Home / International / Opinion Tools: Save | Print | E-mail | Most Read | Comment
Principles of Shanghai Communique Still Apply 35 Years After Nixon's Visit
Adjust font size:

Thirty-five years after former US President Richard Nixon's visit to China, the principles of the Shanghai Communique remain the touchstone of US-China relations, a leading US expert said.

"In one very important respect the Communique provided an example of how the two sides should handle disagreements," David M. Lampton, director of China Studies at Johns Hopkins University, said in a recent interview with Xinhua.

"It identified common points between China and the United States, and each side also honestly expressed the differences that remained," he added.

On Feb. 21, 1972, Nixon arrived in Beijing for a week-long "ice-breaking" tour. On Feb. 28, the last day of his visit, the two sides signed a joint communique, known as the Shanghai Communique.

"The Communique also was based on an understanding of the One China principle, the need to carefully handle the Taiwan issue," noted Lampton, who is a former president of the National Committee on US- China Relations.

"These remain the basic conditions for effectively managing US-China relations to this day," he said.

In Lampton's opinion, the most impressive improvement in US-China relations since the Shanghai Communique is that "the two sides have had a peaceful, though not entirely calm, relationship for 35 years."

Firstly, China and the United States have benefited enormously from pursuing their common interests, he said, while the second level of the communique's importance is seen in the positive changes in cultural relations and economic ties.

Finally, the scope of US-China relations has expanded greatly since then, he added.

"Today it is a relationship knitted together at every level of our two societies and governmental systems. Moreover, the US-China relationship is knitted together by our common membership in global organizations," said Lampton.

The lesson of Nixon's trip, he noted, is that, in order to succeed, US-China relations must be based on common long-term interests.

"Nixon's early statement to Chairman Mao that it was common interests that brought us together remains true-- and it is common interests that will keep us together," said the expert.

He said there are differences and some similarities between the China policy of Nixon's administration and the current administration.

"The similarities now involve the fact that, as in the Vietnam War era, the United States is now involved in foreign conflict and also has other global issues like nuclear proliferation, in which Washington desires China's cooperation," said Lampton.

In other words, "there is an important strategic context, for both Nixon in 1971-1972, and for US President George W. Bush today", and "those strategic contexts foster US-China cooperation," he said.

The big difference is that "the range of issues in US-China relations confronting the US President is much greater today than it was in the early 1970s."

"Most obviously, trade was virtually not a consideration in 1971-1972 and it is a major concern for the current administration," said Lampton.

He said it is very important for both countries to maintain a healthy and steady relationship.

"Without peaceful and productive US-China relations, there cannot be peace and prosperity in Asia. And, without peace and prosperity in Asia there will not be peace in the world," said the expert.

(Xinhua News Agency February 27, 2007)

Tools: Save | Print | E-mail | Most Read
Comment
Pet Name
Anonymous
China Archives
Related >>
- US Needs to Continue Policy of Engagement with China
- Nixon Still Remembered for 'Ice-breaking Tour'
Most Viewed >>
> Korean Nuclear Talks
> Reconstruction of Iraq
> Middle East Peace Process
> Iran Nuclear Issue
> 6th SCO Summit Meeting
Links
- China Development Gateway
- Foreign Ministry
- Network of East Asian Think-Tanks
- China-EU Association
- China-Africa Business Council
- China Foreign Affairs University
- University of International Relations
- Institute of World Economics & Politics
- Institute of Russian, East European & Central Asian Studies
- Institute of West Asian & African Studies
- Institute of Latin American Studies
- Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies
- Institute of Japanese Studies