Trade frictions between China and the United States have been gradually heating up recently, the wrestling centering round the question of the Renminbi (RMB) exchange rate has also been continuously escalating, plus the fuss about so-called "theory of Chinese military threat", as a result, Sino-US relationship has been covered by dark clouds for a while.

On June 2, US Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierez paid a visit to China at such a sensitive moment. Two days before the secretary's visit, Chinese Commerce Minister Bo Xilai gave an all-round exposition and explanation of the Chinese government's basic stance and main viewpoints related to current Sino-US trade frictions. What presages between these two actions is: First, the seriousness and urgency of Sino-US economic and trade frictions have really developed to such an extent that requires the two sides to sit down to have good talks; second, both China and America have realized that it is best to solve the economic and trade issue through mutual communications and consultations by economic and trade departments of the two sides, and the issue should not be "politicized".

The solution of the question concerning US permanent normalization of trade ties with China in 2000 and China's accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001 marked a key step taken by Sino-US economic and trade relationship mechanistically toward "non-politicization". The establishment of a Sino-US Commerce-Trade Mixed Committee made further guarantee for "non-politicization" in systemic arrangement. Precisely because of this, Sino-US economic and trade ties have made a spurt of progress and reached a new stage in recent years.

However, practice has proved that it is far from enough to rely merely on mechanistic establishment, systemic arrangement and organizational guarantee for a thorough "non-politicization" of economic and trade ties. At present, in Sino-US economic and trade relations, the content, the structure and internal and external mechanisms have not changed, but frictions have suddenly heated up, this has much to do with the change in the "major political factor" of US strategy toward China.

In the final analysis, the real "major problem" with Sino-US economic and trade relations does not lie in so-called trade deficit, the RMB exchange rate and textiles friction, rather it lies in the assertion made by some American personages that China's rise is "too fast in speed", "too vigorous in momentum" and a "hardly predictable prospect". They are somewhat dissatisfied and thus try hard to check and contain it. Therefore, a real realization of "non-politicization", in the final analysis, requires that the US administration and personages in various social circles look squarely at and accept China's peaceful rise with new psyche and strategic mind.

Sino-US relationship has to date developed into a kind of complicated, multidimensional and all-round ties, the strategic interests between them should not damage the overall relations simply because problems arising in a certain field. If the problem really turns to become serious, eventually it is still necessary to keep a sober mind and carefully evaluate and properly deal with it. It is essential to treat and handle economic and trade frictions and other partial problems from a strategic height.

US China policy-makers should be clear about this. On the day before Gutierez's China visit, that is, on May 31, George W. Bush, at a press conference held in the White House, talked in great detail about the current US-China relations, his keynote was positive on the whole. Which includes: He emphasized the complexity of US-China relations, which he did not hope to be simplified; he stressed that China's economic development implies an export increase, as well as a "huge market" which should be regarded as an "opportunity"; he also emphasized that China is an important partner of the United States in the security fields of counter-terrorism and coping with the Korean Peninsular nuclear crisis, and affirmed the "mystery" of China's development.

These words show that the US government still persists in examining the development of US-China relationship and its significance from a strategic height and does not want to bring its relations with China to a deadlock. This more or less shows a definite breadth of strategic mind. We will wait and see as to whether this strategic mind can be expressed in the US commerce secretary's visit to China. Chinese Commerce Minister Bo Xilai has stated, "The prospect of Sino-US economic and trade relationship is optimistic, on the basis of mutual benefit and reciprocity, China is willing to properly solve the existing problems through equal consultations." China has always been handling Sino-US economic and trade problems as well as overall China-US relationship with such mind.

Published on the front page of People's Daily Overseas Edition on June 2, the above article is translated by People's Daily Online