By Zhong Sheng, People’s Daily

From July 28 to 29, China and the United States held a new round of economic and trade talks in Stockholm, Sweden. The two sides held candid, in-depth and constructive exchanges on economic and trade issues of mutual concern, including China-U.S. economic relations and macroeconomic policies. 

They reviewed and affirmed the implementation of the consensus reached in Geneva and the framework agreed on in London talks. Based on the meeting consensus, both sides will continue pushing for the continued extension by 90 days of the pause on 24 percent of reciprocal tariffs of the U.S. side, as well as counter measures of the Chinese side.

The talks this time played a positive role in consolidating consensus and deepening mutual trust, further boosting confidence for both parties to resolve economic and trade disputes through equal dialogue and consultation.

China-U.S. economic and trade relations are vast in scale and broad in scope, profoundly affecting the welfare of businesses and people in both countries. 

Through joint efforts by both sides, the Stockholm talks sent positive signals. The continued extension of pause on 24 percent of reciprocal tariffs of the U.S. side, as well as counter measures of the Chinese side represents a consensus welcomed by all parties. 

The fewer the tariffs, the greater the cooperation. Such pragmatic arrangements developed through China-U.S. dialogue not only help build mutual trust and advance negotiations, but reaffirm that resolving trade disputes through and consultation proves more efficient and less costly than alternatives.

This round of talks continued the positive momentum formed by the China-U.S. economic and trade teams under the guidance of the important consensus reached by the two heads of state during their phone conversation. The previous economic and trade talks in Geneva and London reached a consensus in Geneva and a framework in London, respectively, effectively helping to cool down and defuse bilateral economic and trade frictions. 

This round maintained positive momentum established by both economic teams under their leaders’ strategic guidance. Previous Geneva talks yielded substantive agreements, while London negotiations produced a framework—collectively easing bilateral trade tensions.

There exists broad consensus across both countries and the international community that China and the United States should resolve trade disputes through equal dialogue, guided by the principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation.

Through sustained engagement, both sides have deepened their understanding of respective concerns, with growing alignment on resolving differences and expanding cooperation. 

At the Stockholm meeting, China expressed that a stable, healthy and sustainable China-U.S. economic and trade relationship serves not only the two countries’ respective development goals, but also contributes to global economic growth and stability. 

At the Stockholm meeting, China emphasized that a stable, healthy, and sustainable bilateral economic relationship serves not only both countries’ development objectives but also contributes to global economic growth and stability.

The U.S. side also acknowledged that a stable U.S.-China economic and trade relationship is of great significance to the economies of both countries and the world at large. It expressed willingness to work with the Chinese side to continue to resolve differences in the economic and trade field through the consultation mechanism, promote more outcomes from the talks, and further stabilize bilateral economic and trade relations.

Since the onset of recent China-U.S. trade tensions, the U.S. narratives have frequently emphasized a so-called “China rebalancing” rhetoric. While firmly safeguarding its interests, China remains committed to resolving differences through equal dialogue and consultation, seeking to unlock bilateral economic potential. 

The trajectory of China-U.S. economic relations must evolve with both nations’ development. The key question remains: Will both sides steer toward mutual benefit and shared success, or descend into confrontation? The optimal path is evident – what’s needed is the wisdom and courage to seize opportunities.

Shared interests and vast cooperation potential define the China-U.S. economic relationship. China’s ongoing high-quality development and expanding market openness generate significant opportunities for mutually beneficial collaboration.

In manufacturing, China’s integrated supply chains, robust industrial ecosystems, and dynamic growth are attracting increasing numbers of U.S. firms. These companies expand operations in China to leverage complementary resources from both nations, thereby strengthening their global competitiveness.

Within the consumer sector, China is treating the expansion of domestic demand as a strategic initiative, taking multiple measures to actively expand imports, with American companies being important beneficiaries. 

China welcomes enterprises from both sides achieve greater complementary advantages and mutual benefit based on each other’s needs. Given the U.S. objective of expanding exports to China, reducing bilateral trade barriers and fostering a conducive business environment would serve this shared interest. Words require credibility, and actions must yield results. Progress in China-U.S. economic talks has been hard-won, and sustained advancement demands continued alignment from both sides.

Both sides should continue to fully leverage the role of the China-U.S. economic and trade consultation mechanism in accordance with the important consensus reached by the two heads of state during their phone conversation, continue to implement the consensus and results that have already been formed, constantly enhance consensus, reduce misunderstandings, strengthen cooperation, further deepen dialogue and consultations, and strive for more win-win outcomes, thus injecting more positive energy into the stable development of both countries and the global economy.

(Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People’s Daily to express its views on foreign policy and international affairs.)