Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Israel-Hamas
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
    • North Korea
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / China / A fourth joint communique would benefit Washington’s China policy
China, Asia

August 16, 2024

A fourth joint communique would benefit Washington’s China policy

By Quinn Marschik

August marks the 42nd anniversary of President Ronald Reagan’s Third U.S.-China Joint Communique. Reagan accomplished this feat during a period of intense debate over the United States’ relationship with China to avoid a cross-Strait crisis. While today’s debate appears to reject hard-nosed diplomacy, interest-based and clear-eyed diplomacy with China is needed to restore stability to the relationship. A fourth communique would be a bold and beneficial tool to reorient U.S.-China relations to focus on national interests and avoid conflict.

Both Washington and Beijing use the Three Communiques as the framework for relations. A new one could establish additional guidance for the conduct and goals of each country’s policy.

It should begin with focusing on issues and tension points in the U.S.-China relationship, namely trade, national security, and political affairs. Both countries should acknowledge that trade and investment restrictions – including Chinese market access and fair treatment and U.S. technology trade controls and tariffs – have created tension and distrust. Recognizing key national security issues, such as Chinese espionage and support for Russia’s war in Ukraine and U.S. military operations near China, are important to clearing the air. Even mentioning different interpretations of human rights and political systems as a source of distrust in the relationship would signal that despite the existing political chasm, Washington and Beijing are willing to talk.

Each country’s redlines should be clearly defined, setting the guardrails of the U.S.-China relationship. Like with the previous Three Communiques creating a flexible Taiwan policy which has preserved regional peace, inclusion of redlines should be specific enough for each country to know when to back down, but vague enough to allow interpretation to meet domestic political needs. Washington should unequivocally affirm its vital interests are safeguarding U.S. sovereignty and territorial integrity (including its overseas territories), economic prosperity, and political system. Likewise, Beijing should restate its core interests of sovereignty (meaning rejecting outside interference in China’s domestic political affairs), territorial integrity, and economic development.

Read at RealClearWorld

Author

Quinn
Marschik

Contributing Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Asia

op-edChina, Air power, Asia, Balance of power, Global posture, Land power, Naval power, Taiwan

China tariffs deal could backfire on Trump

By Jennifer Kavanagh

May 12, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, Air power, Asia, Balance of power, Global posture, Land power, Naval power

The Pentagon Is Ignoring Its Own Strategy

By Jennifer Kavanagh

May 7, 2025

ExplainerMiddle East, China, Europe and Eurasia

China can’t dominate the Middle East

By Rosemary Kelanic

May 5, 2025

In the mediaChina, Asia, Taiwan

Trump fires national security adviser, signaling new China line

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

May 2, 2025

op-edChina, Asia, Taiwan

Kavanagh and Wertheim Respond: Why Taiwan’s Survival Depends on Realistic Defense

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Stephen Wertheim

April 28, 2025

op-edChina, Air power, Asia, Balance of power, Global posture, Land power, Naval power

US should look before it leaps into South China Sea

April 18, 2025

Events on China

See All Events
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

Past Virtual Event: China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualAsia, Basing and force posture, Burden sharing, China, Grand strategy

Past Virtual Event: Rethinking U.S. strategy in East Asia: do more bases mean more deterrence?

January 24, 2024
virtualChina, Asia, Grand strategy

Past Virtual Event: Rocks, reefs, and resolve? Examining the purpose of U.S. policy in the South China Sea

December 12, 2023

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved