in the country's position of strategic ambiguity. A Biden administration official later said there had been no change to US policy on Taiwan, and analysts said Biden appeared to have mischaracterized America's defense commitment to Taiwan.{{cite news|title=Did Biden's Taiwan Remarks Represent a US Policy Change?|url=https://thediplomat.com/2021/08/did-bidens-taiwan-remarks-represent-a-us-policy-change|agency=The Diplomat|access-date=28 July 2022|archive-date=28 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220728182636/https://thediplomat.com/2021/08/did-bidens-taiwan-remarks-represent-a-us-policy-change|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=U.S. position on Taiwan unchanged despite Biden comment - official|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-position-taiwan-unchanged-despite-biden-comment-official-2021-08-19|work=Reuters|access-date=28 July 2022|archive-date=29 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220729134227/https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-position-taiwan-unchanged-despite-biden-comment-official-2021-08-19/|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=Comments by Biden and others on U.S. policy of 'ambiguity' on Taiwan|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/comments-by-biden-others-us-policy-ambiguity-taiwan-2022-05-23|work=Reuters|access-date=28 July 2022|archive-date=28 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220728182638/https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/comments-by-biden-others-us-policy-ambiguity-taiwan-2022-05-23/|url-status=live}}

On 15 September 2021, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia formed AUKUS. Australia will be provided with conventionally-armed submarines powered by nuclear energy. See SSN-AUKUS. These submarines will be based on Britain's advanced nuclear submarine design and will incorporate the latest technology from the United States. The partnership involves the construction and utilization of these submarines by both the U.K. and Australia. The long-term strategic goal is to help neutralize Chinese military expansion to the South. China has denounced the agreement as "extremely irresponsible".See "Aukus: UK, US and Australia launch pact to counter China" (BBC, 16 September 2021) [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-58564837 online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211210231939/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-58564837|date=10 December 2021}}See also "AUKUS: The Trilateral Security Partnership Between Australia, U.K. and U.S." (U.S. Dept of Defense, 2023) [https://www.defense.gov/Spotlights/AUKUS/#:~:text=In%20September%202021%2C%20leaders%20of,building%20on%20longstanding%20and%20ongoing online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230512033323/https://www.defense.gov/Spotlights/AUKUS/#:~:text=In%20September%202021%2C%20leaders%20of,building%20on%20longstanding%20and%20ongoing|date=12 May 2023}}

In November 2021, the United States updated its assessment of China's nuclear weapon stockpile, showing that China will have 700 nuclear warheads by 2027, and that number will reach 1,000 by 2030.{{Cite news|title=China Could Have 1,000 Nuclear Warheads by 2030, Pentagon Says|newspaper=The New York Times|date=3 November 2021|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/03/us/politics/china-military-nuclear.html|last1=Cooper|first1=Helene|access-date=24 November 2021|archive-date=24 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211124092924/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/03/us/politics/china-military-nuclear.html|url-status=live}}

Biden held his first virtual meeting with Xi on 15 November 2021.{{Cite news|url = https://apnews.com/article/biden-xi-meeting-e6013378e03727b85a8f59f71fe61f4a|title = Biden, Xi try to tamp down tension in long virtual meeting|website = Associated Press|date = 15 November 2021|access-date = 16 November 2021|archive-date = 16 November 2021|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20211116010201/https://apnews.com/article/biden-xi-meeting-e6013378e03727b85a8f59f71fe61f4a|url-status = live}}

On 24 November 2021, the Biden administration invited Taiwan to attend the 'Summit for Democracy' - to be held in December 2021. China's Foreign Ministry reacted by saying it was "firmly opposed" to the invitation.{{Cite news|date=2021-11-24|title=U.S. invites Taiwan to its democracy summit; China angered|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-democracy-taiwan-idUSKBN2I9062|access-date=2021-11-24}}

On 2 December 2021, the US Securities and Exchange Commission finalized rules which would enable it to delist Chinese firms which have been determined to be non-compliant with the disclosure requirements as stipulated in the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act from US stock exchanges.{{cite news|title=U.S. SEC mandates Chinese companies detail ownership structure, audits|url=https://www.reuters.com/business/us-sec-mandates-foreign-companies-spell-out-ownership-structure-disclose-2021-12-02|work=Reuters|access-date=28 July 2022|archive-date=28 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220728185400/https://www.reuters.com/business/us-sec-mandates-foreign-companies-spell-out-ownership-structure-disclose-2021-12-02/|url-status=live}}

On 6 December 2021, the United States announced that its diplomats would boycott the Beijing Olympics.{{Cite news|last=Kanno-Youngs|first=Zolan|date=2021-12-06|title=U.S. Will Not Send Government Officials to Beijing Olympics|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/06/us/politics/olympics-boycott-us.html|access-date=2023-08-16|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=4 August 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230804194427/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/06/us/politics/olympics-boycott-us.html|url-status=live}}

On 23 December 2021, Biden signed the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act into law.{{Cite web|title=Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act {{!}} U.S. Customs and Border Protection|url=https://www.cbp.gov/trade/forced-labor/UFLPA|access-date=2023-02-07|website=www.cbp.gov|language=en|archive-date=7 August 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230807163603/https://www.cbp.gov/trade/forced-labor/UFLPA|url-status=live}}

On 27 December 2021, Biden signed his first defense bill into law. Certain provisions of the act called for the enhancements to the security of Taiwan, including inviting the Taiwanese navy to the 2022 Rim of the Pacific exercise in the face of "increasingly coercive and aggressive behavior" by China.{{Cite web|last=Smith|first=Adam|date=2021-12-02|title=Text - H.R.4350 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022|url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4350/text|access-date=2021-12-17|website=www.congress.gov|archive-date=30 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211230191919/https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4350/text|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|title=US Congress supports Taiwan in defense spending bill|url=https://en.rti.org.tw/news/view/id/2006672|access-date=2021-12-17|website=RTI Radio Taiwan International|language=zh-Hant-TW}}{{Cite news|last=Singh|first=Kanishka|date=2021-12-27|title=U.S. President Biden signs $770 billion defense bill|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-president-biden-signs-770-billion-defense-bill-2021-12-27/|access-date=2021-12-30}}

On 27 February 2022, the White House urged China to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine.{{cite news|last1=Chang|first1=Richard|last2=Chiacu|first2=Doina|title=White House calls on China to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/white-house-calls-china-condemn-russias-invasion-ukraine-2022-02-27/|access-date=27 February 2022|work=Reuters|agency=Reuters|date=27 February 2022}} China accused the United States of being responsible for the war in Ukraine.{{cite news|title=China hammers home its message of US blame for Ukraine war to domestic audience|url=https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3172228/china-hammers-home-its-message-us-blame-ukraine-war-domestic|work=South China Morning Post|date=29 March 2022|access-date=14 August 2022|archive-date=2 September 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240902164742/https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3172228/china-hammers-home-its-message-us-blame-ukraine-war-domestic|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=China says the US is the 'main instigator' of the war in Ukraine|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/8/10/china-accuses-us-as-main-instigator-of-the-war-in-ukraine|work=Al Jazeera|date=10 August 2022|access-date=14 August 2022|archive-date=14 August 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220814163322/https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/8/10/china-accuses-us-as-main-instigator-of-the-war-in-ukraine|url-status=live}}

File:Tsai Presents Pelosi with Order of Propitious Clouds by Chien 01.jpg with US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on 3 August 2022]]

On 18 March 2022, Joe Biden and Xi Jinping directly communicated with each other for the first time since Russia's invasion of Ukraine.{{cite news|date=18 March 2022|title=US, China discuss Russia as Biden and Xi hold call|work=Al Jazeera|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/18/biden-and-xi-to-talk-on-phone-as-us-presses-china-over-russia|access-date=20 March 2022|archive-date=19 March 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220319220508/https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/18/biden-and-xi-to-talk-on-phone-as-us-presses-china-over-russia|url-status=live}}

In May 2022, Chinese officials ordered government agencies and state-backed companies to remove personal computers produced by American corporations and replace them with equipment from domestic companies. Bloomberg said the decision was one of China's most aggressive moves to eliminate the usage of foreign technology from the most sensitive parts of its government and spur its campaign to substitute foreign technology with domestic ones.{{cite news|last1=Li|first1=Yanping|last2=Gao|first2=Yuan|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-06/china-orders-government-state-firms-to-dump-foreign-pcs|title=China Orders Government, State Firms to Dump Foreign PCs|work=Bloomberg News|date=2022-05-06|access-date=2022-05-06|archive-date=6 May 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220506210247/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-06/china-orders-government-state-firms-to-dump-foreign-pcs|url-status=live}}

In late May 2022, the State Department restored a line on its fact sheet on US-Taiwan relations which it removed earlier in the month and stated it did not support Taiwanese independence. However,{{cite news|title=U.S. puts back 'no support of Taiwan independence' statement on fact sheet|url=https://focustaiwan.tw/cross-strait/202206030004|agency=Focus Taiwan|publisher=CNA|access-date=14 November 2022|archive-date=14 November 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221114131005/https://focustaiwan.tw/cross-strait/202206030004|url-status=live}} another line which was also removed in the earlier fact sheet that acknowledged China's sovereignty claims over Taiwan was not restored while a line that stated the US would maintain its capacity to resist any efforts by China to undermine the security, sovereignty and prosperity of Taiwan in a manner that was consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act was added to the updated fact sheet.

On 11 June 2022, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin condemned China's "provocative, destabilising" military activity near Taiwan,{{cite news|title=US blasts China's 'destabilising' military activity near Taiwan|url=https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220611-us-blasts-china-s-destabilising-military-activity-near-taiwan|work=France 24|date=11 June 2022|access-date=14 August 2022|archive-date=13 August 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220813231437/https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220611-us-blasts-china-s-destabilising-military-activity-near-taiwan|url-status=live}} a day after China's Defence Minister Wei Fenghe warned Austin that "if anyone dares to split Taiwan from China, the Chinese army will definitely not hesitate to start a war no matter the cost."{{cite news|title='Smash to smithereens': China threatens all-out war over Taiwan|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/10/china-tells-us-it-will-not-hesitate-to-start-war-over-taiwan|work=Al-Jazeera|date=10 June 2022|access-date=14 August 2022|archive-date=13 August 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220813231524/https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/10/china-tells-us-it-will-not-hesitate-to-start-war-over-taiwan|url-status=live}}

[[Joe Biden met with Xi Jinping on 14 November 2022.|thumb]]

In July 2022, speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi announced that she would be leading a congressional delegation to the Indo-Pacific region.{{Cite web|date=2022-07-31|title=Pelosi to Lead Congressional Delegation to Indo-Pacific Region|url=https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/pelosi-to-lead-congressional-delegation-to-indo-pacific-region|access-date=2022-08-02|website=Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi|language=en|archive-date=2 August 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220802112457/https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/pelosi-to-lead-congressional-delegation-to-indo-pacific-region|url-status=live}} She has planned to visit Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea and Japan, as well as the island of Taiwan. China has responded to this by saying "it would constitute a gross interference in China's internal affairs", and continued military exercises within Chinese territories.{{Cite web|date=2022-08-02|title=Taiwan and China step up military rhetoric as expected Pelosi visit looms|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/02/taiwan-and-china-step-up-military-rhetoric-as-expected-pelosi-visit-looms|access-date=2022-08-02|website=The Guardian|language=en|archive-date=2 September 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240902163011/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/02/taiwan-and-china-step-up-military-rhetoric-as-expected-pelosi-visit-looms|url-status=live}} When Pelosi visited the island the following month, the act was strongly condemned by China.{{cite web| url=https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/02/politics/nancy-pelosi-visit-taipei-taiwan-trip/index.html| title=US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi lands in Taiwan amid threats of Chinese retaliation| date=2 August 2022| access-date=6 August 2022| archive-date=4 August 2022| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220804025031/https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/02/politics/nancy-pelosi-visit-taipei-taiwan-trip/index.html| url-status=live}} As a result, China severed ties in all cooperation activities with the United States in several areas, including military matters, global climate cooperation, and drug trafficking enforcement. Later the State Department summoned Chinese ambassadors to complain about Chinese aggression. China claimed that the Pelosi visit served no other purpose than to provoke China and to deteriorate Sino-American relations while the United States, pointing to past precedent, said that Pelosi had the right to visit Taiwan and attacked the Chinese response as disproportionate.[https://apnews.com/article/taiwan-china-asia-beijing-b252479810add6a225fa1e4a6d441983 "China cuts off vital US contacts over Pelosi Taiwan visit"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220805095713/https://apnews.com/article/taiwan-china-asia-beijing-b252479810add6a225fa1e4a6d441983|date=5 August 2022}} APnews.com. Retrieved 6 August 2022.[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/08/05/us-summons-china-ambassador/ "White House summons Chinese ambassador as crisis escalates"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220806203137/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/08/05/us-summons-china-ambassador/|date=6 August 2022}}. Washington Post. Retrieved 6 August 2022.{{cite news|title=White House decries China rhetoric over Pelosi Taiwan visit|url=https://apnews.com/article/china-asia-beijing-malaysia-pacific-15f739b266c2c90ba41c5917f26eb980|work=AP News|access-date=14 November 2022|archive-date=8 November 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231108061737/https://apnews.com/article/china-asia-beijing-malaysia-pacific-15f739b266c2c90ba41c5917f26eb980|url-status=live}} After Pelosi's departure, the PRC began military exercises encircling Taiwan.{{Cite news|work=Reuters|date=2 August 2022|title=China to launch 'targeted military operations' due to Pelosi visit|language=en|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/china-launch-targeted-military-operations-due-pelosi-visit-2022-08-02/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220802231811/https://www.reuters.com/world/china-launch-targeted-military-operations-due-pelosi-visit-2022-08-02/|archive-date=2 August 2022}}

On 7 October 2022, the US implemented new export controls targeting China's ability to access and develop advanced computing and semiconductor manufacturing items.{{Cite web|last=Bureau of Industry and Security|date=October 7, 2022|title=Commerce Implements New Export Controls on Advanced Computing and Semiconductor Manufacturing Items to the People's Republic of China (PRC)|url=https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/about-bis/newsroom/press-releases/3158-2022-10-07-bis-press-release-advanced-computing-and-semiconductor-manufacturing-controls-final/file|access-date=October 29, 2022|website=U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security|archive-date=10 March 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240310160001/https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/about-bis/newsroom/press-releases/3158-2022-10-07-bis-press-release-advanced-computing-and-semiconductor-manufacturing-controls-final/file|url-status=live}} The new export controls reflect the United States' ambition to counter the accelerating advancement of China's high-tech capabilities in these spaces to address foreign policy and national security concerns.{{Cite web|date=2022-10-24|title=New US Semiconductor Export Controls Signify Dramatic Shift in Tech Relations With China|url=https://www.justsecurity.org/83744/new-us-semiconductor-export-controls-signify-dramatic-shift-in-tech-relations-with-china/|access-date=2022-10-29|website=Just Security|language=en-US|archive-date=8 December 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221208071253/https://www.justsecurity.org/83744/new-us-semiconductor-export-controls-signify-dramatic-shift-in-tech-relations-with-china/|url-status=live}}

On 14 November 2022, Joe Biden and Xi Jinping met on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Bali for their first in-person encounter since Biden became president. The meeting lasted for more than 3 hours and they discussed a range of issues which included tensions over Taiwan and North Korea, and the war in Ukraine.{{cite news|title=Factbox: Top takeaways from the Biden-Xi meeting in Bali|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/top-takeaways-biden-xi-meeting-bali-2022-11-14|work=Reuters|access-date=17 November 2022|archive-date=16 November 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221116101502/https://www.reuters.com/world/top-takeaways-biden-xi-meeting-bali-2022-11-14/|url-status=live}}{{cite news|title=November 14, 2022 Biden, Xi meet during G20 summit|url=https://www.cnn.com/asia/live-news/biden-xi-meeting-g20-summit-bali-indonesia/index.html|agency=CNN|access-date=17 November 2022|archive-date=17 November 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221117174915/https://www.cnn.com/asia/live-news/biden-xi-meeting-g20-summit-bali-indonesia/index.html|url-status=live}}

File:Secretary Blinken Meets with Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Bali (52204013285).jpg (right) with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on 9 July 2022. Blinken dismissed China's claims to be neutral in the Russo-Ukrainian War and accused China of supporting Russia.{{cite news|title=US's Blinken raises China's 'alignment with Russia' on Ukraine|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/9/us-blinken-and-chinas-wang-yi-hold-talks-on-ukraine-trade|work=Al Jazeera|date=9 July 2022|access-date=26 February 2023|archive-date=20 March 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230320064107/https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/9/us-blinken-and-chinas-wang-yi-hold-talks-on-ukraine-trade|url-status=live}}]]

Some geoeconomics experts see an acceleration of the US–China rivalry as "inevitable" given the tensions manifested openly in the last months of 2022 and early 2023. In a series of interviews with BBC News and Asharq News, Nicolas Firzli, director, EU ASEAN Centre, argued that "Cold War 2 with China [was] part of the Biden Doctrine, and the only remaining point of convergence between Biden and a Republic dominated Congress [...] January 2023 is the moment when things crystalized irreversibly".Nicolas Firzli: [https://now.asharq.com/program/5/الرابط/1547258/هل-تحركات-واشنطن-كافية-للحد-من-سيطرة-الصين-على-قطاع-التكنولوجيا-المتقدمة "Interview of Nicolas Firzli & Joseph A. Bosco: China and Tech Supremacy"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230218114529/https://now.asharq.com/program/5/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A8%D8%B7/1547258/%D9%87%D9%84-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%86-%D9%83%D8%A7%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%AF-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%B9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%83%D9%86%D9%88%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%A7-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%A9|date=18 February 2023}}, Asharq News with Bloomberg, 12 January 2023

On 2 February 2023, a Chinese reconnaissance balloon was spotted flying over US airspace in the state of Montana, potentially to collect information related to nuclear silos in the area.{{Cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/02/us/politics/china-spy-balloon-pentagon.html|title=U.S. Detects Suspected China Spy Balloon Hovering over Northwest|website=The New York Times|access-date=2 February 2023|archive-date=4 February 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230204165824/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/02/us/politics/china-spy-balloon-pentagon.html|url-status=live}} Two days later, the United States shot it down over the Atlantic Ocean, citing national security concerns.{{Cite web|last=Capoot|first=Ashley|title=U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/04/us-military-prepares-to-take-down-suspected-chinese-surveillance-balloon.html|access-date=2023-02-04|website=CNBC|date=4 February 2023|language=en|archive-date=4 February 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230204200619/https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/04/us-military-prepares-to-take-down-suspected-chinese-surveillance-balloon.html|url-status=live}} The balloon incident followed previous Chinese government actions targeting the U.S., including the Chinese theft of the designs for the F-35 about fifteen years earlier and successful Chinese government-sponsored cyberattacks targeting the Office of Personnel Management security clearance files (2015), the healthcare company Anthem (2015), and the Marriott International system (2018).{{Cite news|last=Sanger|first=David E.|date=February 5, 2023|title=Balloon Incident Reveals More Than Spying as Competition With China Intensifies|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/05/us/politics/balloon-china-spying-united-states.html|url-access=limited|access-date=February 10, 2023|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=February 10, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230210105143/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/05/us/politics/balloon-china-spying-united-states.html|url-status=live}} In 2022, the US and its allies imposed stringent additional export controls on the sale of "foundational technologies" (including advanced semiconductor chips and related technology) to China, with the aim of inhibiting any Chinese military buildup. The Biden administration has also sought to maintain critical-sector supply chains independent from China.{{cite news|last1=Wong|first1=Edward|last2=Barnes|first2=Julian E.|date=February 9, 2023|title=Chinese Balloon Had Tools to Collect Electronic Communications, U.S. Says|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/09/us/politics/china-spy-balloon-program.html|url-access=limited|access-date=February 9, 2023|archive-date=February 9, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230209231207/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/09/us/politics/china-spy-balloon-program.html|url-status=live}} The Beijing government expressed strong dissatisfaction and protest against the US's use of force, calling it a violation of international practice. The US claimed the balloon was a violation of its sovereignty.{{Cite news|title= China blasts US for shooting down balloon|url= https://www.dawn.com/news/1735601/china-blasts-us-for-shooting-down-balloon|access-date= 6 February 2023|archive-date= 6 February 2023|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20230206164514/https://www.dawn.com/news/1735601/china-blasts-us-for-shooting-down-balloon|url-status= live}}

File:U-2 Pilot over Central Continental United States (7644960).jpg pilot takes a picture somewhere over the Central Continental U.S.; the Chinese balloon is in the background]]

On 11 February 2023, the US Commerce Department prohibited six Chinese companies connected to the aerospace programs of the Chinese army from acquiring US technology without authorization from the government. These six businesses include Nanjiang Aerospace Technology of Beijing; The 48th Research Institute of China Electronics Technology Group Corporation; Technology for Dongguan Lingkong Remote Sensing; Aviation Science and Technology Group of the Eagles Men; Tian-Hai-Xiang Aviation Technology in Guangzhou; together with the Shanxi Eagles Men Aviation Science and Technology Group.{{cite web|last1=Rokus|first1=Brian|title=US restricts 6 Chinese companies tied to airships and balloons|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/11/business/spy-balloon-us-restricts-chinese-companies-intl-hnk/index.html|website=cnn|date=11 February 2023|access-date=14 February 2023|archive-date=2 September 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240902164742/https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/11/business/spy-balloon-us-restricts-chinese-companies-intl-hnk/index.html|url-status=live}}

In April 2023, China sanctioned US Representative Michael McCaul in response to a legislative trip for Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen.{{cite web|title=China sanctions U.S. Congress member for Taiwan visit|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/14/china-sanctions-us-congress-member-for-taiwan-visit.html|website=cnbc.com|date=14 April 2023|publisher=CNBC|access-date=14 April 2023|archive-date=14 April 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230414174627/https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/14/china-sanctions-us-congress-member-for-taiwan-visit.html|url-status=live}}

In May 2023, an American citizen living in Hong Kong named John Shing-Wan Leung was sentenced to life in prison on charges of espionage. Leung was arrested in 2021 by China's counterintelligence agency.{{Cite news|date=2023-05-15|first=Gareth|last=Evans|title=China sentences 78-year-old US citizen to life in prison for spying|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-65595221|access-date=2023-05-15|website=BBC News|language=en-GB|archive-date=15 May 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230515100541/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-65595221|url-status=live}}

On 23 September 2024,The Biden administration is banning Chinese software from U.S. internet-connected vehicles, citing national security risks. This move builds on previous actions against Chinese tech, deepening the digital divide between the two nations.{{cite web|title=US for ban on Chinese-developed software in Internet-connected cars in country|date= 24 September 2024|url=https://www.telegraphindia.com/world/us-for-ban-on-chinese-developed-software-in-internet-connected-cars-in-country/cid/2050087|language=en|work=The Telegraph Online| access-date=25 September 2024}}

In mid-2023, both countries started to increase meetings between high-level officials in the hope of stabilizing the relationship; on 11 May, US national security adviser Jake Sullivan met with Wang Yi, director of the Office of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission, with the topics including Taiwan and Russia's invasion of Ukraine.{{Cite news|last1=Hutzler|first1=Charles|last2=Youssef|first2=Nancy A.|date=2023-05-11|title=U.S., China Senior Officials Meet in Tentative Effort to Restart Ties|language=en-US|work=The Wall Street Journal|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-china-senior-officials-meet-in-tentative-effort-to-restart-ties-54f49ba4|access-date=2023-06-08|issn=0099-9660|archive-date=20 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230620190042/https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-china-senior-officials-meet-in-tentative-effort-to-restart-ties-54f49ba4|url-status=live}} On 21 May, Biden commented during the G7 summit in Hiroshima that he expected a thaw in relations with China soon, commenting that the two countries were moving towards more dialogue but "this silly balloon that was carrying two freight cars worth of spy equipment was flying over the United States and it got shot down and everything changed in terms of talking to one another".{{Cite news|last1=Thomas|first1=Ken|last2=Linskey|first2=Annie|date=2023-05-21|title=Biden Sees Potential Thaw With China After Tough G-7 Statement|language=en-US|work=The Wall Street Journal|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-sees-potential-thaw-with-china-after-tough-g-7-statement-5c200aa9|access-date=2023-06-08|issn=0099-9660|archive-date=8 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230608232934/https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-sees-potential-thaw-with-china-after-tough-g-7-statement-5c200aa9|url-status=live}} On 26 May, Chinese minister of commerce Wang Wentao met with US secretary of commerce Gina Raimondo, where Raimondo raised concerns about treatment of US companies by China.{{Cite news|last1=Politi|first1=James|last2=Leahy|first2=Joe|date=2023-05-26|title=US and China address trade tensions in rare high-level Washington meeting|work=Financial Times|url=https://www.ft.com/content/fd43bb75-cc29-4ba1-9cab-9c0f5dfdb6bb|access-date=2023-06-08|archive-date=8 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230608183547/https://www.ft.com/content/fd43bb75-cc29-4ba1-9cab-9c0f5dfdb6bb|url-status=live}} US officials also announced in June that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director William J. Burns travelled to China in May.{{Cite news|last1=Martina|first1=Michael|last2=Hunnicutt|first2=Trevor|date=2023-06-02|title=CIA chief Burns visited China in May|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/cia-head-visited-china-may-met-counterparts-us-official-2023-06-02/|access-date=2023-06-08|archive-date=9 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230609204122/https://www.reuters.com/world/cia-head-visited-china-may-met-counterparts-us-official-2023-06-02/|url-status=live}} However, a meeting in the Shangri-La Dialogue between Chinese minister of national defense Li Shangfu and US secretary of defense Lloyd Austin failed to take place, after China rebuffed US requests to meet.{{Cite news|last1=Lin|first1=Chen|last2=Kapoor|first2=Kanupriya|date=2023-06-04|title=China says clash with US would be 'unbearable disaster'|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-seeks-dialogue-over-confrontation-defence-minister-tells-security-meet-2023-06-04/|access-date=2023-06-08|archive-date=7 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230607230613/https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-seeks-dialogue-over-confrontation-defence-minister-tells-security-meet-2023-06-04/|url-status=live}} In late June 2023, Blinken traveled to China and met with Xi; subsequent public statements by both countries were largely positive, with Xi and Blinken emphasizing that both sides have a responsibility to manage relations.{{Cite web|last1=Sim|first1=Dewey|last2=Wang|first2=Orange|date=2023-06-19|title=Xi and Blinken Cap China Trip With Vow to Steady Ties to Ward off Conflict|url=https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3224560/antony-blinken-and-wang-yi-meet-beijing-us-and-china-push-mend-strained-relationship|access-date=2023-06-21|website=South China Morning Post|language=en|archive-date=21 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230621042425/https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3224560/antony-blinken-and-wang-yi-meet-beijing-us-and-china-push-mend-strained-relationship|url-status=live}} However, relations became more contentious after Biden called Xi a "dictator".{{Cite news |last1=Hawkins |first1=Amy |last2= |first2= |date=2023-06-23 |title=China reportedly rebukes US ambassador after Biden called Xi a 'dictator' |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/23/china-reportedly-rebukes-us-ambassador-after-biden-called-xi-a-dictator |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240902163015/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/23/china-reportedly-rebukes-us-ambassador-after-biden-called-xi-a-dictator |archive-date=2 September 2024 |access-date=2023-06-25 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}

File:Yellen-He meeting 2023.jpg meeting with Vice Premier He Lifeng during Yellen's trip to Beijing, 8 July 2023]]

The trips further continued as between 6–9 July, United States secretary of treasury Janet Yellen visited China, her first trip to the country during her tenure as well as the first trip to the country by a US Treasury secretary in four years. During the visit, she met with various Chinese officials, including former vice premier Liu He, governor of the People's Bank of China (PBC) Yi Gang,{{Cite news|last1=Cash|first1=Joe|date=2023-07-07|title=Yellen holds talks with China central bank governor, ex-economy tsar|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/yellen-holds-talks-with-chinas-central-bank-governor-former-economy-tsar-2023-07-07/|access-date=2023-07-09|archive-date=15 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230715133750/https://www.reuters.com/world/yellen-holds-talks-with-chinas-central-bank-governor-former-economy-tsar-2023-07-07/|url-status=live}} minister of finance Liu Kun,{{Cite news|last1=Rappeport|first1=Alan|last2=Bradsher|first2=Keith|date=2023-07-09|title=China and the U.S., Still Adversaries, Are Talking. That's a Start.|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/09/business/janet-yellen-china-us.html|access-date=2023-07-09|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=1 September 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230901060744/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/09/business/janet-yellen-china-us.html|url-status=live}} CCP secretary of PBC Pan Gongsheng, vice premier He Lifeng, and premier Li Qiang.{{Cite news|last=Dendrinou|first=Viktoria|date=2023-07-09|title=Yellen Says US-China Ties on 'Surer Footing' After Critical Trip|language=en|work=Bloomberg News|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-09/yellen-says-us-china-ties-on-surer-footing-after-critical-trip|access-date=2023-07-09|archive-date=10 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230710021928/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-09/yellen-says-us-china-ties-on-surer-footing-after-critical-trip|url-status=live}} During her visit to, Yellen criticized China's treatment of American companies with foreign connections,{{Cite news|last1=Rappeport|first1=Alan|last2=Bradsher|first2=Keith|date=2023-07-07|title=Yellen, in Beijing, Criticizes China's Treatment of U.S. Companies|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/07/business/yellen-china-companies-meetings.html|access-date=2023-07-08|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=9 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230709054911/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/07/business/yellen-china-companies-meetings.html|url-status=live}} stating to Li Qiang: "We seek healthy economic competition that is not winner-take-all but that, with a fair set of rules, can benefit both countries over time."{{Cite news|last1=Shalal|first1=Andrea|last2=Cash|first2=Joe|last3=Cash|first3=Joe|date=2023-07-07|title=Yellen criticizes China's 'punitive' actions against US companies, urges market reforms|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/yellen-urges-china-adopt-market-reforms-insists-us-not-decoupling-2023-07-07/|access-date=2023-07-08|archive-date=9 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230709065633/https://www.reuters.com/world/yellen-urges-china-adopt-market-reforms-insists-us-not-decoupling-2023-07-07/|url-status=live}} She also said that the US national security restrictions on investment in China were intended to be narrowly focused and not have broad effects on the Chinese economy.

File:Qin-Blinken meeting (2023) 02.jpg in Beijing, 18 June 2023]]

On July 13, 2023, Secretary of State Antony Blinken met the Director of the Office of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs Wang Yi in Jakarta at the ASEAN Post-Ministerial Conference at the request of Blinken to discuss the removal of obstacles that complicate US-China relations, such as the Taiwan question and sanctions the U.S. is imposing against China's high-technology sector, as well as to promote the pragmatic approach with regard to regional cooperation. Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of China Qin Gang had just been replaced by his predecessor Wang Yi due to an extramarital affair of Gang in July of the same year. This meeting also paved the way for a further encounter of China's top diplomat Wang Yi before year's end when he will be invited to meet Blinken in Washington DC. Later on the sidelines of the U.N General Assembly (UNGA) in NY on September 26, Vice-president Han Zheng met with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to further nurture the strained bilateral ties of both superpowers. The absence of Xi-Jinping at the 2023 G20 New Delhi summit in India on September 9 and 10 was regretful, according to a statement by U.S. President Joe Biden, however, recent news reports indicate that both CCP General Secretary Xi as well as CCP Foreign Affairs Commission Office Director Wang Yi will meet Biden and Blinken before year's end to hopefully ease the strained relations between the two nations.[https://www.reuters.com/world/us-expects-blinken-will-host-chinas-top-diplomat-wang-yi-before-year-end-2023-09-11/ "US expects Blinken will host China's top diplomat Wang Yi before year-end"] Reuters (September 12, 2023). Accessed October 1st 2023.

Yellen's visit was followed by a visit by United States secretary of commerce Gina Raimondo between 27 and 30 August, where she met minister of culture and tourism Hu Heping, minister of commerce Wang Wentao, vice premier He Lifeng, and premier Li Qiang.{{Cite news|last1=Wong|first1=Kandy|last2=Jennings|first2=Ralph|last3=Nulimaimaiti|first3=Mia|date=29 August 2023|title=As Gina Raimondo wraps up Beijing leg of China trip with high-level meetings, will it be a litmus test for relations?|work=South China Morning Post|url=https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3232692/gina-raimondos-trip-shifts-tone-and-cools-tensions-it-litmus-test-us-china-relations-talks-resume?module=inline&pgtype=article|access-date=3 September 2023}} Raimondo also visited Shanghai, where she met with Shanghai Communist Party secretary Chen Jining, and visited Shanghai Disneyland.{{Cite news|last=Shepardson|first=David|date=30 August 2023|title=US Commerce chief leaves China on upbeat note after 'uninvestible' remark|language=en-US|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/markets/china-response-uss-raimondo-says-it-is-easing-market-access-foreign-firms-2023-08-30/|access-date=2023-09-03}} During the meeting, the two sides announced a working group on commercial issues and an export control enforcement “information exchange” dialogue.{{Cite news|last=Bade|first=Gavin|date=31 August 2023|title=Raimondo's 'bold move' in China|work=Politico|url=https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/31/raimondo-china-congressional-hawks-00113601|access-date=3 September 2023}} The working group, upon its launch on September 22, 2023, was divided into two segments: one economic subgroup and one financial subgroup.{{cite news|last1=Hussein|first1=Fatima|title=United States and China launch economic and financial working groups with aim of easing tensions|url=https://apnews.com/article/us-china-working-groups-yellen-tensions-c21a6d14467893123ef70eb8a0443366|access-date=26 September 2023|publisher=AP News|date=22 September 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230922120621/https://apnews.com/article/us-china-working-groups-yellen-tensions-c21a6d14467893123ef70eb8a0443366|archive-date=22 September 2023|language=en}}

File:Sullivan-Wang meeting (2023).jpg with CCP Foreign Affairs Commission Office director Wang Yi, 28 October 2023]]

On November 2, 2023, a report from the Wall Street Journal was released saying that the U.S. and China would hold nuclear arms talks, a rarity, ahead of Xi Jinping's visit to the United States.{{cite web|url=https://time.com/6330731/us-china-nuclear-arms-talks/|work=Bloomberg News|publisher=Time|date=November 2, 2023|title=U.S. and China to Hold Rare Nuclear Arms Talks Before Biden-Xi Meeting|access-date=November 2, 2023}}

At the beginning of November 2023, insiders cautiously expressed hope for a climate agreement between China and United States ahead of the 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference, similar to the agreement of 2014 which paved the way for the Paris Agreement. One contentious topic is a plan for reduction of methane emissions in China. According to China's climate envoy Xie Zhenhua "progress on a plan reflected the state of US-China relations." Another is a reduction in coal use in China. China says it expands coal use for improving energy security, even though many think there are better ways to improve it.{{cite news|last1=Hawkins|first1=Amy|title=China releases methane plan as hopes rise for new climate agreement with US|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/08/china-methane-plan-climate-agreement-us|access-date=8 November 2023|agency=The Guardian|date=8 November 2023}} Talks between Janet Yellen and He Lifeng yielded a decision to enhance cooperation between China and the United States in several domains, including climate, debt relief. Much is expected from the meeting between Joe Biden and Xi Jinping. According to Kate Logan from the Asia Society Policy Institute, cooperation between the 2 countries, can "set the stage for a successful outcome at the COP28".{{cite web|title=US, China agree to cooperate on climate change, global debt relief|url=https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-brief/us-china-agree-to-cooperate-on-climate-change-global-debt-relief/|website=Carbon Brief|access-date=14 November 2023}}

On November 15, 2023, President Joe Biden met with Xi Jinping at the 2023 APEC Summit in San Francisco.{{Cite news|last1=Hunnicutt|first1=Trevor|last2=Mason|first2=Jeff|last3=Holland|first3=Steve|last4=Mason|first4=Jeff|date=2023-11-16|title=Biden, Xi's 'blunt' talks yield deals on military, fentanyl|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-xi-meet-us-china-military-economic-tensions-grind-2023-11-15/|access-date=2023-11-16}} This was speculated to be their last meeting of 2023 before Biden's 2024 reelection campaign.{{Cite web|last=Cheng|first=Evelyn|date=2023-11-15|title=Earth is 'big enough' for U.S. and China to succeed, Xi says as he meets Biden|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/15/xi-biden-at-apec-summit-china-us-leaders-meet-in-san-francisco.html|access-date=2023-11-17|website=CNBC|language=en}}

The US and China resumed semi-official nuclear arms talks in March 2024, with China reassuring the US it wouldn't use nuclear weapons over Taiwan and reaffirming its no-first-use policy. Despite broader tensions, both sides plan to continue discussions in 2025.{{Cite news|last1=Torode|first1=Greg|last2=Doyle|first2= Gerry|last3=Chen|first3=Laurie|date=21 June 2024|title=U.S. and China hold first informal nuclear talks in five years|newspaper=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us-china-hold-first-informal-nuclear-talks-5-years-eyeing-taiwan-2024-06-21/|access-date=23 June 2024}}

In October 2024 American drone maker Skydio was sanctioned by China after its products were approved for use by fire departments in Taiwan. The Chinese government forbade components suppliers and other businesses in China from doing business with Skydio.{{cite web |last1=Irwin |first1=Kate |title=China Sanctions US Drone Maker Skydio Over Taiwan Deal |url=https://www.pcmag.com/news/china-sanctions-us-drone-maker-skydio-over-taiwan-deal |website=pcmag.com |date=31 October 2024 |publisher=PC Magazine |access-date=31 October 2024}}

On 16 November 2024, Xi Jinping and Joe Biden discussed stabilizing U.S.-China relations at APEC Summit in Lima, as Trump's return raises concerns over potential trade and Taiwan tensions. Beijing seeks dialogue but braces for challenges.{{Cite news|last=Frances|first=Mao|date=17 November 2024|title=Xi says he will work with Trump in last meeting with Biden|newspaper=BBC|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2l4dn802lo |access-date=17 November 2024}}

On 1 December 2024, China condemned a U.S. arms sale to Taiwan, valued at $385 million, which included F-16 jet parts and radar support. The sale was approved by the U.S. just before Lai Ching-te began a Pacific tour with stops in Hawaii and Guam. China criticized the sale for encouraging Taiwan's independence and damaging U.S.-China relations, and objected to Lai's U.S. transit, calling him a "separatist." Despite the lack of formal diplomatic ties, the U.S. is required by law to assist Taiwan in defending itself, which continues to provoke Beijing. Taiwan rejects China's claims of sovereignty.{{cite news|title=China blasts US arms sale to Taiwan, President Lai's U.S. transit |date=1 December 2024 |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-taiwan-us-arms-sales-president-lai-ching-te-hawaii-rcna182323 |website=NBC News |access-date=1 December 2024}}

After Washington announced more military aid and sales to Taiwan, China called it "playing with fire" and said such actions by the United States contradict the solemn commitments of its leaders not to support Taiwan independence.{{cite news |title=China says US 'playing with fire' by giving Taiwan more military aid |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/12/22/china-says-us-playing-with-fire-by-giving-taiwan-more-military-aid |agency=Al-Jazeera |date=22 Dec 2024}}

Following his second election victory as President of the United States in November 2024, Donald Trump nominated Florida Senator Marco Rubio as Secretary of State and Representative Michael Waltz as National Security Advisor in his second administration. According to Neil Thomas, a fellow in Chinese politics at the Asia Society Policy Institute's Center for China Analysis, the selection of Rubio and Waltz—both known as hardliners on China—signals that Trump's foreign policy will prioritize China above all else.{{cite web|url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rubio-waltz-picks-puts-china-back-center-us/story?id=115787057|title=Rubio and Waltz picks put China back at the center of US foreign policy|first=Selina|last=Wang|newspaper=ABC News|date=2024-11-13|access-date=2024-11-14}} Just before Trump's second inauguration in January 2025, Vice President JD Vance and ally Elon Musk each held separate meetings with China's vice president Han Zheng, who was in Washington attending the event as China's president Xi Jinping's special representative.{{Cite news |last=Wang |first=Orange |date=January 20, 2025 |url=https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3295419/china-vice-president-han-meets-vance-musk-ahead-trump-inauguration |title=Han and Vance strike positive tone for US-China ties ahead of Trump inauguration |newspaper=South China Morning Post |access-date=January 20, 2025 |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250120045309/https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3295419/china-vice-president-han-meets-vance-musk-ahead-trump-inauguration |archive-date=January 20, 2025 }} Han's presence at the capitol was seen by commentators as representative of Xi's interest in strengthening the two countries' relationship under Trump's tenure.{{Cite news |last=McCarthy |first=Simone |date=January 20, 2025 |title=Who is Han Zheng, the senior Chinese official attending Trump's inauguration? |url=https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/19/china/han-zheng-trump-inauguration-intl-hnk/index.html |agency=CNN |access-date=January 20, 2025 }}{{cite news |last=Bodeen |first=Christopher |date=January 20, 2025 |url=https://apnews.com/article/han-zheng-trump-inauguration-china-vice-president-5bb18d5049683d6624a9e1d4ee028104 |title=Vice President Han Zheng, China's representative at Trump's inauguration, is a trusted adviser to Xi |work=AP News |access-date=January 20, 2025 }}

On 23 March 2025, Chinese Premier Li Qiang met with U.S. Senator Steve Daines, a Trump ally, in Beijing. Li emphasized the need for dialogue over confrontation, while Daines carried Trump’s "America First" agenda, particularly on trade and fentanyl issues. The U.S. imposed 20% tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting Beijing to retaliate with 15% duties on American farm goods. China maintained that economic cooperation was vital and opposed U.S. pressure over fentanyl controls.{{cite news|last1=Krolicki |first1=Kevin |last2=Li |first2=Qiaoyi |title= China denounces Trump tariff: 'Fentanyl is America's problem'|date=2 January 2025 | work=Reuter |url= https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-denounces-trump-tariff-fentanyl-is-americas-problem-2025-02-02/|access-date= 2 February 2025}}

Under the directive published by the U.S. State Department in 2025, the Chinese leader should be referred to as “General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party”, rather than “President of China” reflecting the supremacy of the party over the state.{{cite news |title=Secretary of State Marco Rubio with Hugh Hewitt Interview|url=https://www.state.gov/secretary-of-state-marco-rubio-with-hugh-hewitt/ |work=United States Department of State |author=Marco Rubio & Hugh Hewitt |date=2025-03-19| quote=Yesterday, The Wall Street Journal reported that General Secretary Xi is upset about the deal you made in Panama about the canal...}}{{cite news |title=VOA Exclusive: State Department guidance distinguishes CCP from Chinese people |url=https://www.voanews.com/a/voa-exclusive-state-department-guidance-distinguishes-ccp-from-chinese-people/7996193.html |work=Voice of America |date=2025-03-03}}{{Better source needed|reason=The current source is insufficiently reliable (WP:NOTRS).|date=March 2025}}

In 2025, Beijing denounced G7 statements accusing it of destabilizing maritime security, highlighting ongoing diplomatic friction.

In April 2025, China imposed a 34% tariff on all U.S. imports, matching the rate introduced by President Donald Trump earlier that week. The move came after two rounds of U.S. tariffs; each 10%; were implemented in February and March, citing China's alleged role in the fentanyl crisis. In retaliation, China also restricted exports of rare earth elements, filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization, and blacklisted several U.S. firms. Additional measures included suspending imports from American agricultural and food producers and launching an anti-monopoly probe into DuPont China. Analysts noted this marked a significant escalation in the ongoing trade tensions, reducing prospects for near-term diplomatic resolution.{{Cite web |date=2025-04-04 |title=China slaps a 34% tax on all US imports in retaliation for Trump's tariffs |url=https://apnews.com/article/china-tariff-trade-trump-earths-02cd23e913649f32985f075058e787c4 |access-date=2025-04-08 |website=AP News |language=en}} Trump threatened to impose an additional 50% tariff on Chinese goods on April 9 if China did not withdraw its retaliatory measure of a 34% tariff on all US goods by 8 April. This would boost the effective 54% tariffs on China on April 9 to 104%.{{Cite web |title=Trump tariffs live updates: Trump tells Americans not to panic as stock markets open to big losses |url=https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-updates/trump-tariffs-live-updates-us-stronger-despite-market/?id=120551033 |access-date=2025-04-07 |website=ABC News |language=en}} China responded with retaliatory tariffs of 84% on US goods.{{Cite web |title=China slaps retaliatory tariffs of 84% on US goods in response to Trump |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/09/china-slaps-retaliatory-tariffs-of-84percent-on-us-goods-in-response-to-trump.html |access-date=2025-04-09 |website=CNBC |language=en}} In response, Trump increased tariffs on Chinese goods to 125% on the same day. However, the White House clarified the next day that the tariff rate had risen to 145%.{{cite news |last1=Iordache |first1=Dan Mangan, Kevin Breuninger, Christina Wilkie,Megan Cassella,Jesse Pound,Ruxandra |date=10 April 2025 |title=Trump tariffs on China now total 145%, White House clarifies: Live updates |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/10/china-trump-tariffs-live-updates.html |work=CNBC |language=en}} China, in retaliation, announced an increase in tariffs on all American imports from the previous 84% to 125%, set to take effect on April 12.{{Cite news |date=2025-04-11 |title=Breaking: China to increase tariffs on US goods to 125 per cent |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-04-11/china-to-increase-us-tariffs-to-125-per-cent/105168174 |access-date=2025-04-11 |work=ABC News |language=en-AU}} The US later announced reciprocal tariffs will exclude consumer electronics from tariffs from most countries, but retained a 20% tariff on electronics from China.{{Cite news |last=Garrett |first=Luke |date=2025-04-13 |title=Trump mulls semiconductor levies after lifting reciprocal tariffs on electronics |url=https://www.npr.org/2025/04/13/g-s1-60086/semiconduct-tariffs-trump |access-date=2025-04-14 |work=NPR |language=en}}

As part of China's foreign-exchange reserves, China has a preference for dollar-denominated assets, including United States treasury securities.{{Rp|pages=44–45}} In turn, the United States benefits because it lacks the domestic savings to fund its budget deficit.{{Rp|page=44}} After the 2008 financial crisis, Chinese policymakers and the general public viewed China's holdings of US debt as unwisely overexposing China to volatility.{{Cite book|last=Liu|first=Zongyuan Zoe|title=Sovereign Funds: How the Communist Party of China Finances its Global Ambitions|publisher=The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press|year=2023|isbn=9780674271913|doi=10.2307/jj.2915805|jstor=jj.2915805|s2cid=259402050}}{{Rp|pages=61–62}} China remains a major holder of United States treasury securities, although the amount has decreased as of at least 2022.{{Cite web|last=Cox|first=Jeff|date=July 18, 2022|title=China holdings of U.S. debt fall below $1 trillion for the first time since 2010|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/18/china-holdings-of-us-debt-fall-below-1-trillion-for-the-first-time-since-2010.html|access-date=2023-02-13|website=CNBC|language=en}}File:US China imports and exports Census data.svg

File:Foreign Holders of United States Treasury Securities.svg (2009)]]

In trade matters, the United States has benefitted from China's demand for United States export products, which grew rapidly from 2000 to at least 2021.{{Rp|page=44}} As of 2021, China was the third largest market for United States export merchandise.{{Rp|page=44}} Inexpensive Chinese exports to the United States increase the purchasing power of American consumers and American business profits.{{Rp|page=44}} Both countries are benefitted by the demand for their respective exports to the other.{{Rp|pages=44–45}}

In 1991, China only accounted for 1% of total imports to the United States.{{Cite web|url=https://voxeu.org/article/reconsidering-china-shock-trade|title=Reconsidering the 'China shock' in trade|last1=Feenstra|first1=Robert|last2=Ma|first2=Hong|date=18 January 2018|website=VoxEU.org|last3=Sasahara|first3=Akira|last4=Xu|first4=Yuan}} For many years, China was the most important country which required an annual waiver to maintain free trade status. The waiver for the PRC had been in effect since 1980. Every year between 1989 and 1999, legislation was introduced in Congress to disapprove the President's waiver. The legislation had sought to tie free trade with China to meeting certain human rights conditions that go beyond freedom of emigration. All such attempted legislation failed to pass. The requirement of an annual waiver was inconsistent with the rules of the World Trade Organization, and for the PRC to join the WTO, congressional action was needed to grant permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) to China. This was accomplished in 2000 (United States–China Relations Act of 2000), allowing China to join WTO in 2001.{{cite news|title=Waking the Sleeping Dragon|url=https://slate.com/business/2016/09/when-china-joined-the-wto-it-kick-started-the-chinese-economy-and-roused-a-giant.html?via=gdpr-consent|work=Slate|date=28 September 2016}}{{cite news|title=Was Letting China Into the WTO a Mistake?|url=https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2018-04-02/was-letting-china-wto-mistake|work=Foreign Affairs|date=2 April 2018}}{{cite news|title=Normalizing Trade Relations With China Was a Mistake|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/06/normalizing-trade-relations-with-china-was-a-mistake/562403/|work=The Atlantic|date=8 June 2018}} China's most favoured nation (MFN) status was made permanent on 27 December 2001.{{cite news|title=President Grants Permanent Trade Status to China|url=https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011227-2.html|via=National Archives|work=whitehouse.gov|date=27 December 2001}}

Since the entry of China into the WTO in December 2001, the decline in U.S. manufacturing jobs has accelerated (the China shock).{{cite journal|first1=David H.|last1=Autor|first2=David|last2=Dorn|first3=Gordon H.|last3=Hanson|year=2016|title=The China Shock: Learning from Labor Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade|journal=Annual Review of Economics|volume=8|issue=1|pages=205–240|doi=10.1146/annurev-economics-080315-015041|s2cid=1415485|url=http://www.nber.org/papers/w21906.pdf}}{{cite news|first=Jeffry|last=Bartash|title=China really is to blame for millions of lost U.S. manufacturing jobs, new study finds|url=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/china-really-is-to-blame-for-millions-of-lost-us-manufacturing-jobs-new-study-finds-2018-05-14|work=Market Watch|date=14 May 2018}} The Economic Policy Institute estimated that the trade deficit with China cost about 2.7 million jobs between 2001 and 2011, including manufacturing and other industries.{{Cite web|url=https://www.epi.org/publication/bp345-china-growing-trade-deficit-cost/|title=The China toll: Growing U.S. trade deficit with China cost more than 2.7 million jobs between 2001 and 2011, with job losses in every state|website=Economic Policy Institute}}

The PRC and the US resumed trade relations in 1972 and 1973. Direct investment by the US in mainland China covers a wide range of manufacturing sectors, several large hotel projects, restaurant chains, and petrochemicals. US companies have entered agreements establishing more than 20,000 equity joint ventures, contractual joint ventures, and wholly foreign-owned enterprises in mainland China. More than 100 US-based multinationals have projects in mainland China, some with multiple investments. Cumulative US investment in mainland China is valued at $48 billion. The US trade deficit with mainland China exceeded $350 billion in 2006 and was the United States' largest bilateral trade deficit.Graph showing US-China trade [http://china.usc.edu/App_Images//trade-1978-2008-lgweb.jpg] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110813132416/http://china.usc.edu/App_Images//trade-1978-2008-lgweb.jpg|date=13 August 2011}}; source [http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1512] Some of the factors that influence the US trade deficit with mainland China include:

• US Import Valuation Overcounts China: there has been a shift of low-end assembly industries to mainland China from newly industrialized countries in East Asia and the Asia-Pacific. Mainland China has increasingly become the last link in a long chain of value-added production. Because US trade data attributes the full value of a product to the final assembler, mainland Chinese value added is overcounted. Using a statistical model that eliminates these global value chain-related distortions, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) researchers and World Trade Organization (WTO) researchers conclude that the United States' measures may overstate the value of Chinese exports by as much as 35%.{{Cite book|last=Roach|first=Stephen|url=|title=Accidental Conflict: America, China, and the Clash of False Narratives|date=2022|publisher=Yale University Press|isbn=978-0-300-26901-7|doi=10.2307/j.ctv2z0vv2v|jstor=j.ctv2z0vv2v|s2cid=252800309|author-link=Stephen S. Roach}}{{Rp|page=39}} According to Pascal Lamy: "The statistical bias created by attributing commercial value to the last country of origin perverts the true economic dimension of the bilateral trade imbalances. This affects the political debate, and leads to misguided perceptions. Take the bilateral deficit between China and the US. A series of estimates based on true domestic content can cut the overall deficit – which was $252bn in November 2010 – by half, if not more."{{cite news|last=Lamy|first=Pascal|date=24 January 2011|title='Made in China' tells us little about global trade|newspaper=Financial Times|publisher=FT.com|url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d37374c-27fd-11e0-8abc-00144feab49a.html|url-status=live|url-access=subscription|access-date=7 July 2012|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221210/http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d37374c-27fd-11e0-8abc-00144feab49a.html|archive-date=10 December 2022}}
• US demand for labor-intensive goods exceeds domestic output: the PRC has restrictive trade practices in mainland China, which include a wide array of barriers to foreign goods and services, often aimed at protecting state-owned enterprises. These practices include high tariffs, lack of transparency, requiring firms to obtain special permission to import goods, inconsistent application of laws and regulations, and leveraging technology from foreign firms in return for market access. Mainland China's accession into the World Trade Organization is meant to help address these barriers.
• The undervaluation of the Renminbi relative to the United States dollar.{{cite web|url=http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2007/01/data/weorept.aspx?sy=2004&ey=2007&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=924&s=PPPEX&grp=0&a=&pr1.x=62&pr1.y=9|title=World Economic Outlook Database, April 2007|publisher=Imf.org|date=14 September 2006|access-date=2 December 2010}}

Beginning in 2009, the US and China agreed to hold regular high-level talks about economic issues and other mutual concerns by establishing the Strategic Economic Dialogue, which meets biannually. Five meetings have been held, the most recent in December 2008. Economic nationalism seems to be rising in both countries, a point the leaders of the two delegations noted in their opening presentations.{{Cite web|url=https://china.usc.edu/wu-yi-opens-third-china-us-strategic-economic-dialogue-2007|title=Wu Yi opens the Third China-US Strategic Economic Dialogue, 2007 {{pipe}} US-China Institute|website=china.usc.edu}}{{Cite web|url=https://china.usc.edu/us-treasury-sec-henry-paulson-opens-strategic-economic-dialogue-dec-2007|title=U.S. Treasury Sec. Henry Paulson opens Strategic Economic Dialogue, Dec. 2007 {{pipe}} US-China Institute|website=china.usc.edu}}{{Cite web|url=https://china.usc.edu/tensions-over-trade-part-2-election-08-and-challenge-china|title=Tensions over Trade: Part 2 of Election '08 and the Challenge of China {{pipe}} US-China Institute|website=china.usc.edu}} The United States and China have also established the high-level US-China Senior Dialogue to discuss international political issues and work out resolutions.

File:United States Balance of Trade Deficit-pie chart.svg

In September 2009 a trade dispute emerged between the United States and China, which came after the US imposed tariffs of 35 percent on Chinese tire imports. The Chinese commerce minister accused the United States of a "grave act of trade protectionism,"{{cite web|date=13 September 2010|title=Obama's Tire Tariff Draws Beijing's Ire|url=http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/sep2009/gb20090913_714101.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090922172106/http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/sep2009/gb20090913_714101.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=22 September 2009|website=Bloomberg Businessweek}} while an USTR spokesperson said the tariff "was taken precisely in accordance with the law and our international trade agreements". Additional issues were raised by both sides in subsequent months.{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1600|title=Statistics on world trade, list of US-China WTO complaints|publisher=China.usc.edu|access-date=2 December 2010}}China slaps deposits/tariffs on US steel exports; US politicians rant about China [http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1920]

When a country joins the World Trade Organization they commit to keep their Tariffs beneath the bound rate, which is generally around 39 percent. China's reaction is due to the fact that nations usually keep their Tariffs at an average of 9 percent, but when the US raised their Tariff on Chinese imported tires to 35 percent, it was still below the average bound rate.{{cite web|url=https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/20y_e/wto_20_brochure_e.pdf|title=Trade and Tariffs|publisher=World Trade Organization|date=2015}}

File:U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue (3767084375).jpg was held in Washington, D.C., from 27 to 28 July 2009]]

File:Countries by total wealth (trillions USD), Credit Suisse.png (trillions USD), Credit Suisse]]

In early 2012, a dispute over rare earth minerals was brought into the light between the two countries. President Obama made an announcement that the United States would be one of a few countries to file a trade dispute with China. Amongst the United States, Japan and other Western European countries would also be filing disputes as well. This is simply just one of few disputes between the United States and China. It is believed by many experts, including Chris Isidore, a writer for CNN Money, that "any one of the disputes could damage the economies of both countries as well as the relationship between them".{{Cite news|url=https://money.cnn.com/2012/03/13/news/international/china-trade/|title=U.S. vs. China: The trade battles|last=Isidore|first=Chris|date=13 March 2012|work=CNN Money}} The dispute was filed, and China was charged with putting unfair restrictions on the exportation of rare earth minerals. These minerals were crucial and in high demand by all countries. President Obama believed the United States should have those minerals in the United States whereas China disagreed. China denied all of the said charges brought forth "saying its rules are defensible on grounds of environmental and economic sustainability, and suggests there would be consequences if the United States presses the case." It is important to understand the relationship between the United States and China, especially economically. There is not one without the other. China's state news agency commented that "past experiences have shown that policymakers in Washington should treat such issues with more prudence, because maintaining sound Sino-American trade relations is in the fundamental interests of both sides"

File:President Trump at the G20 (48162295476).jpg with US President Donald Trump at the 14th G20 in Osaka, June 2019.{{Cite news |last=Churchill |first=Owen |date=25 July 2020 |title=US officials now call Xi Jinping 'general secretary' instead of China's 'president' – but why? |url=https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3094669/us-officials-switch-calling-chinas-xi-jinping |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200724220251/https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3094669/us-officials-switch-calling-chinas-xi-jinping |archive-date=24 July 2020 |access-date=25 July 2020 |website=South China Morning Post |language=en}}]]

China was the biggest trading partner of the United States until 2019, when it dropped to the third place because of the ongoing trade war.{{Cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-lost-spot-as-top-u-s-trading-partner-in-first-half-11564749251|title=Tariff Fight Knocks Off China as Top U.S. Trading Partner|last=DeBarros|first=Paul Kiernan and Anthony|newspaper=The Wall Street Journal|date=2 August 2019|language=en-US|access-date=6 August 2019}}

In November 2021, US producer Venture Global LNG signed a twenty-year contract with China's state-owned Sinopec to supply liquefied natural gas (LNG).{{cite news|title=Sinopec signs China's largest long-term LNG contract with U.S. firm|url=https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/sinopec-signs-20-yr-lng-contract-with-us-venture-global-lng-2021-11-04/|work=Reuters|date=November 4, 2021}} China's imports of US natural gas will more than double.{{cite news|title=Sinopec signs huge LNG deals with US producer Venture Global|url=https://www.ft.com/content/00fdc70e-1482-4ce6-ba43-a802550838d4|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221210/https://www.ft.com/content/00fdc70e-1482-4ce6-ba43-a802550838d4|archive-date=10 December 2022|url-access=subscription|url-status=live|work=Financial Times|date=20 October 2021}} US exports of liquefied natural gas to China and other Continental Asian countries surged in 2021, with Continental Asian buyers willing to pay higher prices than European importers.{{cite news|title=Asian buyers outbid Europe for spot supplies of American-produced natural gas|url=https://www.ft.com/content/deaa7583-e69f-4a5f-9486-cc05c710a51a|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221210/https://www.ft.com/content/deaa7583-e69f-4a5f-9486-cc05c710a51a|archive-date=10 December 2022|url-access=subscription|work=Financial Times|date=21 September 2021}}

On 25 March 2023, Apple CEO Tim Cook made an official visit to Beijing to attend the China Development Forum. Cook praised China's innovation, and long history of cooperation with Apple Inc. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Apple supplier Foxconn was heavily disrupted by workers protesting China's zero-COVID policies. Cook also presented an expanded rural education program for 100 million yuan to further improve the skill-set of Chinese workers.[https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-ceo-praises-chinas-innovation-long-history-cooperation-beijing-visit-2023-03-25/ "Apple CEO praises China's innovation, long history of cooperation on Beijing visit"] Reuters. accessed 25 March 2023.

In February 2025, Donald Trump signed an executive order that directed the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to restrict Chinese investment in strategic economic areas.{{Cite news |last=Holland |first=Steve |date=22 February 2025 |title=Trump orders use of CFIUS to restrict Chinese investments in strategic areas |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-use-cfius-restrict-chinese-investments-strategic-areas-white-house-2025-02-21/ |access-date=22 February 2025 |work=Reuters}} Premier Li Qiang emphasized the need for open markets and fair competition, while the U.S. accused China of unfair trade practices and inadequate fentanyl control efforts.{{Cite web |date=2025-03-23 |title=China's premier says US relations at 'an important juncture' during meeting with pro-Trump senator |url=https://apnews.com/article/china-us-daines-li-qiang-tariff-fentanyl-321538fba10eb1c4d04f6146a4eb06b6 |access-date=2025-03-25 |website=AP News |language=en}}

{{Main|Renminbi currency value|Internationalization of the renminbi}}

China engaged in currency manipulation{{Cite journal|last1=Skaff|first1=Rebecca|last2=Lincoln|first2=Webb|date=March 2018|title=Understanding China's Currency Manipulation|url=https://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/166316|journal=The Takeaway|publisher=The Mosbacher Institute for Trade, Economics, and Public Policy at Texas A&M University Bush School of Government and Public Service|volume=9|issue=1|hdl=1969.1/166316|via=OAKTrust}} from 2003 to 2014.{{Cite book|last=Bergsten|first=C. Fred|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1255691875|title=The United States vs. China : the quest for global economic leadership|date=2022|isbn=978-1-5095-4735-7|location=Cambridge|oclc=1255691875}} Economist C. Fred Bergsten, writing for the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said that, during this period, "China bought more than $300 billion annually to resist upward movement of its currency by artificially keeping the exchange rate of the dollar strong and the renminbi's exchange rate weak. China's competitive position was thus strengthened by as much as 30 to 40 percent at the peak of the intervention. Currency manipulation explained most of China's large trade surpluses, which reached a staggering 10 percent of its entire GDP in 2007."C. Fred Bergsten, [https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investment-policy-watch/china-no-longer-manipulating-its-currency China is No Longer Manipulating its Currency], Peterson Institute for International Economics (18 November 2016). China's currency manipulation was a point of conflict with the United States. Domestic leaders within the United States pressured the Obama administration to take a hardline stance against China and compel China to raise the value of its currency, and legislation was introduced to the United States Congress calling on the President to impose tariffs on Chinese imports until China properly values its currency.{{cite news| url=https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68L5K120100924| work=Reuters| title=House panel cranks up pressure on China currency| date=24 September 2010}} Nonetheless, the United States was not willing to label China as a "currency manipulator" at that time, on the theory that doing so would risk China's cooperation on other issues.

In 2014, China stopped manipulating its currency,Paul Wiseman, [https://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/fact-check-china-manipulate-currency/ Fact check: Does China manipulate its currency?], Associated Press (29 December 2016). as the growth in the Chinese economy slowed and Chinese investors made more investments outside the country, leading to a drop in the yuan's value in relation to the dollar, as well as a decline in China's reserves.

In August 2019, five years after China had stopped manipulating its currency, the US Treasury designated China as a currency manipulator.{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-currency-idUSKCN1UV2BK|title=U.S. designates China as currency manipulator for first time in...|date=5 August 2019|work=Reuters|access-date=6 August 2019|language=en}} Some US analysts characterized the belated designation as "embarrassing", "without factual basis", or "a stretch".{{Cite web|title=The irony of calling China a currency manipulator|url=https://www.yahoo.com/now/the-irony-of-calling-china-a-currency-manipulator-152537290.html|access-date=2022-06-17|website=Yahoo|date=6 August 2019|language=en-US}} On 13 January 2020, the United States removed the designation as part of the Phase One{{Cite web|title=Phase One|url=http://ustr.gov/phase-one|access-date=2022-06-17|website=United States Trade Representative|language=en}} efforts to reach a deal on the trade war.{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/13/us/politics/treasury-china-currency-manipulator-trade.html|title=U.S. Says China Is No Longer a Currency Manipulator|last=Rappeport|first=Alan|date=13 January 2020|work=The New York Times|access-date=20 January 2020|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}

Relations between the two world powers have historically been stable, punctuated by several periods of open conflict, most notably during the Korean War and the Vietnam War. The United States and China have mutual environmental, political, economic, and security interests, such as climate change and the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, but there remain perennial concerns, such as human rights in China, as well as cross-strait relations and the US's attitude towards the One China policy. China is the second largest foreign creditor of the United States, after Japan.{{Cite news|url=https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/3023034/japan-overtakes-china-biggest-creditor-us-japans-june-treasuries|title=Japan surpasses China as the biggest creditor to the US government|date=16 August 2019|website=South China Morning Post|language=en|access-date=18 August 2019}} China's expansion in the Indo-Pacific has triggered pushback from the US and its partners in the region. The two countries remain in dispute over territorial issues in the South China Sea;{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/world/asia/south-china-sea-dispute-arbitration-explained.html|title=The South China Sea: Explaining the Dispute|last=Fisher|first=Max|date=14 July 2016|work=The New York Times|access-date=11 March 2017|issn=0362-4331}} China claims sovereignty over large swaths of the South China Sea; the United States instead sees much of this ocean as international waters, and as such claims the right of its warships and aircraft to conduct military operations within them.{{Cite news|title=China's Claims in the South China Sea – The Short Answer|last1=Page|first1=Jeremy|last2=Moss|first2=Trefor|work=The Wall Street Journal|date=30 November 1999|access-date=30 July 2021|url= https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-263B-4730}}{{Cite news|title=China, US argue over naval activity in South China Sea|work=Associated Press|date=20 May 2021|access-date=30 July 2021|url= https://apnews.com/article/asia-pacific-china-b20b3b72604728c2e3f7498e2f492cac}}

{{Main|Military budget of China|Military budget of the United States|United States–China security cooperation}}{{Update|part=section|date=May 2023}}

China's investment in its military is growing rapidly; the United States remains convinced that the PRC conceals the real extent of this expansion, a view shared by many independent analysts.{{cite web|url=http://hongkong.usconsulate.gov/uscn/others/2004/060601.htm|title= Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's Remarks at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Singapore, 6/6/2004|website=hongkong.usconsulate.gov|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041206021659/http://hongkong.usconsulate.gov/uscn/others/2004/060601.htm|archive-date=6 December 2004}}{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4351422.stm| work=BBC News| title=Rumsfeld questions China spending| date=18 October 2005| access-date=7 April 2010}} China claims it spent a total of $45 billion over the course of 2007, an average of $123 million per day.{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=586|title=china's military spends hundreds of millions of dollars|publisher=China.usc.edu|access-date=2 December 2010}}{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=586&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1|title=china's military spends hundreds of millions of dollars|publisher=China.usc.edu|access-date=2 December 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090202163232/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=586&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1|archive-date=2 February 2009}} That same year, the US military spent $548.8 billion, or an average $1.66 billion per day. US estimates of Chinese military expenditure{{when|date=September 2023}} range between $85 billion and $125 billion.

File:Xu and Gates.JPG of the People's Liberation Army and US Defense Secretary Robert Gates at the Pentagon]]

Concerns over the Chinese military budget may come from US worries that the PRC is attempting to threaten its neighbors or to challenge the United States. Concerns have been raised that China is developing a large naval base near the South China Sea and has diverted resources from the People's Liberation Army Ground Force to the People's Liberation Army Navy and to air force and missile development.{{cite news| url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/majornews/1917167/Chinese-build-secret-nuclear-submarine-base.html| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080504060556/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/majornews/1917167/Chinese-build-secret-nuclear-submarine-base.html| url-status=dead| archive-date=4 May 2008| work=The Daily Telegraph| location=London| title=Chinese nuclear submarine base| first=Thomas| last=Harding| date=1 May 2008| access-date=7 April 2010}}{{Cite web|url=http://www.sipri.org/contents/milap/milex/mex_database1.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061129014345/http://www.sipri.org/contents/milap/milex/mex_database1.html|title=SIPRI military expenditure database|archive-date=29 November 2006}}

On 27 October 2009, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates praised the steps China has taken to increase transparency of defense spending.{{cite web|last=Luce|first=Dan De|url=https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iN273FI9Ieez9xh4hwmwO6hwIG2w|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130201200925/http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iN273FI9Ieez9xh4hwmwO6hwIG2w|url-status=dead|archive-date=1 February 2013|title=Time to end 'on-again-off-again' US-China ties: Pentagon|date=26 October 2009|access-date=2 December 2010}} In June 2010, however, he said that the Chinese military was resisting efforts to improve military-to-military relations with the United States.{{cite news|last=Entous|first=Adam|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65220220100603?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews|title=Gates says China's PLA may be trying to thwart ties|publisher=Reuters.com|date= 3 June 2010|access-date=2 December 2010}} Gates also said that the United States would "assert freedom of navigation" in response to Chinese complaints about US Navy deployments in international waters near China.{{citation needed|date=February 2023}} Admiral Michael Mullen said that the United States sought closer military ties to China but would continue to operate in the western Pacific.Pessin, Al. [https://www.voanews.com/a/us-wants-better-military-ties-to-china-but-will-continue-pacific-operations--111149499/166716.html "US Wants Better Military Ties to China, But Will Continue Pacific Operations."] Voice of America, 1 December 2010.

File:South China Sea claims map.svg in the South China Sea]]James R. Holmes, a specialist on China at the US Naval War College, has said that China's investments towards a potential future conflict are closer to those of the United States than may first appear because the Chinese understate their spending, the internal price structures of the two countries are different, and the Chinese need to concentrate only on projecting military force a short distance from their own shores. The balance may shift to the advantage of the Chinese very quickly if they continue double-digit annual growth, and the US and their allies cut back.{{cite web|url=https://thediplomat.com/the-naval-diplomat/2013/03/07/what-to-make-of-chinas-defense-spending-increase/|title=What to Make of China's Defense Spending Increase|author=James R. Holmes|work=The Diplomat}}

In line with power transition theory, the idea that "wars tend to break out... when the upward trajectory of a rising power comes close to intersecting the downward trajectory of a declining power," some political scientists and international relations scholars have argued that a potential conflict between China, an emerging power, and the United States, the current superpower, is all but inevitable.{{cite book|last=Kagan|first=Robert|title=The World America Made|year=2012|publisher=Knopf|location=New York|page=90}} Many academics disagree with applying power transition theory to the China-U.S. relationship.{{Cite book |last1=Ma |first1=Xinru |title=Beyond Power Transitions: The Lessons of East Asian History and the Future of U.S.-China Relations |last2=Kang |first2=David C. |date=2024 |publisher=Columbia University Press |isbn=978-0-231-55597-5 |series=Columbia Studies in International Order and Politics |location=New York}}{{Rp|page=29}} Robert Art states that these perspectives generally ignore China's peaceful rise strategy.{{Rp|page=29}} Steve Chan concludes that the China-U.S. power transition will be more similar to the U.K.-U.S. power transition than the Anglo-German power transition in which World War I arose.{{Rp|page=29}}

{{Main|Taiwan independence movement|Political status of Taiwan}}

Since the renewal of US-China relations in early 1979, the Taiwan issue remained a major source of contention. After the announcement of the intention to establish diplomatic relations with Mainland China (PRC) on 15 December 1978, the Republic of China (Taiwan) immediately condemned the United States, leading to rampant protests in both Taiwan and in the US.Steven M. Goldstein, and Randall Schriver, "An Uncertain Relationship: The United States, Taiwan and the Taiwan Relations Act." China Quarterly 165 (2001): 147–72. [http://cm.olemiss.edu/courses/pol324/goldschr.pdf online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151120210107/http://cm.olemiss.edu/courses/pol324/goldschr.pdf|date=20 November 2015}} In April 1979, the US Congress signed into law the Taiwan Relations Act,{{Cite web|date=April 10, 1979|title=Taiwan Relations Act, 1979 {{!}} US-China Institute|url=https://china.usc.edu/taiwan-relations-act-1979|website=USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism|language=en}} permitting unofficial relations with Taiwan to flourish and granting the right to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character. Its passage prompted Deng to begin to view the United States as an insincere partner willing to abandon its prior commitments to China.{{Cite book|last=Zhao|first=Suisheng|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1346366969|title=The Dragon Roars Back Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy.|date=2023|publisher=Stanford University Press|isbn=978-1-5036-3415-2|location=Stanford, California|pages=54|oclc=1346366969}} The expanding relationship that followed normalization was threatened in 1981 by PRC objections to the level of US arms sales to the Republic of China on Taiwan. Secretary of State Alexander Haig visited China in June 1981 in an effort to resolve Chinese concerns about America's unofficial relations with Taiwan. Vice President Bush visited the PRC in May 1982. Eight months of negotiations produced the US-PRC Joint Communiqué of 17 August 1982. In this third communiqué, the US stated its intention to gradually reduce the level of arms sales to the Republic of China, and the PRC described as a fundamental policy their effort to strive for a peaceful resolution to the Taiwan question.

When Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, contention over the Taiwan issue intensified; President Trump became the first sitting US president since Jimmy Carter in 1979 to have any formal political or diplomatic contacts with Taiwan when he decided to receive a phone call from president Tsai Ing-Wen. Trump expanded the duties of the US' de facto embassy in Taipei - the American Institute in Taiwan - by adding more security personnel, and oversaw increasing non-diplomatic visits of Tsai Ing-Wen and Congressmen to each other's countries/regions. In addition, American warships reportedly crossed the Taiwan strait and increased military drills with Taiwan, which mainland China views as a direct threat to its sovereignty.{{cite news|title=US Navy warship challenges Chinese claims in the South China Sea|work=CNN|url=https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/13/_politics-zone-injection/us-warship-south-china-sea/index.html}}{{cite news|title=In Beijing rebuke, Taiwan signals closer defense ties with US and Japan|work=Nikkei Asia|url=https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/In-Beijing-rebuke-Taiwan-signals-closer-defense-ties-with-US-and-Japan}}

Chinese leader Xi Jinping told European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in April 2023 that the United States was trying to trick China into attacking Taiwan, but he would not take the bait.{{cite news|last1=Sevastopulo|first1=Demetri|title=Xi Jinping claimed US wants China to attack Taiwan|url=https://www.ft.com/content/7d6ca06c-d098-4a48-818e-112b97a9497a|agency=Financial Times|date=15 Jun 2024}}

Tensions persist over Taiwan, with China conducting military drills in March 2025 following U.S. statements on Taiwanese sovereignty.{{Cite web |date=2025-03-18 |title=China conducts air and sea drills near Taiwan in response to US and Taiwanese statements |url=https://apnews.com/article/taiwan-china-planes-ships-d7e0beea3f6164046d34d1dfa1dda71a |access-date=2025-03-25 |website=AP News |language=en}}

File:Kurt Campbell with Chen Guangcheng at US Embassy May 1, 2012.jpg Chen Guangcheng (left) with former United States ambassador to China Gary Locke (center) and former Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt M. Campbell (right) at the US Embassy in Beijing on 1 May 2012]]

File:2008 Olympic Torch Relay in SF - Embarcadero 47.JPGan protesters clash with pro-Chinese protesters in San Francisco in 2008.]]

{{Main|Human rights in China|Human rights in the United States|Human Rights Record of the United States|Chinese censorship abroad}}

In 2003, the United States declared that despite some positive momentum that year and despite greater signs which showed that the People's Republic of China was willing to engage in discussions about human rights with the US and other nations, there was still serious backsliding. In principle, China has acknowledged the importance of the protection of human rights and it has claimed that it has taken steps to bring its own human rights practices into conformity with international norms. Among those steps are China's signing of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in October 1997, which was ratified in March 2001, and China's signing of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in October 1998, which has not been ratified yet. In 2002, China released a significant number of political and religious prisoners and it also agreed to hold discussions about torture, arbitrary detention, and religion with UN experts. However, international human rights groups assert that there has been virtually no movement with regard to those promises,{{citation needed|date=February 2014}} with more people having been arrested for similar offences since then. Those groups maintain that China still has a long way to go in instituting the kind of fundamental systemic change that will protect the rights and liberties of all its citizens in mainland China. The US State Department publishes an annual report on human rights around the world, which includes an evaluation of China's human rights record.{{cite web|url=http://www.china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=973|title=U.S. Department of State, 2007 Human Rights in China, March 11, 2008|access-date=31 August 2008|archive-date=19 October 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141019051521/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=973|url-status=dead}}{{cite web|url=http://www.china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1368|title=U.S. Department of State, 2008 Human Rights in China, February 25, 2009|access-date=26 December 2009|archive-date=11 October 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141011065606/http://www.china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1368|url-status=dead}}

In a decision that was criticized by human rights groups, the United States State Department did not list China as one of the world's worst human rights violators in its 2007 report of human rights practices in countries and regions outside the United States.{{cite news|last1=Cooper|first1=Helen|title=U.S. Drops China From List of Top 10 Violators of Rights|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/washington/12rights.html|publisher=NYT|date=12 March 2008}} However, the assistant secretary of the State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Jonathan D. Farrar stated that China's overall human rights record in 2007 remained poor.

Since 1998, China has annually published a White Paper detailing the human rights abuses by the United States{{cite web|url=http://www.china.org.cn/e-white/20020313/index.htm|title=2002 PRC White Paper on US Human Rights Abuses|publisher=china.org.cn|date=11 March 2002|access-date=2 December 2010}}{{cite web|url=http://www.china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=974|title=PRC State Council, Human Rights Record of the United States in 2007, March 13, 2008|access-date=31 August 2008|archive-date=2 March 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140302130854/http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=974|url-status=dead}}{{cite web|url=http://www.china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1370|title=PRC State Council, Human Rights Record of the United States in 2008, February 27, 2009|access-date=26 December 2009|archive-date=11 October 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141011065746/http://www.china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=1370|url-status=dead}} and since 2005 has also published a White Paper on its own political system and democratic progress.{{cite web|url=http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/zt/zgrq/t217337.htm|title=China issues 1st white paper on democracy|publisher=China-embassy.org|date=19 October 2005|access-date=2 December 2010}}{{cite web|url=http://china.usc.edu/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=855|title=White Paper on China's Political System, 2007|publisher=China.usc.edu|access-date=2 December 2010}}

On 27 February 2014,{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2014-02/28/c_133150493.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140301022136/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2014-02/28/c_133150493.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=1 March 2014|title=China issues report on U.S. human rights - Xinhua - English.news.cn}} the United States released its China report on human rights practices for 2013, which, according to its executive summary, described the PRC as an authoritarian state and a place in which repression and coercion were routine.{{cite news|title=Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2013: China (includes Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau)|url=https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/humanrightsreport/index.htm?year=2013&dlid=220263#wrapper|publisher=U.S. Department of State}} On 28 February 2014, China published a report on human rights in the United States that cited surveillance on its own citizens, mistreatment of inmates, gun violence, and homelessness, despite having a vibrant economy, as important issues.

American criticism of China on human rights, especially on the issue of the Xinjiang internment camps, significantly expanded at the end of 2018 and in 2019.{{Cite news|date=23 September 2018|title=US criticises treatment of Uighurs in latest China row|language=en|website=The Straits Times, Agence France Presse|url=https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/us-criticises-treatment-of-uighurs-in-latest-china-row-0|access-date=22 August 2019}} In March 2019, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo indirectly compared China to the Nazi Germany by saying that the roundup of Muslim minorities to into camps had not been seen "since the 1930s".{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/13/us/politics/state-department-human-rights-abuses.html|title=State Dept. Accuses China of Rights Abuses Not Seen 'Since the 1930s'|last=Sanger|first=David E.|date=13 March 2019|work=The New York Times|access-date=22 August 2019|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}{{Cite web|url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/state-department-compares-china-to-nazi-germany-in-human-rights-briefing|title=State Department compares China to Nazi Germany in human rights briefing|date=13 March 2019|website=Washington Examiner|language=en|access-date=22 August 2019}} In May 2019, the United States government accused China of putting Uyghurs in "concentration camps".{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-concentrationcamps-idUSKCN1S925K|title=China putting minority Muslims in 'concentration camps,' U.S. says|date=4 May 2019|work=Reuters|access-date=22 August 2019|language=en}} The US government has also considered sanctioning Chinese officials involved in the camps, including Chen Quanguo, the Chinese Communist Party Committee Secretary of Xinjiang and a member of the 19th Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party although no CCP Politburo member has ever been sanctioned by the US government.{{Cite web|url=https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3004602/chinas-top-xinjiang-official-chen-quanguo-should-face|title=Top Xinjiang official Chen Quanguo should face sanctions – US lawmakers|date=4 April 2019|website=South China Morning Post|language=en|access-date=22 August 2019}}{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-usa-xinjiang-rights-idUSKCN1SZ22E|title=Rights group urges U.S. to sanction China over Xinjiang camps|date=29 May 2019|work=Reuters|access-date=22 August 2019|language=en}} In July 2019, Vice President Mike Pence accused China of persecuting Christians, Muslims and Buddhists.{{Cite web|url=https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-vice-president-pence-2nd-annual-religious-freedom-ministerial/|title=Remarks by Vice President Pence at the 2nd Annual Religious Freedom Ministerial|language=en-US|via=National Archives|work=whitehouse.gov|access-date=22 August 2019}}

On 4 October 2019, the Houston Rockets' general manager, Daryl Morey, issued a tweet that supported the 2019–20 Hong Kong protests.{{cite news|title=Rockets working to mend ties with China after executive's Hong Kong tweet|url=https://www.nba.com/article/2019/10/06/cba-suspends-cooperation-rockets|work=AP|date=6 October 2019}} Morey's tweet resulted in the Chinese Basketball Association's suspension of its relationship with the Houston Rockets and the issuance of a statement of dissatisfaction from the consulate office of China in Houston.{{cite news|title=Rockets' general manager's Hong Kong comments anger China|url=https://www.apnews.com/0a660e9e10664e31bf6ee359c22058cf|work=Associated Press|date=7 October 2019}} On 6 October, both Morey and the NBA issued separate statements addressing the original tweet. Morey said that he never intended his tweet to cause any offense, and the NBA said the tweet was "regrettable".{{cite news|last=Chang|first=Joy|date=7 October 2019|title=Houston Rockets GM's Hong Kong tweet outrages Chinese fans|work=SCMP|url=https://www.scmp.com/video/hong-kong/3031915/houston-rockets-gms-hong-kong-tweet-outrages-chinese-fans}}{{cite news|last=Victor|first=Daniel|date=7 October 2019|title=Hong Kong Protests Put N.B.A. on Edge in China|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/sports/basketball/nba-china-hong-kong.html|work=NYT}} The statements were criticized by US politicians and third-party observers for the perceived exercise of economic statecraft by the PRC and insufficiency of the NBA's defense of Morey's tweet.Some relevant sources include:

• {{cite news|date=7 October 2019|title=Rockets' general manager's Hong Kong comments anger China|work=Associated Press|url=https://www.apnews.com/0a660e9e10664e31bf6ee359c22058cf}}
• {{cite news|date=8 October 2019|title=China's vise grip on corporate America|publisher=Axios|agency=Axios|url=https://www.axios.com/china-nba-corporate-america-hong-kong-protests-cf9af430-4f8f-4968-aca3-c4b90fb5b2d1.html}}
• {{cite news|date=8 October 2019|title=The NBA Should Call China's Bluff|publisher=Bloomberg|agency=Bloomberg|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-10-08/the-nba-should-call-china-s-bluff}}
• {{cite news|date=7 October 2019|title=Sixers have a chance to show some guts about the NBA and China. They're passing it up. {{!}} Mike Sielski|publisher=Philadelphia Inquirer|agency=Philadelphia Inquirer|url=https://www.inquirer.com/sixers/philadelphia-76ers-china-daryl-morey-nba-tweet-loong-lions-20191007.html}}
• {{cite news|title=CNN's Kate Bolduan Rips NBA for Silencing Exec Who Criticized China: 'This is Shocking'|work=Mediaite|url=https://www.mediaite.com/sports/cnns-kate-bolduan-rips-nba-for-silencing-exec-who-criticized-china-this-is-shocking/}}
• {{cite news|date=7 October 2019|title=Opinion: The NBA was staring down a China problem with or without Daryl Morey's tweet|publisher=LAT|agency=LAT|url=https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-10-07/daryl-morey-nba-china-problem}}
• {{cite news|date=7 October 2019|title=The day the NBA fluttered before China|newspaper=The Washington Post|agency=Chron|url=https://www.chron.com/opinion/article/The-day-the-NBA-fluttered-before-China-14499738.php}}
• {{cite news|date=8 October 2019|title=Daryl Morey's tweet on Hong Kong shows how China is calling the shots in the NBA|work=NBC News|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/daryl-morey-s-tweet-hong-kong-shows-how-china-calling-ncna1063551}}
• {{cite news|title=NBA Defends 'Freedom Of Speech' For Employees As China Moves To Block Games Facebook Twitter Flipboard Email|work=NPR|url=https://www.npr.org/2019/10/08/768225490/nba-defends-freedom-of-speech-for-employees-as-china-moves-to-block-block-games|quote=Critics in the U.S. are accusing the NBA of prioritizing profits over principles. And critics in China also cried foul, saying the league is being insensitive in handling a politically divisive issue.}}

Critics also contrasted the league's disparate response to Morey's tweet with its history of political activismSome relevant sources include:

• {{cite news|date=8 October 2019|title=China's heavy-handed reaction to the NBA is just the wake-up call the world needed|work=CNBC|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/08/chinas-reaction-to-the-nba-is-the-wake-up-call-the-world-needed.html|quote=The NBA is not likely to face a debilitating series of protests from U.S. fans who may be angered by the league's agonizingly cautious and wavering responses to Morey's tweet. But the extreme attention the story has garnered does weaken the NBA's efforts to cast itself as a force for positive social change. Commissioner Adam Silver's public declaration of his "personal outrage" over the racist comments made by former L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling in 2014, and his pushback against the passing of the controversial transgender bathroom law in North Carolina in 2016 seem inconsistent now with a league that remains silent about China's many human rights abuses.}}
• {{cite news|date=7 October 2019|title=Sixers have a chance to show some guts about the NBA and China. They're passing it up. {{!}} Mike Sielski|work=Philadelphia Inquirer|url=https://www.inquirer.com/sixers/philadelphia-76ers-china-daryl-morey-nba-tweet-loong-lions-20191007.html}}
• {{cite news|date=7 October 2019|title=The World's Wokest Sports League Bows to China|publisher=NYT|agency=NYT|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/opinion/nba-china-hong-kong.html}}
• {{cite news|date=7 October 2019|title=Opinion: The NBA was staring down a China problem with or without Daryl Morey's tweet|work=Los Angeles Times|url=https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-10-07/daryl-morey-nba-china-problem}}
• {{cite news|title=Opinion: It's time for LeBron James to speak out on China, regardless of Nike ties|publisher=USAToday|agency=USAToday|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/josh-peter/2019/10/07/lebron-james-china-hong-kong-controversy/3903187002/}}
• {{cite news|date=7 October 2019|title=The day the NBA fluttered before China|newspaper=The Washington Post|agency=Chron|url=https://www.chron.com/opinion/article/The-day-the-NBA-fluttered-before-China-14499738.php}}

The statements also drew criticism from PRC state-run media for their perceived insufficiency, as Morey did not apologize.{{cite news|author1=陈远丁|author2=黄钰|author3=席莉莉|title=莫雷、NBA声明均未道歉 网友：这是对中国的无视和挑衅|trans-title=Morey & NBA did not apologize; Netizens: It's provocative behavior toward China|url=http://society.people.com.cn/n1/2019/1007/c428181-31385995.html|access-date=8 October 2019|work=人民网|date=7 October 2019|language=zh}}{{cite news|title=央视快评：莫雷必须道歉|trans-title=Morey Must Apologize|url=http://tv.cctv.com/2019/10/07/VIDEOS2ZjZVo3Y3gnh4Ck92p191007.shtml|access-date=8 October 2019|work=CCTV|date=7 October 2019|language=zh}}

In June 2020, the White House on 31st anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown, asked Beijing to respect human rights, carry out its due commitments

on Hong Kong, as well as flog persecution of ethnic and religious minorities.{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-tiananmen-usa/white-house-on-tiananmen-anniversary-urges-china-to-respect-human-rights-idUSKBN23B3I3|title=White House, on Tiananmen anniversary, urges China to respect human rights|access-date= 4 June 2020|website=Reuters|date=4 June 2020}} On 9 July 2020, the United States announced sanctions against Chinese politicians, who as per its record were responsible for human rights violations against Muslim minorities in Xinjiang.{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53355697|title=Xinjiang: US sanctions on Chinese officials over 'abuse' of Muslims|work=BBC News|date=9 July 2020|access-date=9 July 2020}}

On 20 July 2020, US government sanctioned 11 new Chinese companies from purchasing American technology and products over human rights violations in China targeting Uyghurs in the Xinjiang region.{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/20/business/economy/china-sanctions-uighurs-labor.html|title=U.S. Imposes Sanctions on 11 Chinese Companies Over Human Rights|access-date=20 July 2020|work=The New York Times|date=20 July 2020|last1=Swanson|first1=Ana}}

Many American companies, including Delta Air Lines, Coach New York, Marriott International, Calvin Klein and Tiffany & Co. have apologized to China after "offending" the country and China's ruling Communist Party.{{cite news|date=8 October 2019|title=The NBA landed in hot water after the Houston Rockets GM supported the Hong Kong protests. Here are other times Western brands caved to China after offending the Communist Party.|work=Business Insider|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/western-companies-apologize-china-communist-party-list-2019-10#christian-dior-after-an-employee-reportedly-used-a-map-of-china-that-did-not-include-taiwan-in-a-presentation-2}}

File:Xinjiang Internment Map, US-Aus Gov Assessment.jpg. The United States officially recognized the Chinese government's treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang as a genocide.]]

On September 15, 2020, the US government decided to take steps to block some exports from Xinjiang, over the country's alleged human rights abuses directed mostly against Uyghurs of the region.{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54155809|title= Xinjiang: US to block some exports citing China's human rights abuses|work= BBC News|date= 15 September 2020|access-date= 15 September 2020}}

In 2020, Chinese diplomats increasingly adopted "wolf warrior diplomacy" to deny all accusations of human rights abuses.{{Cite web|title=China is embracing a new brand of wolf warrior diplomacy|last1=Westcott|first1=Ben|last2=Jiang|first2=Steven|work=CNN|date=29 May 2020|access-date=8 October 2021|url= https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/asia/china-wolf-warrior-diplomacy-intl-hnk/index.html}} Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian tweeted that as long as the US had problems itself, it "had no right" to criticize China on human rights abuses.

On 19 January 2021, Mike Pompeo officially declared that China is committing a genocide against Uyghurs in the Xinjiang region.{{Cite news|date=20 January 2021|title=EXPLAINER: Why US accused China of genocide and what's next|website=The Independent|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/explainer-why-us-accused-china-of-genocide-and-whats-next-china-xinjiang-labor-us-genocide-b1789886.html|access-date=20 January 2021}} Pompeo called for "all appropriate multilateral and relevant juridical bodies, to join the United States in our effort to promote accountability for those responsible for these atrocities".{{Cite news|date=19 January 2021|title=Mike Pompeo declares China's treatment of Uighurs 'genocide'|website=The Guardian|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/19/mike-pompeo-china-uighur-genocide-sanctions-xinjiang|access-date=21 January 2021}} Salih Hudayar, the prime minister of the East Turkistan Government-in-Exile (who claim to be the legitimate government of Xinjiang), has said, "We hope that this designation will lead to real strong actions to hold China accountable and bring an end to China's genocide."{{cite news|date=20 January 2021|title=U.S. Says China Is Committing Genocide Against Uighur Muslims|language=en|work=The Wall Street Journal|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-declares-chinas-treatment-of-uighur-muslims-to-be-genocide-11611081555|access-date=22 January 2021}}

On 20 January 2021, China imposed sanctions against outgoing US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former secretary of health and human services Alex Azar, former under secretary of state Keith J. Krach, outgoing US ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft, and 24 other former Trump officials. Biden's National Security Council called the sanctions "unproductive and cynical". In his nomination hearing, Blinken endorsed Pompeo's report that China is committing a genocide against Uyghurs, reaffirming Biden's campaign stance.

{{see also|Free and Open Indo-Pacific|United States foreign policy toward the People's Republic of China}}

China's economic rise has led to some geo-political friction between the US and China in East Asia{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/world/asia/23china.html|title=U.S. Influence in Asia Revives Amid China's Disputes|last=Wong|first=Edward|date=22 September 2010|work=The New York Times|access-date=25 October 2019|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}} as well as to an extent in Southeast Asia{{Cite web|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/12/china-is-more-powerful-than-the-us-in-southeast-asia-csis-survey-shows.html|title = China's influence in Southeast Asia is growing — and the U.S. Has some catching up to do|website = CNBC|date = 12 June 2020}} and in Central Asia including Afghanistan.{{Cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-china-vie-for-influence-in-central-asia-as-u-s-plans-afghan-exit-11560850203|title = Russia, China Vie for Influence in Central Asia as U.S. Plans Afghan Exit|newspaper = Wall Street Journal|date = 18 June 2019}} For example, in response to China's response to the bombardment of Yeonpyeong by North Korea, "Washington is moving to redefine its relationship with South Korea and Japan, potentially creating an anti-China bloc in Northeast Asia that officials say they don't want but may need."Pomfret, John. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/05/AR2010120503513.html?hpid=moreheadlines "U.S. steps up pressure on China to rein in North Korea."] The Washington Post, 6 December 2010. The Chinese government fears a conspiracy by the US to encircle it.Lam, Willy Wo-Lap. [http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=22963 "Beijing's Alarm Over New 'US Encirclement Conspiracy'."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120307183235/http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=22963|date=7 March 2012}} Jamestown Foundation, 12 April 2005{{better source needed|date=August 2014}}

China and the United States have recently led competing efforts to gain Influence in East Asian and the Greater Asian-Pacific trade and development. In 2015, China led the creation of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank with the goal of financing projects that would spur the development of the lower-tier Asian economies, thus facilitating improved economic ties across the region. It has been suggested that the United States considered the AIIB to be a challenge to the US-backed Asian Development Bank and the World Bank and saw the Chinese effort as an attempt to set the global economic agenda on terms that would be formulated by the Chinese government.{{cite news|last1=Perlez|first1=Jane|title=China Creates a World Bank of Its Own, and the U.S. Balks|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/business/international/china-creates-an-asian-bank-as-the-us-stands-aloof.html|website=The New York Times|date=4 December 2015|access-date=11 May 2017}} The Obama administration led an effort to enact the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, a multilateral trade pact between a number of Pacific Rim countries, which excluded China. According to the US Trade Representative, the agreement was designed to "promote economic growth; support the creation and retention of jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in the signatories' countries; and promote transparency, good governance, and enhanced labor and environmental protections."{{cite web|url=https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2015/october/summary-trans-pacific-partnership|title=Summary of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement|date=4 October 2015|publisher=USTR|access-date=16 October 2015}} The Partnership was anticipated to impose costs on businesses dependent on regional markets.{{Cite journal|last1=Gulotty|first1=Robert|last2=Li|first2=Xiaojun|date=2019-07-30|title=Anticipating exclusion: Global supply chains and Chinese business responses to the Trans-Pacific Partnership|url=https://doi.org/10.1017/bap.2019.8|journal=Business and Politics|volume=22|issue=2|pages=253–278|doi=10.1017/bap.2019.8|s2cid=201359183}} The deal was placed on hold after the US withdrew from the agreement on 23 January 2017.{{cite news|title=Trump executive order pulls out of TPP trade deal|work=BBC News|date=23 January 2017|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38721056|access-date=23 January 2017| quote = Mr Trump's executive order on TPP is seen as mainly symbolic since the deal was never ratified by a divided US Congress.}} The efforts are among the attempts by both the US and China to increase their influence over the Asia-Pacific by strengthening their economic ties within the region.

In 2009, the United States requested China to open the Wakhjir Pass on the Sino-Afghan border as an alternative supply route for the US and NATO during their operations in Afghanistan.{{Cite journal|url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40647-014-0017-z|doi = 10.1007/s40647-014-0017-z|title = Geo-political Significance of the Wakhan Corridor for China|year = 2014|last1 = Malik|first1 = Hasan Yaser|journal = Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences|volume = 7|issue = 2|pages = 307–323|s2cid = 140705773}}{{Cite web|last=Kendrick Foster|date=5 December 2019|title=The New Road to Conflict: Geopolitics of the Wakhan Corridor|url=https://hir.harvard.edu/wakhancorridor/|website=Harvard International Review}} China refused the request.{{Cite web|last=VINAY KAURA|date=July 2021|title=THE PAKISTAN FACTOR IN CHINA'S AFGHANISTAN POLICY: EMERGING REGIONAL FAULTLINES AMID US WITHDRAWAL|url=https://www.mei.edu/sites/default/files/2021-07/The%20Pakistan%20Factor%20in%20China’s%20Afghanistan%20Policy%20-%20Emerging%20Regional%20Faultlines%20amid%20US%20Withdrawal.pdf|website=Middle East Institute}}

ASEAN and the various Southeast Asian states have responded to Chinese claims for sea areas by seeking closer relations with the United States.Slavin, Erik. [http://www.stripes.com/news/china-s-claim-on-sea-leads-asian-neighbors-to-strengthen-ties-with-u-s-1.147599 "China's claim on sea leads Asian neighbors to strengthen ties with U.S."] Stars and Stripes, 27 June 2011. American Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said that in spite of budget pressures, the United States would expand its influence in the region to counter China's military buildup.Entous, Adam. [https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203911804576653160176584104 "Pentagon Will Add to Asia Operations."] The Wall Street Journal, 26 October 2011.

Shared concerns in the face of China have prompted the United States to step up cooperation with China's geopolitical rivals such as India, drawing greater opposition from China.{{cite news|title=U.S. Seeks Closer Ties With India as Tension With China and Russia Builds|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/11/business/us-india-relations.html|work=The New York Times|date=11 November 2022|access-date=11 November 2022|last1=Rappeport|first1=Alan|last2=Swanson|first2=Ana}}

In the Chinese view, the United States has broken trust in the bilateral relationship through a containment strategy implemented via the Obama administration's pivot to East Asia and the Asia-Pacific, the development of the TPP, and the trade war launched by the Trump administration.{{Rp|page=293}}

{{See also|American espionage in China|Chinese espionage in the United States|List of Chinese spy cases in the United States}}

The US Department of Justice investigation into fundraising activities uncovered evidence that Chinese agents sought to direct contributions from foreign sources to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) before the 1996 presidential campaign. The Chinese embassy in Washington, D.C., was used to co-ordinate contributions to the DNC.Woodward, Bob and Duffy, Brian, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/stories/china1.htm "Chinese Embassy Role In Contributions Probed"], The Washington Post, 13 February 1997{{cite news|title=Findings Link Clinton Allies to Chinese Intelligence|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?destination=%2farchive%2fpolitics%2f1998%2f02%2f10%2ffindings-link-clinton-allies-to-chinese-intelligence%2f87265d5d-7452-41f2-ad2f-aa4abe7e579e%2f%3f|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=11 February 1998}}

In 2014, Chinese hackers hacked the computer system of the US Office of Personnel Management,{{Cite web|url=http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/24/politics/fbi-arrests-chinese-national-in-opm-data-breach/index.html|title=FBI arrests Chinese national connected to malware used in OPM data breach|last=Perez|first=Evan|website=CNN|date=24 August 2017}} resulting in the theft of approximately 22 million personnel records that were handled by the office."[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/federal-eye/wp/2015/07/09/hack-of-security-clearance-system-affected-21-5-million-people-federal-authorities-say/ Hacks of OPM databases compromised 22.1 million people, federal authorities say]". The Washington Post. 9 July 2015. Former FBI Director James Comey stated, "It is a very big deal from a national security perspective and from a counterintelligence perspective. It's a treasure trove of information about everybody who has worked for, tried to work for, or works for the United States government."

In October 2018, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee held a hearing on the threat to the US posed by China. Before the hearing, Bloomberg released an article that stated that China is embedding technology in microchips that are sent to America that collect data on American consumers. However, both FBI Director Christopher Wray and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen declined to confirm that statement. Nielsen said that China has become a major threat to the US and also confirmed, in an answer to a question from a senator, that China is trying to influence US elections.{{Cite news|url=https://homelandprepnews.com/stories/30822-threats-posed-by-china-focus-of-senate-homeland-security-hearing/|title=Threats posed by China focus of Senate Homeland Security hearing - Homeland Preparedness News|last=Roberts|first=Ed|date=10 October 2018|work=Homeland Preparedness News|access-date=25 October 2018|language=en-US}}

In 2019, two Chinese nationals were indicted for the Anthem medical data breach.{{cite news| url=https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/09/chinese-hackers-anthem-data-breach-1421341| title=Chinese nationals charged for Anthem hack, 'one of the worst data breaches in history'| first=Eric| last=Geller| work=Politico| date=9 May 2019}} About 80 million company records were hacked, stoking fears that the stolen data could be used for identity theft.{{cite news| url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/06/business/experts-suspect-lax-security-left-anthem-vulnerable-to-hackers.html| title=Anthem Hacking Points to Security Vulnerability of Health Care Industry| first1=Reed| last1=Abelson| first2=Matthew| last2=Goldstein| work=The New York Times| date=5 February 2015| url-access=limited}} In February 2020, the United States government indicted members of China's PLA for hacking into Equifax and plundering sensitive data as part of a massive heist that also included stealing trade secrets.{{cite web| url = https://www.cbsnews.com/news/china-denies-responsibility-in-equifax-breach-after-doj-charges-four-military-members/| title = Data from Equifax credit hack could "end up on the black market", expert warns| date= 11 February 2020| work = CBS News}}{{cite web| url = https://www.wsj.com/articles/four-members-of-china-s-military-indicted-for-massive-equifax-breach-11581346824| title = Four Members of China's Military Indicted Over Massive Equifax Breach| date= 11 February 2020| work = The Wall Street Journal}} Private records of more than 145 million Americans were compromised in the 2017 Equifax data breach.{{cite news|title=FBI Director Wray warns of Chinese hacking, espionage threats against American companies|url=https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/506250-fbi-director-wray-warns-of-chinese-hacking-espionage-threats-against|work=The Hill|date=7 July 2020}}

According to a report by Reuters, in 2019 the United States CIA began a clandestine campaign on Chinese social media to spread negative narratives about the Xi Jinping administration in an effort to influence Chinese public opinion against the government.{{Cite news|last1=Bing|first1=Christopher|last2=Schectman|first2=Joel|date=March 14, 2024|title=Exclusive: Trump Launched CIA Covert Influence Operation against China|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-launched-cia-covert-influence-operation-against-china-2024-03-14/|access-date=June 14, 2024|work=Reuters}} The CIA promoted narratives that CCP leaders were hiding money overseas and that the Belt and Road Initiative was corrupt and wasteful. As part of the campaign, the CIA also targeted foreign countries where the United States and China compete for influence.

Voice of America reported in April 2020 that "Internet security researchers say there have already been signs that China-allied hackers have engaged in so-called "spear-phishing" attacks on American political targets" ahead of the 2020 United States elections.{{cite news|title=China, Caught Meddling in Past Two US Elections, Claims 'Not Interested' in 2020 Vote|url=https://www.voanews.com/a/east-asia-pacific_china-caught-meddling-past-two-us-elections-claims-not-interested-2020-vote/6188474.html|work=Voice of America|date=30 April 2020}} As of 7 July 2020, the US government was 'looking at' banning Chinese video streaming application, TikTok due to national security concerns. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the Trump administration had been aware of the potential threat and has "worked on this issue for a long time".{{cite web|title=The United States is 'looking at' banning TikTok and other Chinese social media apps, Pompeo says|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/07/tech/us-tiktok-ban/index.html|access-date=7 July 2020|website=CNN International|date=7 July 2020}} On 19 September 2020, a complaint was filed in Washington by TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance, challenging the recent moves made by the Trump administration to prevent the application from operating in the US. The court documents argued that the US government took the step for political reasons rather than to stop an "unusual and extraordinary threat".{{cite web|date=19 September 2020|title=TikTok files complaint against Trump administration to try to block U.S. ban|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/19/tiktok-files-complaint-against-trump-administration-to-try-to-block-us-ban-.html|access-date=19 September 2020|website=CNBC}} In April 2024, the House of Representatives passed a bill requiring TikTok to divest from ByteDance within 9–12 months or face a potential ban, Biden signed the bill into law soon afterwards.{{cite web | url=https://www.npr.org/2024/04/20/1245594589/house-approves-bill-tiktok-ban | title=House approves sell-or-be-banned TikTok measure, attaching it to foreign aid bill | work=NPR | date=20 April 2024 | last1=Allyn | first1=Bobby }}

In December 2024, Chinese state-sponsored hackers reportedly breached the U.S. Treasury Department’s security systems, exploiting vulnerabilities in the cybersecurity services of third-party provider BeyondTrust. Using a compromised digital key, the attackers accessed a cloud-based service that provided technical support for Treasury end users, enabling them to override security measures and retrieve certain unclassified documents. Treasury officials, alerted to the breach by BeyondTrust on 8 December 2024, collaborated with the FBI and CISA to investigate the incident, which was attributed to a China-linked Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) group.{{cite news|last1=Satter |first1=Raphael |last2=Vicens |first2=A.J. |title=US Treasury says Chinese hackers stole documents in 'major incident' |date=31 December 2024 |url=https://www.reuters.com/technology/cybersecurity/us-treasurys-workstations-hacked-cyberattack-by-china-afp-reports-2024-12-30/ |website=Reuters |access-date=2 January 2025}}

The field of nuclear security (preventing nuclear material from being used to make illicit weapons) is a well-established area of successful U.S.-China cooperation.{{Cite book|last=Moore|first=Scott|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1316703008|title=China's next act : how sustainability and technology are reshaping China's rise and the world's future|date=2022|isbn=978-0-19-760401-4|location=New York, NY|pages=210|oclc=1316703008}}

Precipitated by a 2010 Nuclear Security Summit convened by the Obama administration, China and the United States launched a number of initiatives to secure potentially dangerous, Chinese-supplied, nuclear material in countries such as Ghana or Nigeria. Through these initiatives, China and the US have converted Chinese-origin Miniature Neutron Source Reactors (MNSRs) from using highly enriched uranium to using low-enriched uranium fuel (which is not directly usable in weapons, thereby making reactors more proliferation resistant).{{Cite news|date=2022-07-26|title=The Little Known Success Story of U.S.-China Nuclear Security Cooperation|newspaper=The Nuclear Threat Initiative|url=https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/little-known-success-story-us-china-nuclear-security-cooperation/|access-date=2022-07-26|archive-date=26 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220726130140/https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/little-known-success-story-us-china-nuclear-security-cooperation/|url-status=bot: unknown}}

China and the United States collaborated to build the China Center of Excellence on Nuclear Security, which opened in 2015.{{Cite book|last=Massot|first=Pascale|title=China's Vulnerability Paradox: How the World's Largest Consumer Transformed Global Commodity Markets|date=2024|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-777140-2|location=New York, NY, United States of America|pages=}}{{Rp|page=209}} The center is a forum for nuclear security exchange, training, and demonstration in the Asia Pacific region.{{Rp|page=209}}

In May 2023, Chinese Defense Spokesperson Tan Kefei urged the United States to fulfill its commitments and adhere to the Chemical Weapons Convention by taking "concrete actions".{{cite web|url=https://www.southportsentinel.com/2023/05/chinese-defense-spokesperson-accuses-us.html|title=Chinese Defense Spokesperson Accuses US of Failing to Comply with Chemical Weapons Convention|newspaper=The Southport Sentinel|date=30 May 2023|access-date=2 June 2023|archive-date=2 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230602085436/https://www.southportsentinel.com/2023/05/chinese-defense-spokesperson-accuses-us.html|url-status=dead}}

{{Main|China and the opioid epidemic in the United States}}

File:US timeline. Opioid deaths.jpg in 2021, up from around 10,000 in 1999.{{cite news|title=Opioid Deaths Could Hit 165,000 Annually Without Intervention, Biden Official Warns|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2023/06/07/opioid-deaths-could-hit-165000-annually-without-intervention-biden-official-warns/|work=Forbes|date=June 7, 2023}}]]

According to the United States Drug Enforcement Agency in 2023, China continued to be the primary source of fentanyl being imported into the United States, killing over 100 Americans every day.{{Cite web|url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-un-ambassador-kelly-craft-full-court-press-china-fentantyl-abuses-kentucky-elected-governor|title=Trump UN ambassador vows 'full court press' to combat China's fentanyl 'abuses' in this state if elected gov|first=Brandon|last=Gillespie|date=January 12, 2023|website=Fox News}}{{cite news|title=U.S. Presses China to Stop Flow of Fentanyl|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/business/economy/biden-xi-fentanyl.html|work=The New York Times|date=November 15, 2023}} Over a two-year period, close to $800{{nbsp}}million worth of fentanyl pills were illegally sold online to the US by Chinese distributors.[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/24/us/politics/senate-investigation-china-mail-opioids.html "Online Sales of Illegal Opioids from China Surge in U.S."], The New York Times, January 24, 2018[https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/opioids/americans-spent-nearly-800m-in-2-years-on-illegal-fentanyl-from-china-5-things-to-know.html "Americans spent nearly $800M in 2 years on illegal fentanyl from China: 5 things to know"], Becker's Hospital Review, January 25, 2018 The drug is usually manufactured in China, then shipped to Mexico, where it is processed and packaged, which is then smuggled into the US by Mexican drug cartels.{{Cite web|last=Linthicum|first=Kate|date=2020-04-24|title=Coronavirus chokes the drug trade — from Wuhan, through Mexico and onto U.S. streets|url=https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-04-24/wuhan-china-coronavirus-fentanyl-global-drug-trade|access-date=2022-04-01|website=Los Angeles Times|language=en-US}} A large amount is also purchased online and shipped through the US Postal Service.[https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/population-health/deadly-synthetic-opioids-coming-to-us-via-dark-web-and-the-postal-service.html "Deadly synthetic opioids coming to US via 'dark web' and the postal service"], Becker's Hospital Review, December 28, 2016 It can also be purchased directly from China, which has become a major manufacturer of various synthetic drugs illegal in the US.[https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/22/world/asia/in-china-illegal-drugs-are-sold-online-in-an-unbridled-market.html "In China, Illegal Drugs Are Sold Online in an Unbridled Market"], The New York Times, June 21, 2015 According to Assistant US Attorney, Matt Cronin:

{{blockquote|It is a fact that the People's Republic of China is the source for the vast majority of synthetic opioids that are flooding the streets of the United States and Western democracies. It is a fact that these synthetic opioids are responsible for the overwhelming increase in overdose deaths in the United States. It is a fact that if the People's Republic of China wanted to shut down the synthetic opioids industry, they could do so in a day.[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/deadly-fentanyl-bought-online-from-china-being-shipped-through-the-mail-60-minutes-2019-04-28/?bhid=26893734359926884765307486560917&ftag=CNM-00-10aab4e#t=11m445s "Deadly fentanyl bought online from China being shipped through the mail"], "60 Minutes", CBS, April 28, 2019}}

In June 2023, U.S. federal prosecutors announced criminal indictments of fentanyl precursor producers in China.{{Cite news|last1=Lynch|first1=Sarah N.|last2=Cohen|first2=Luc|last3=Lynch|first3=Sarah N.|last4=Cohen|first4=Luc|date=2023-06-23|title=US files first-ever charges against Chinese fentanyl manufacturers|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-files-first-ever-charges-against-chinese-fentanyl-manufacturers-2023-06-23/}} In October 2023, OFAC sanctioned a China-based network of fentanyl manufacturers and distributors.{{Cite news|last1=Goudsward|first1=Andrew|last2=Psaledakis|first2=Daphne|date=2023-10-03|title=US takes action against Chinese companies, people tied to fentanyl|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us-sanctions-china-based-network-accused-trafficking-fentanyl-2023-10-03/}}{{Cite web|date=2023-08-28|title=Treasury Targets Large Chinese Network of Illicit Drug Producers|url=https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1779|website=U.S. Department of the Treasury|language=en}}

{{Main|Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on politics}}

In relation to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on politics, the Trump administration referred to the coronavirus as the "Wuhan virus", terms which have been criticized for being racist{{cite news|last1=Rogers|first1=Katie|last2=Jakes|first2=Lara|last3=Swanson|first3=Anna| name-list-style = vanc|title=Trump Defends Using 'Chinese Virus' Label, Ignoring Growing Criticism|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/us/politics/china-virus.html|access-date=20 March 2020|newspaper=The New York Times|date=18 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200320001747/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/us/politics/china-virus.html|archive-date=20 March 2020|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-using-racism-against-china-to-distract-from-coronavirus-failures-2020-3|title=Republicans are using racism against China to try to distract from Trump's disastrous coronavirus response|last=Haltiwanger|first=John|work=Business Insider|date=19 March 2020}} and "distract[ing] from the Trump administration's failure to contain the disease".{{Cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/united-states/2020/03/26/relations-between-china-and-america-are-infected-with-coronavirus|title=Relations between China and America are infected with coronavirus|newspaper=The Economist|access-date=30 March 2020|issn=0013-0613}} In return, some Chinese officials, including Zhao Lijian, rejected an earlier acknowledgement of the coronavirus outbreak starting in Wuhan, in favor of conspiracy theories that the virus originated in the U.S.{{cite news|date=14 March 2020|title=Chinese diplomat promotes conspiracy theory that US military brought coronavirus to Wuhan|work=CNN International|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/13/asia/china-coronavirus-us-lijian-zhao-intl-hnk/index.html}}{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/world/asia/coronavirus-china-conspiracy-theory.html|title=China spins tale that the US Army started the coronavirus epidemic|date=13 March 2020|work=The New York Times}}The Daily Beast obtained a US government cable outlining a communications strategy with apparent origins in the National Security Council, quoted as "Everything is about China. We're being told to try and get this messaging out in any way possible".{{cite news|last1=Banco|first1=Erin| name-list-style = vanc|url=https://www.thedailybeast.com/white-house-pushes-us-officials-to-criticize-china-for-coronavirus-cover-up?ref=scroll|title=White House Pushes U.S. Officials to Criticize China For Coronavirus 'Cover-Up'|work=The Daily Beast|date=21 March 2020|access-date=3 April 2020}} Multiple U.S. intelligence agencies have reportedly been pressured by the Trump administration to find intelligence supporting conspiracy theories regarding the origins of the virus in China.{{Cite news|last1=Mazzetti|first1=Mark|last2=Barnes|first2=Julian E.|last3=Wong|first3=Edward|last4=Goldman|first4=Adam| name-list-style = vanc|date=30 April 2020|title=Trump Officials Are Said to Press Spies to Link Virus and Wuhan Labs|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/30/us/politics/trump-administration-intelligence-coronavirus-china.html|access-date=6 May 2020|issn=0362-4331}}

According to a New York Times report in April 2020, the U.S. intelligence community says China intentionally under-reported its number of coronavirus cases.{{cite news|title=C.I.A. Hunts for Authentic Virus Totals in China, Dismissing Government Tallies|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/us/politics/cia-coronavirus-china.html|work=The New York Times|date=2 April 2020}} Some outlets such as Politico and Foreign Policy have said China's efforts to send aid to virus-stricken countries is part of a propaganda push for global influence.{{cite news|title=China is winning the coronavirus propaganda war|url=https://www.politico.eu/article/coronavirus-china-winning-propaganda-war/|work=Politico|date=18 March 2020}}{{cite news|title=China Is Fighting the Coronavirus Propaganda War to Win|url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/03/20/china-coronavirus-propaganda-war-journalists-press-freedom/|work=Foreign Policy|date=20 March 2020}} EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell warned there is "a geo-political component including a struggle for influence through spinning and the 'politics of generosity'".{{cite news|last1=Lau|first1=Stuart| name-list-style = vanc|title=EU fires warning shot at China in coronavirus battle of the narratives|url=https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3076728/eu-fires-warning-shot-china-coronavirus-battle-narratives|work=South China Morning Post|date=24 March 2020}} Borrell also said "China is aggressively pushing the message that, unlike the U.S., it is a responsible and reliable partner."{{cite news|title=Governments reject Chinese-made equipment|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52092395|work=BBC News|date=30 March 2020}} China has also called for the US to lift its sanctions from Syria,{{citation needed|date=September 2023}} Venezuela{{cite web|date=18 March 2020|title=China hints Venezuela aid, IMF pans request: Update|url=https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/2088421-china-hints-venezuela-aid-imf-pans-request-update|access-date=4 April 2020|website=Argus Media}} and Iran,{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-iran-sanctions-idUSKBN2132F5|title=China urges U.S. to lift sanctions on Iran amid coronavirus response|date=16 March 2020|work=Reuters|access-date=4 April 2020}} while reportedly sending aid to the latter two countries.{{cite web|last=Leonardo Flores|title=Venezuela's Coronavirus Response Might Surprise You|url=https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/03/25/venezuelas-coronavirus-response-might-surprise-you|access-date=4 April 2020|website=Common Dreams}}{{cite web|url=https://www.salon.com/2020/03/18/us-continues-sanctions-against-iran-and-venezuela-during-coronavirus-pandemic-_partner/|title=U.S. continues sanctions against Iran and Venezuela during coronavirus pandemic|date=18 March 2020|website=Salon|access-date=4 April 2020}} Donations of 100,000 masks to Cuba made by Chinese businessman Jack Ma was blocked by US sanctions on April 3.{{cite web|url=https://apnews.com/2858fbaa2dd5460fa2988b888fc53748|title=Cuba: US embargo blocks coronavirus aid shipment from Asia|date=3 April 2020|website=AP NEWS|access-date=4 April 2020}} Trade in medical supplies between the United States and China has also become politically complicated. Exports of face masks and other medical equipment to China from the United States (and many other countries) spiked in February, according to statistics from Trade Data Monitor, prompting criticism from The Washington Post that the United States government failed to anticipate the domestic needs for that equipment.{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/us-sent-millions-of-face-masks-to-china-early-this-year-ignoring-pandemic-warning-signs/2020/04/18/aaccf54a-7ff5-11ea-8013-1b6da0e4a2b7_story.html|title=U.S. sent millions of face masks to China early this year, ignoring pandemic warning signs|last1=Eilperin|first1=Juliet|last2=Stein|first2=Jeff|last3=Butler|first3=Desmond|last4=Hamburger|first4=Tom|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=18 April 2020|access-date=24 June 2020}} Similarly, The Wall Street Journal, citing Trade Data Monitor to show that China is the leading source of many key medical supplies, raised concerns that US tariffs on imports from China threaten imports of medical supplies into the United States.{{Cite web|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-tariffs-hamper-imports-of-sanitizer-disinfectants-11586683800|title=U.S. Tariffs Hamper Imports of Sanitizer, Disinfectants, Some Companies Say|last1=Ferek|first1=Katy Stech|last2=Zumbrun|first2=Josh|work=The Wall Street Journal|date=12 April 2020|access-date=24 June 2020}}

By May 2020, the relationship had deteriorated to the lowest point as both sides were recruiting allies to attack the other regarding guilt for the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic.Kate O'Keeffe, Michael C. Bender and Chun Han Wong, "Coronavirus Casts Deep Chill Over U.S.-China Relations: Pandemic has brought relations between the two to a modern-day nadir as they try to outmaneuver one another to shape the world order" [https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-casts-deep-chill-over-u-s-china-relations-11588781420?mod=hp_lead_pos5 The Wall Street Journal May 6, 2020]

In September 2020, the trade war between China and the US alongside Beijing's behavior during the COVID-19 crisis combined to worsen American public opinion about China.{{Cite web|last=Yellinek|first=Roie|date=31 August 2020|title=US Attitudes Toward China in the Wake of the Coronavirus|url=https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/us-attitudes-china-coronavirus/|access-date=7 September 2020|website=Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies|language=en-US}} This also affected American perceptions of China-Taiwan tensions as a serious national security concern.{{Cite journal|last=Pan|first=Hsin-Hsin|date=2023|title=US public opinion on cross-strait relations: the effect of China threat on the China–Taiwan tension|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/japanese-journal-of-political-science/article/abs/us-public-opinion-on-crossstrait-relations-the-effect-of-china-threat-on-the-chinataiwan-tension/428CE7AF8FB2211C91BA090567652D09|journal=Japanese Journal of Political Science|language=en|volume=24|issue=2|pages=190–207|doi=10.1017/S1468109923000038|issn=1468-1099}}

On September 22, 2020, President Donald Trump called on the United Nations to "hold China accountable for their actions", in a speech to the world body's General Assembly. President Trump blamed the Chinese government for the global spread of COVID-19, which had infected 31 million people worldwide and killed more than 965,000, by then.{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/22/world/americas/UN-Trump-Xi-China-coronavirus.html|title= Trump Demands U.N. Hold China to Account for Coronavirus Pandemic|access-date= 22 September 2020|website= The New York Times|date= 22 September 2020|last1= Gladstone|first1= Rick}}

On May 26, 2021, Joe Biden tasked the US intelligence community with investigating the origins of the pandemic.{{cite news|last1=Shear|first1=Michael|last2=Barnes|first2=Julian|last3=Zimmer|first3=Carl|last4=Mueller|first4=Benjamin|title=Biden Orders Intelligence Inquiry Into Origins of Virus|url=http://nytimes.com/2021/05/26/us/politics/biden-coronavirus-origins.html|access-date=28 February 2023|work=The New York Times|date=26 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210527004118/http://nytimes.com/2021/05/26/us/politics/biden-coronavirus-origins.html|archive-date=27 May 2021}} By August 2021, the intelligence probe assessed that the Chinese government did not have foreknowledge of the outbreak, yet the investigation did not render conclusive results on the origins.{{cite news|last1=Nakashima|first1=Ellen|last2=Achenbach|first2=Joel|date=27 August 2021|title=U.S. spy agencies rule out possibility the coronavirus was created as a bioweapon, say origin will stay unknown without China's help|newspaper=The Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/wuhan-coronavirus-lab-leak/2021/08/27/8f20b024-0740-11ec-8c3f-3526f81b233b_story.html|access-date=29 August 2021|archive-date=29 August 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210829091607/https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/wuhan-coronavirus-lab-leak/2021/08/27/8f20b024-0740-11ec-8c3f-3526f81b233b_story.html|url-status=live}} Of eight assembled teams, one (the Federal Bureau of Investigation) leaned towards a lab leak theory, four others (and the National Intelligence Council) were inclined to uphold a zoonotic origin, and three were unable to reach a conclusion.{{cite news|last=Merchant|first=Nomaan|date=27 August 2021|title=US intelligence still divided on origins of coronavirus|language=en|work=Associated Press|url=https://apnews.com/article/science-health-coronavirus-pandemic-2570b89545d4332b8a3bd7289982aa22/|access-date=29 August 2021|archive-date=29 August 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210829012940/https://apnews.com/article/science-health-coronavirus-pandemic-2570b89545d4332b8a3bd7289982aa22|url-status=live}}{{Cite journal|last=Cohen|first=Jon|date=27 August 2021|title=COVID-19's origins still uncertain, U.S. intelligence agencies conclude|url=https://www.science.org/content/article/covid-19-s-origins-still-uncertain-us-intelligence-agencies-conclude|access-date=29 August 2021|website=Science|language=en|doi=10.1126/science.abm1388|s2cid=240981726|quote=The first, and most important, takeaway is that the IC is 'divided on the most likely origin' of the pandemic coronavirus and that both hypotheses are 'plausible.'|archive-date=31 August 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210831193701/https://www.science.org/content/article/covid-19-s-origins-still-uncertain-us-intelligence-agencies-conclude|url-status=live}}{{Cite news|last=Barnes|first=Julian E.|date=29 October 2021|title=Origin of Virus May Remain Murky, U.S. Intelligence Agencies Say|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/29/us/politics/coronavirus-origin-intelligence-report.html|access-date=17 December 2021|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=17 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211217032701/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/29/us/politics/coronavirus-origin-intelligence-report.html|url-status=live}} In February 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy revised its previous estimate of the origin from "undecided" to "low confidence" in favor of a laboratory leak.{{cite news|last1=Mueller|first1=Julia|title=National security adviser: No 'definitive answer' on COVID lab leak|url=https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3874580-national-security-adviser-no-definitive-answer-on-covid-lab-leak/|access-date=26 February 2023|work=The Hill|date=26 February 2023}}{{cite web|last1=Barnes|first1=Julian E.|title=Lab Leak Most Likely Caused Pandemic, Energy Dept. Says|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/26/us/politics/china-lab-leak-coronavirus-pandemic.html|website=The New York Times|access-date=27 February 2023|date=26 February 2023}} Following the Energy Department's revised conclusion, the Chinese foreign ministry called on the United States to "stop defaming China" with the lab leak theory, adding that the US was politicizing a scientific issue.{{cite news|last1=Pierson|first1=David|title=China Dismisses Latest Claim That Lab Leak Likely Caused Covid|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/27/world/asia/china-react-covid-lab-leak.html|access-date=1 March 2023|work=The New York Times|date=27 February 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230227100229/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/27/world/asia/china-react-covid-lab-leak.html|archive-date=27 February 2023}} In January 2025, after John Ratcliffe became its director, the Central Intelligence Agency revised its previous estimate of the origin from "undecided" to "low confidence" in favor of a laboratory leak.{{Cite news |last=Barnes |first=Julian E. |date=2025-01-25 |title=C.I.A. Now Favors Lab Leak Theory to Explain Covid's Origins |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/25/us/politics/cia-covid-lab-leak.html |access-date=2025-01-25 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}

According to a report by Reuters, the United States ran a propaganda campaign to spread disinformation about the Sinovac Chinese COVID-19 vaccine, including using fake social media accounts to spread the disinformation that the Sinovac vaccine contained pork-derived ingredients and was therefore haram under Islamic law.{{Cite news|last1=Bing|first1=Chris|last2=Schechtman|first2=Joel|date=June 14, 2024|title=Pentagon Ran Secret Anti-Vax Campaign to Undermine China during Pandemic|url=https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-covid-propaganda/|work=Reuters}} The campaign was described as "payback" for COVID-19 disinformation by China directed against the U.S.{{Cite web|last=Toropin|first=Konstantin|date=2024-06-14|title=Pentagon Stands by Secret Anti-Vaccination Disinformation Campaign in Philippines After Reuters Report|url=https://www.military.com/daily-news/2024/06/14/pentagon-stands-secret-anti-vaccination-disinformation-campaign-philippines-after-reuters-report.html|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240614223757/https://www.military.com/daily-news/2024/06/14/pentagon-stands-secret-anti-vaccination-disinformation-campaign-philippines-after-reuters-report.html|archive-date=2024-06-14|access-date=2024-06-19|website=Military.com|language=en}} The campaign primarily targeted people in the Philippines and used a social media hashtag for "China is the virus" in Tagalog. The campaign ran from the spring of 2020 to mid-2021.

The United States and China are the highest greenhouse gas emitters among developed countries and developing countries, respectively.{{Rp|page=82}} Clean energy and climate cooperation were generally viewed by both China and the United States as a relative safe harbor for cooperation, even during many of the most contentious periods in the bilateral relationship.{{Rp|pages=81–82}} A record number of bilateral cooperation agreements, including related to climate issues, were signed during the tenure of US President Barack Obama.{{Rp|page=2}}

However, cooperation on clean energy and climate change issues were also limited by lack of consistent funding and lack of dialogue at high political levels,{{Rp|page=94}} and ended almost entirely after US President Donald Trump de-prioritized environmental issues during his term.{{Rp|page=108}} The subsequent Joseph Biden administration ended the U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center (CERC) established under Obama.{{Rp|page=98}} CERC had been the most ambitious clean energy cooperation platform between the two countries,{{Rp|page=117}} and one of the few cooperation mechanisms to have survived the Trump administration.{{Rp|page=98}}

On 18 July 2023, U.S. climate envoy John Kerry emphasized the goal of redefining the China-U.S. relationship through climate cooperation. The subsequent day's discussions centered on climate financing, coal consumption, and methane reduction. Kerry's visit signifies the renewed focus on high-level climate diplomacy between the two nations.{{Cite news|last= Volcovici|first= Valerie|date=2023-07-18|title= US envoy Kerry says climate cooperation could redefine US-China ties|language=en|work=Reuters|url= https://www.reuters.com/world/us-climate-envoy-kerry-meets-chinas-top-diplomat-wang-yi-2023-07-18/ |access-date=2023-07-25}}

In November 2023, The representatives of the United States and China issued the "Sunnylands Statement on Enhancing Cooperation to Address the Climate Crisis" published immediately in both countries. The statement contains a plan of further cooperation on climate issues between the sides. In the statement both countries pledged among others to:{{cite web|title=Sunnylands Statement on Enhancing Cooperation to Address the Climate Crisis|url=https://www.state.gov/sunnylands-statement-on-enhancing-cooperation-to-address-the-climate-crisis/|website=US Department of State|publisher=United States Government|access-date=15 November 2023}}{{cite news|title=China, U.S. release statement on enhancing cooperation to address climate crisis|url=https://english.news.cn/20231115/f83e897bf1e94c33943533fc73d5e3f1/c.html|access-date=15 November 2023|agency=Xinhua|date=15 November 2023}}

• Make common efforts to stop climate change, limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees as defined in the Paris agreement.
• Make the common efforts as at national so at the subnational level (cooperation between districts, cities in the 2 countries) including information exchange, dialog. The 2 countries will meet regularly for discussing the problem.
• Activate a US-China climate group named "Working Group on Enhancing Climate Action in the 2020s" that will regularly coordinate those efforts.
• Push for climate action at 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference. Ensure climate finance to low income countries, including the long-awaited 100 billion dollars per year, increase 2 times adaptation finance and create new financial pledges in COP 29.
• Reactivate the US-China Energy Efficiency Forum, for coordinate bilateral efforts on energy conservation in the industry, buildings, transportation, equipment sectors, including cooling equipment.
• Make efforts to triple global renewable energy capacity by 2030, deploy it in the US and China replacing fossil fuels, so the emissions from energy sector will decline in the 2020s.
• Reduce methane emissions and create immediately a special group dealing with this.
• Manage nitrous oxide emission and implement the Kigali Amendment to zero emissions from hydrofluorocarbons.
• Support efforts to achieve resource efficiency and circular economy.
• End plastic pollution, fight Air pollution,
• Stop and reverse deforestation by 2030, including by stopping illegal imports.
• Create new, economy wide NDC for the year 2035, with targets, compatible with the Paris Agreement goals.

The United States used to have substantial soft power in China. However, with China's rise in the 21st century, American culture has declined in popularity in China.{{Cite news |title=The United States used to have cachet in China. Not anymore. |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/05/14/china-united-states-soft-power/ |newspaper=Washington Post}}

{{See also|American Chinese cuisine}}

{{See also|Ping-pong diplomacy|Baseball in China}}

A major element of China's modern sports policy is to surpass other nations, particularly the United States, in Olympic gold medals. In the 2024 Olympics, the two countries tied at 40 gold medals.{{Cite web |title=Gold Medal Rivalry: For China and the US, the Olympics Are More Than Just Sport |url=https://thediplomat.com/2024/08/gold-medal-rivalry-for-china-and-the-us-the-olympics-are-more-than-just-sport/ |access-date=2024-11-16 |website=thediplomat.com |language=en-US}}

Chinese students constitute about one-quarter of international students in the US, second largest after Indians, contributing significantly to university funding. While many return to China after graduation, science and engineering doctorate holders often remain in the U.S.{{Cite web |date=2025-03-20 |title=China calls for protections for students in US after congressional panel demands data from colleges |url=https://apnews.com/article/china-us-students-technology-security-d6895c64e0f314fbc7138e96709f0d7d |access-date=2025-03-25 |website=AP News |language=en}} The number of Chinese students in the US peaked in 2019–2020 at 372,532, and has been declining significantly since.{{Cite news |last=Han |first=Bochen |date=18 November 2024 |title=As number of Chinese students in US keeps falling, Indians move to top of list |url=https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/3286834/number-chinese-students-us-keeps-falling-indians-move-top-list |access-date=20 March 2025 |work=South China Morning Post}}

File:Governor Newsom met with Xi Jinping in Beijing 20231025 (3).jpg's Governor Gavin Newsom with Chinese leader Xi Jinping on 25 October 2023. Newsom called for better relations between the U.S. and China.{{Cite news|last1=Toh|first1=Michelle|last2=Lilieholm|first2=Lucas|date=26 October 2023|title='Divorce is not an option' for US and China, Newsom says after Xi meeting|work=CNN|url=https://edition.cnn.com/newsom-xi-meeting-us-china-intl-hnk/index.html}}]]

Despite tensions during Barack Obama's presidency, the Chinese population's favorability of the US stood at 51% in Obama's last year of 2016, only to fall during the Trump administration.{{Cite web|title=Global Indicators Database|url=https://www.pewresearch.org/global/database/indicator/1/country/cn|website=Pew Research Center|date=17 November 2010}}{{cite web|date=30 June 2017|title=BBC World Service poll (page 8)|url=http://www.globescan.com/images/images/pressreleases/bbc2017_country_ratings/BBC2017_Country_Ratings_Poll.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210608143515/https://globescan.com/images/images/pressreleases/bbc2017_country_ratings/BBC2017_Country_Ratings_Poll.pdf|archive-date=8 June 2021|access-date=6 July 2018|website=GlobeScan|agency=BBC}}

American public opinion of China and of General secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Xi Jinping has deteriorated sharply since the start of the China–United States trade war and during the COVID-19 pandemic, with many expressing economic, human-rights, and environmental concerns.{{cite news|date=April 2020|title=Americans take an ever more negative view of China|newspaper=The Economist|url=https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/21/americans-take-an-ever-more-negative-view-of-china|access-date=23 April 2020}}{{cite news|date=21 April 2020|title=Amid Coronavirus Outbreak, Americans' Views of China Increasingly Negative|work=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project|url=https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/04/21/u-s-views-of-china-increasingly-negative-amid-coronavirus-outbreak/|access-date=23 April 2020}}

In 2024, 81% of US adults viewed China unfavorably, according to the Pew Research Center.{{Cite web |date=2024-05-01 |title=Americans Remain Critical of China |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/05/01/americans-remain-critical-of-china/ |access-date=2024-11-01 |website=Pew Research Center |language=en-US}} In 2023, a Gallup survey showed above 50% Americans are most likely to mention China as the United States’ greatest enemy in the world since 2021.{{Cite web|date=2023-03-06|title=Americans Continue to View China as the U.S.'s Greatest Enemy|url=https://news.gallup.com/poll/471494/americans-continue-view-china-greatest-enemy.aspx|access-date=2023-03-21|website=Gallup.com|publisher=Gallup Inc|language=en}}

In 2024, that percentage dropped to 41 percent, yet China remained the biggest enemy.{{cite news |title=Americans Still See China as Nation's Top Foe, Russia Second |url=https://news.gallup.com/poll/612170/americans-china-nation-top-foe-russia-second.aspx |date=18 March 2024}}

A February 2023 Gallup survey found that a record-low 15% of Americans view China favorably, marking a five-percentage-point, one-year decline in this rating, which Gallup has measured since 1979.Gan, N. (2023, March 9). [https://us.cnn.com/2023/03/08/china/china-budget-diplomatic-expenditure-intl-hnk China ups diplomatic offensive with drastic increase in budget – and hardened stance on US.] CNN. Retrieved May 2, 2023; Brenan, M. (2023, March 7). [https://news.gallup.com/poll/471551/record-low-americans-view-china-favorably.aspx Record-low 15% of Americans view China favorably.] Gallup. Retrieved May 2, 2023. A 2024 poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found that Americans' perceptions of China hit a record low, with 55 percent saying that the United States should actively work to limit the growth of China's power.{{Cite news |last=Northrop |first=Katrina |date=24 October 2024 |title=American views of China hit record low, poll finds, as animosity grows |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/10/24/china-trade-war-american-views/ |access-date=31 October 2024 |newspaper=The Washington Post}}{{Cite web |last=Fields |first=Ashleigh |date=2024-10-24 |title=Views of China hit new low: Survey |url=https://thehill.com/policy/international/4951228-americans-china-relations-deteriorate/ |access-date=2024-11-01 |website=The Hill |language=en-US}}

Despite the mutually negative views, the public on both sides overwhelmingly want the relationship to improve.{{Cite web|date=April 2022|title=The State of U.S.-China Relations|url=https://go.morningconsult.com/rs/850-TAA-511/images/220411_US-China-Relations.pdf|access-date=29 August 2022|website=Morning Consult}}{{Cite web|date=2022-04-18|title=Navigating U.S.-China Relations: What American and Chinese Multinationals Need to Know|url=https://morningconsult.com/2022/04/18/navigating-u-s-china-relations/|access-date=2022-08-29|website=Morning Consult|language=en-US}} Two-thirds of US respondents in a Harris poll published in 2023 agreed that the US should "engage in dialogue as much as possible to reduce tensions" with China.{{Cite web|last=Echols|first=Connor|date=2023-02-06|title=Americans far less hawkish on North Korea and China than policy elites: poll|url=https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/02/06/americans-far-less-hawkish-on-north-korea-and-china-than-policy-elites-poll/|access-date=2023-02-24|website=Responsible Statecraft|language=en}} US public support for engaging in dialogue increased by five percentage points since 2021. According to 2023 polling by The Economist and YouGov, Americans aged 18–44 are much more likely than older age groups to have a friendly view of China.{{Cite news|title=Younger Americans are friendlier to China|newspaper=The Economist|url=https://www.economist.com/united-states/2023/03/23/younger-americans-are-friendlier-to-china?ppccampaignID=17210591673&ppcadID=&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiAs6-sBhBmEiwA1Nl8s8iR5DbG7doonC8iI8VlbTvvZhpO6VrToo8VRUNLgvsEe5sWd-yYUxoCyOIQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds|url-status=live|access-date=2023-12-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231227152018/https://www.economist.com/united-states/2023/03/23/younger-americans-are-friendlier-to-china?ppccampaignID=17210591673&ppcadID=&gad_source=1|archive-date=December 27, 2023|issn=0013-0613}}

{{col-begin}}

{{col-2}}

;Chinese Missions in the U.S.{{Cite web|title=Embassy of China, Washington, D.C.|url=http://us.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/|access-date=2024-06-25|website=us.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/}}

• Washington, D.C. (Embassy)
• Chicago (Consulate General)
• Los Angeles (Consulate General)
• New York City (Consulate General)
• San Francisco (Consulate General)

{{col-2}}

;U.S. Missions in China{{Cite web|title=Embassy & Consulates|url=https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/embassy-consulates/beijing/|access-date=2024-06-25|website=U.S. Embassy & Consulates in China|language=en-US}}

• Beijing (Embassy)
• Guangzhou (Consulate General)
• Shanghai (Consulate General)
• Shenyang (Consulate General)
• Wuhan (Consulate General)
• Hong Kong (Consulate General)The U.S. Consulate-General in Hong Kong reports directly to the U.S. Department of State, instead of the U.S. embassy in Beijing{{Cite web|url=https://hk.usconsulate.gov|title=Homepage|website=U.S. Consulate General    Hong Kong & Macau}}

{{col-end}}

File:Embassy of China in Washington, D.C.jpg|Embassy of China in Washington, D.C.

File:Chinese Consulate Chicago.JPG|Consulate-General of China in Chicago

File:PRCConsulateLA.JPG|Consulate-General of China in Los Angeles

File:Consulate General of China in SF.JPG|Consulate-General of China in San Francisco

File:US Embassy in Beijing illuminated with blur and yellow to stand united with Ukraine (4).jpg|Embassy of the United States in Beijing

File:Consulate General of the United States in Guangzhou.jpg|Consulate-General of the United States in Guangzhou

File:Shanghai US Consulate Main building.jpg|Consulate-General of the United States in Shanghai

File:US Embassy of Shenyang in 2019.jpg|Consulate-General of the United States in Shenyang

File:North Entrance of Wuhan Minsheng Bank Building.jpg|Building hosting the Consulate General of the United States in Wuhan

File:HK US Consulate General.jpg|Consulate-General of the United States in Hong Kong

{{Portal|China|United States}}

{{div-col}}

• American espionage in China
• Blue Team (U.S. politics)
• Chinese espionage in the United States
• China Lobby
• Chinese Century
• China–United States trade war
• United States sanctions against China
• Clash of Civilizations
• Foreign relations of China
• Foreign relations of the United States
• List of Chinese spy cases in the United States of America
• Cox Report
• Group of Two (G2)
• Group of Three (G3)
• G20
• Peaceful Evolution theory
• Quadrilateral Security Dialogue
• String of Pearls (Indian Ocean)
• Thucydides Trap

{{div-col-end}}

{{div-col}}

• Americans in China
• Anti-American sentiment in mainland China
• Anti-Chinese sentiment in the United States
• Beijing–Washington hotline
• Chinese Americans
• Document Number Nine
• Group of Two
• Strategic Economic Dialogue
• Taiwan–United States relations
• U.S.–China Strategic and Economic Dialogue

{{div-col-end}}

{{div-col}}

• History of Chinese Americans
• History of the Republic of China
• History of the People's Republic of China
• History of China–United States relations
• East Asia–United States relations
• 1996 United States campaign finance controversy
• China Hands, American experts on China
• Hainan Island incident
• Operation Beleaguer
• Nixon in China
• Ping-pong diplomacy
• United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission
• U.S. immigration policy toward the People's Republic of China
• US Department of Defense China Task Force
• Xenophobia and racism related to the COVID-19 pandemic

{{div-col-end}}

{{reflist|group=note}}

{{Reflist|30em}}

{{Library resources box}}

• Burt, Sally. "The Ambassador, the General, and the President: FDR's mismanagement of interdepartmental relations in wartime China." Journal of American-East Asian Relations 19.3-4 (2012): 288–310.
• Chang, Gordon H. Fateful Ties: A History of America's Preoccupation with China. (Harvard UP, 2015). [https://smile.amazon.com/dp/0674050398/ excerpt]
• Cohen, Warren I. America's Response to China: A History of Sino-American Relations (5th ed. 2010) [https://archive.org/details/americasresponse0005edcohe_f5a5 online]
• Dulles, Foster Rhea. China and America: The Story of Their Relations Since 1784 (1981), general survey [https://archive.org/details/chinaamericastor00dullrich online]
• Fairbank, John King. The United States and China (4th ed. Harvard UP, 1976). [https://archive.org/details/unitedstatesch1979fair online]
• Green, Michael J. By more than providence: Grand strategy and American power in the Asia Pacific since 1783 (Columbia UP, 2017). [https://cup.columbia.edu/book/by-more-than-providence/9780231180429 online]; 725pp; comprehensive scholarly survey.
• Hunt, Michael H. "Americans in the China Market: Economic Opportunities and Economic Nationalism, 1890s-1931." Business History Review 51.3 (1977): 277–307. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/3113634 online]
• Jackson, Carl T. "The Influence of Asia upon American Thought: A Bibliographical Essay." American Studies International 22#1 (1984), pp. 3–31, [https://www.jstor.org/stable/41280625 online] covers China, India & Japan
• Matray, James I. ed. East Asia and the United States: An Encyclopedia of relations since 1784 (2 vol. Greenwood, 2002). [https://www.amazon.com/East-Asia-United-States-Encyclopedia/dp/0313324476/ excerpt v 2]
• Pomfret, John. The Beautiful Country and the Middle Kingdom: America and China, 1776 to the Present (2016) [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/books/review/beautiful-country-middle-kingdom-john-pomfret.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbooks&action=click&contentCollection=books®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=6&pgtype=sectionfront review]
• Schaller, Michael. The United States and China: Into the Twenty-First Century 4th ed 2015)
• Song, Yuwu, ed. Encyclopedia of Chinese-American Relations (McFarland, 2006)
• Spence, Jonathan D. To Change China: Western Advisers in China (1980) [https://www.amazon.com/Change-China-Western-Advisers/dp/0140055282/ excerpt]
• Spence, Jonathan. "Western Perceptions of China from the Late Sixteenth Century to the Present" in Paul S. Ropp, ed.Heritage of China: Contemporary Perspectives on Chinese Civilization (1990) [https://books.google.com/books?id=zm6Sm64y5CwC&pg=PA10 excerpts]
• Sutter, Robert G. Historical Dictionary of United States-China Relations (2005).
• Varg, Paul A. "Sino-American Relations Past and Present." Diplomatic History 4.2 (1980): 101–112. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/24911230 online]
• Wang, Dong. The United States and China: A History from the Eighteenth Century to the Present (2013)
• Westad, Odd Arne. Decisive encounters: the Chinese civil war, 1946-1950 (Stanford University Press, 2003). [https://www.amazon.com/Decisive-Encounters-Chinese-1946-1950-Paperback/dp/B00OVMULDY/ excerpt]

• Blackwill, Robert D., and Richard Fontaine. Lost Decade: The US Pivot to Asia and the Rise of Chinese Power (Oxford University Press, 2024) covers Clinton to Biden years; [https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=61199 online reviews of this book.]

• Blanchard, Jean-Marc F., and Simon Shen, eds. Conflict and Cooperation in Sino-US Relations: Change and Continuity, Causes and Cures (Routledge, 2015)
• Brazinsky, Gregg A. Winning the Third World: Sino-American Rivalry during the Cold War (U of North Carolina Press, 2017); [https://networks.h-net.org/system/files/contributed-files/roundtable-xix-33.pdf four online reviews & author response] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513011241/https://networks.h-net.org/system/files/contributed-files/roundtable-xix-33.pdf|date=13 May 2018}}
• Chang, Gordon H. Friends and Enemies: The United States, China, and the Soviet Union, 1948–1972 (Stanford UP, 1990). [https://archive.org/details/friendsenemiesth00chan online]
• deLisle, Jacques. "International law in the Obama administration's pivot to Asia: the China seas disputes, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, rivalry with the PRC, and status quo legal norms in US foreign policy." Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 48 (2016): 143+ [http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2242&context=jil online].
• Del Rosso, Stephen J. Ask the Experts: How to Stabilize U.S.-China Relations [https://www.carnegie.org/our-work/article/ask-experts-how-stabilize-us-china-relations/ online]
• Doshi, Rush. The Long Game: China's Grand Strategy to Displace American Order (Oxford UP, 2021) [http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=57102 online review]
• Dulles, Foster Rhea. American policy toward Communist China, 1949-1969 (1972) [https://archive.org/details/americanpolicyto00dull online]
• Dumbaugh, Kerry. "China-U.S. relations: current issues and implications for U.S. policy." (Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports and Issue Briefs, Congressional Research Service, 2009) [https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A217606109/GPS?u=wikipedia&sid=GPS online]
• Fenby, Jonathan and Trey McArver. The Eagle and the Dragon: Donald Trump, Xi Jinping and the Fate of US/China Relations (2019)
• Foot, Rosemary. The practice of power: US relations with China since 1949 (Oxford UP, 1995). [https://archive.org/details/practiceofpoweru00foot online]
• Foot, Rosemary, and Amy King. "Assessing the deterioration in China–US relations: US governmental perspectives on the economic-security nexus." China International Strategy Review 1.1 (2019): 39–50. [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42533-019-00005-y online]
• {{Cite book|first1=Rosemary|last1=Foot|first2=Andrew|last2=Walter|title=China, the United States, and Global Order|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2012|isbn=9780521725194}}
• Fravel, M. Taylor. Active Defense: China's Military Strategy since 1949 (Princeton UP, 2019) [https://issforum.org/to/ir11-12 online reviews]
• {{Cite book|first=Aaron L.|last=Friedberg|author-link=Aaron Friedberg|title=A Contest for Supremacy: China, America, and the Struggle for Mastery in Asia|publisher=W.W. Norton|year=2011|isbn=9780393068283}}
• Garson, Robert. "The Road to Tiananmen Square: The United States and China, 1979-1989" Journal of Oriental Studies .ISSN 0022-331X (1992) 30#1/2 pp. 119–135
• Garver, John W.
• China's Quest: The History of the Foreign Relations of the People's Republic (2015), 59–91, 232–58, 286–314, 557–578. 607–673.
• Foreign relations of the People's Republic of China (1992) [https://archive.org/details/foreignrelations0000garv online]
• Goh, Evelyn. "Nixon, Kissinger, and the 'Soviet card' in the US opening to China, 1971–1974." Diplomatic history 29.3 (2005): 475–502. [http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Goh%20Soviet%20Card%20Opening%20to%20China.pdf online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220302163757/http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Goh%20Soviet%20Card%20Opening%20to%20China.pdf|date=2 March 2022}}
• {{Cite journal|author1-link=Avery Goldstein| last = Goldstein| first = Avery| title = First things first: the pressing danger of crisis instability in US-China relations| journal = International Security| volume = 37| issue = 4| pages = 49–89| doi = 10.1162/ISEC_a_00114| date = Spring 2013| s2cid = 53549478}} [http://myweb.rollins.edu/tlairson/china/uschinacrisis.pdf Pdf.]
• Haddick, Robert. Fire on the Water: China, America, and the Future of the Pacific (2nd ed. Naval Institute Press, 2022). [http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=58482 online review]
• Hilsman, Roger. To move a nation; the politics of foreign policy in the administration of John F. Kennedy (1967) pp 275–357; on 1961–63. [https://archive.org/details/tomovenationpol00hils online]
• Hu, XueYing. "Legacy of Tiananmen Square Incident in Sino-US Relations (post-2000)." East Asia 33.3 (2016): 213–232. [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12140-016-9259-5 abstract]
• {{Cite book|author=The International Institute for Strategic Studies|title=The Military Balance 2022|year=2022|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-032-27900-8}}
• Isaacs, Harold R. Scratches on Our Minds: American Images of China and India (1958) [https://archive.org/details/scratchesonourmi010380mbp online]
• Kissinger, Henry. On China (2011) [https://books.google.com/books?id=4pFfYliTIMkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:on+intitle:china+inauthor:kissinger&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjs5JGP6_6JAxUMJTQIHd-XJVwQ6AF6BAgEEAI online]
• Lasater, Martin L. The Taiwan Issue in Sino-American Strategic Relations (Routledge, 2019).
• Li, Cheng. "Assessing US-China Relations Under the Obama Administration" (The Brookings Institution, 30 August 2016) [https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/assessing-u-s-china-relations-under-the-obama-administration/ online]
• Li, Hongshan. Fighting on the Cultural Front: U.S.-China Relations in the Cold War (Columbia University Press, 2024) [https://hdiplo.org/to/E597 online review of this book]
• MacMillan, Margaret. Nixon and Mao: the week that changed the world (2008). [https://archive.org/details/nixonmaoweekthat00macm online]
• Mahbubani, Kishore, "What China Threat? How the United States and China can avoid war", Harper's Magazine, vol. 338, no. 2025 (February 2019), pp. 39–44. "China could... remain a different polity—... not a liberal democracy—and still not be a threatening one." (p. 44.)
• Mann, Jim. About face: A history of America's curious relationship with China, from Nixon to Clinton (Knopf, 1999)
• Mastanduno, Michael. "A grand strategic transition?: Obama, Trump and the Asia Pacific political economy." in The United States in the Indo-Pacific (Manchester UP, 2020) [https://www.manchesteropenhive.com/view/9781526135025/9781526135025.00019.xml online].
• Meltzer, Joshua P. "The U.S.-China trade agreement – a huge deal for China." Brookings (2017) [https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-fromchaos/2017/05/15/the-u-s-china-trade-agreement-a-huge-deal-for-china/ online]
• Rich, Wilbur C. ed. Looking Back on President Barack Obama's Legacy: Hope and Change (2018) [https://books.google.com/books?id=8aV-DwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:Looking+intitle:Back+intitle:on+intitle:President+intitle:Barack+intitle:Obama%27s+intitle:Legacy&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwislNap6_6JAxUkITQIHST-MmgQ6AF6BAgFEAI online]
• Roach, Stephen S. Unbalanced: the codependency of America and China (Yale UP, 2015).
• Roberts, Priscilla. "New Perspectives on Cold War History from China," Diplomatic History 41:2 (April 2017) [https://networks.h-net.org/system/files/contributed-files/ar722.pdf online]
• Rose, Robert S. et al. Re-examining the Cold War: U.S.-China Diplomacy, 1954–1973 (2002)
• Kevin Rudd (Prime Minister of Australia June - September 2013): The Avoidable War: The Dangers of a Catastrophic Conflict between the US and Xi Jinping's China (PublicAffairs, March 2022, ISBN 978-1541701298)
• {{Cite book|editor-first=David|editor-last=Shambaugh|title=Tangled Titans: The United States and China|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|year=2012|isbn=978-1442219700}}
• Schmitt, Gary J. "The China Dream: America's, China's, and the Resulting Competition." AEI Paper & Studies (American Enterprise Institute, 2019), p. 1J+. [https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A574566600/GPS?u=wikipedia&sid=GPS online]
• Schoen, Douglas E. and Melik Kaylan. Return to Winter: Russia, China, and the New Cold War Against America (2015)
• Steinberg, James and Michael E. O'Hanlon, eds. Strategic Reassurance and Resolve: US-China Relations in the Twenty-First Century (Princeton UP, 2014).
• Suettinger, Robert. Beyond Tiananmen: The Politics of US-China Relations, 1989–2000 (Brookings Institution Press, 2004). [https://archive.org/details/beyondtiananmenp0000suet online]
• Tucker, Nancy Bernkopf, ed. China confidential: American diplomats and Sino-American relations, 1945-1996 (Columbia University Press, 2001).
• Tyler, Patrick. A Great Wall: Six Presidents and China (1999) [https://archive.org/details/greatwallsixpres0000tyle online]
• Wang, Dong. "Grand Strategy, Power Politics, and China's Policy toward the United States in the 1960s," Diplomatic History 42:1 (April 2017): 265–287;
• Westad, Odd Arne, "The Sources of Chinese Conduct: Are Washington and Beijing Fighting a New Cold War?", Foreign Affairs, 98#5 (September / October 2019), pp. 86–95. "If some unifying factor does not intervene, the decline in the United States' ability to act purposefully will, sooner than most people imagine, mean not just a multipolar world but an unruly world – one in which fear, hatred, and ambition hold everyone hostage to the basest instincts of the human imagination." (p. 95.) [https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2019-08-12/sources-chinese-conduct online]
• Wheeler, Norton. Role of American NGOs in China's Modernization: Invited Influence (Routledge, 2014) 240 pp. [http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=43437 online review]
• Worden, Robert L. et al. eds. China: a country study (Federal Research Division, U.S. Library of Congress, 1986) comprehensive Library of Congress Country Studies 732pp report on Chinese history, society, economy, military and foreign relations; as a US government document it is not copyright. The Library produced separate reports on 82 countries; it ended the program in 1989. [https://www.loc.gov/item/87600493/ online]
• Xia, Yafeng and Zhi Liang. "China's Diplomacy toward the United States in the Twentieth Century: A Survey of the Literature," Diplomatic History 42:1 (April 2017): 241–264.
• {{Cite journal| last = Yan| first = Xuetong| s2cid = 154460100| title = The instability of China–US relations| journal = The Chinese Journal of International Politics| volume = 3| issue = 3| pages = 263–92| doi = 10.1093/cjip/poq009| date = Autumn 2010}}
• Yim, Kwan Ha.
• China and the US: 1955-63 (1973). [https://archive.org/details/chinaus19556300yimk online]
• China 1964-72 (1975). [https://archive.org/details/chinaus1964720000yimk online]
• China since Mao (1980) pp 129–60 [https://archive.org/details/chinasincemao0000yimk/page/n9 online]
• Zhang, Biwu. Chinese Perceptions of the U.S.: An Exploration of China's Foreign Policy Motivations (Lexington Books; 2012) 266 pages; Chinese views of America's power, politics, and economics, as well as the country as a source of threat or opportunity.
• {{Cite journal| last = Zhao| first = Quansheng| title = America's response to the rise of China and Sino-US relations| journal = Asian Journal of Political Science| volume = 13| issue = 2| pages = 1–27| doi = 10.1080/02185370508434256| date = December 2005| s2cid = 155081636}}

• Brazinsky, Gregg. "The Birth of a Rivalry: Sino-American Relations During the Truman Administration" in Daniel S. Margolies, ed. A Companion to Harry S. Truman (2012) pp 484–497; emphasis on historiography.
• Sutter, Robert. "The Importance of the 'pan-Asian' versus the 'China-first' Emphasis in US Policy toward China, 1969-2008: A Review of the Literature." American Journal of Chinese Studies (2009): 1–18.
• Sutter, Robert. "US Domestic Debate Over Policy Toward Mainland China and Taiwan: Key Findings, Outlook and Lessons." American Journal of Chinese Studies (2001): 133–144.
• Zhu Yongtao. "American Studies in China" American Studies International 25#2 (1987) pp. 3–19 [https://www.jstor.org/stable/41278940 online]

• {{citation|editor=Jeffrey A. Engel|title=The China Diary of George H. W. Bush: The Making of a Global President|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jRvdwoKQOgQC&pg=PA356|year=2011|publisher=Princeton UP|isbn=978-1400829613|jstor=j.ctt7stg8|chapter=The Making of a Global President|last1=Bush|first1=George H. W.|doi=10.2307/j.ctt7stg8|s2cid=266091539}}
• May, Ernest R. ed. The Truman Administration and China 1945–1949 (1975) summary plus primary sources. [https://archive.org/details/trumanadministra0000maye online]

• Lyman Van Slyke, ed. The China White Paper: August 1949 (1967: 2 vol. Stanford U.P.); 1124 pp.; copy of official US Department of State. China White Paper: 1949 [https://books.google.com/books?id=HuB6gPHeP_cC vol 1 online at Google]; [https://archive.org/details/VanSlykeLymanTheChinaWhitePaper1949 online vol 1 pdf]; vol 1 consists of history; vol 2 consists of primary sources and is not online; see [https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/63130113 library holdings via World Cat]
• excerpts appear in Barton Bernstein and Allen J. Matusow, eds. The Truman Administration: A Documentary History (1966) pp. 299–355

{{China–United States relations}}

{{Foreign relations of China}}

{{Foreign relations of the United States}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:China-United States relations}}

Category:Bilateral relations of the United States

United States