China Seeks to Allay U.S. Fears as Summit Nears

China has gone on a publicity push in recent days with a message meant to counter American critics: We’re not an economic or military threat, we’re trying to improve our system, work with us.

The bid to improve China’s image comes amid increasing friction between the two nations and sharper criticism by senior Bush administration officials and U.S. business groups.

The Americans say Beijing needs to better explain its growing defense spending, act more responsibly on the economic front and address human rights issues.

On Thursday, a senior Chinese official said problems between the two nations were to be expected but expressed confidence that reason would prevail.

“I do note that in the United States there are some people who still refuse to give up their Cold War mind-set,” said the official, who requested anonymity. “Some Americans spread the ‘China threat’ argument. But I don’t think their preaching represents the mainstream.”

This week, Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing issued a statement on his ministry’s website highlighting areas of mutual national interest, including scientific exchanges, nonproliferation and regional security. Visiting U.S. congressional delegations also have received a similar message in recent weeks.

Few of the arguments are new. But the concerted presentation appears aimed at laying the groundwork for Chinese President Hu Jintao’s summit with President Bush, scheduled for Sept. 7 in Washington. The trip will be Hu’s first to the United States since he took office in 2003.

Hu is slated to meet with congressional leaders and local officials, give a speech at Yale University and visit businesspeople in Seattle. He will also travel to Mexico and Canada.

But China has raised eyebrows in Washington with its weeklong military exercise with Russia, which wrapped up Thursday. And Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in an interview last week with the New York Times raised concerns about Beijing’s military, human rights and trade policies.

Analysts say Beijing is trying to develop a new strategy to handle relations with the U.S., given the many irritants, but has not settled on an approach.

“Beijing is very nervous about the ‘China military threat’ message voiced in the U.S.,” said Zhu Feng, an international relations professor with Peking University. “We’ve not been sure exactly where the bilateral relationship stands.”

Chinese officials say they have taken several steps recently to address U.S. concerns, including a move last month to revalue China’s currency, albeit modestly; an agreement on intellectual property rights; and the purchase of $5 billion worth of Boeing aircraft and several billion dollars’ worth of telecommunications equipment and agricultural products.

Chinese officials argue that the two economies are complementary, not competitive, and that the U.S. shares the blame for its own large trade deficit, because it has placed restrictions on high-tech exports to China. The Asian nation accounted for about $130 billion of the United States’ $600-billion trade gap last year.

“I’d like to stress, China continues to make its best effort,” the senior Chinese official said Thursday.

U.S. officials say this export-control argument is a red herring because Washington will not approve the sale of sensitive dual-use or military technology to China. Beijing could use such equipment against the Americans should the two sides end up in a showdown over Taiwan, they add.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld threw down the gauntlet in a June speech in Singapore when he questioned China’s military expansion, its increased budget for sophisticated hardware and the estimated 700 missiles it has aimed at Taiwan.

“Since no nation threatens China, one must wonder: Why this growing investment?” Rumsfeld said. “Why these continuing large and expanding arms purchases?”

Chinese officials have argued that most of the increased defense spending goes for pensions, pay and other costs associated with the nation’s 2.25 million men and women in uniform and that the overall expansion is in line with China’s growing economy.

China’s official military budget, currently about $30 billion, has increased by more than 10% a year in the last decade. However, some critics argue that the official budget doesn’t cover all defense-related expenditure, making the real increase substantially higher.

Beijing argues that its military outlays pale beside those of the United States.

“As things now stand, U.S. military spending is 17 times that of China and 77 times that of China on a per capita basis,” the senior Chinese official said. “Regarding defense spending, we’ll focus only on the necessary items, and not a penny more.”

The senior official also questioned why China’s actions had engendered such suspicion. “I don’t think the logic holds water that if a country grows stronger, its actions should be put to a big question mark,” he said.

The statement last month by Maj. Gen. Zhu Chenghu, a dean at the National Defense University, that China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against the United States if Washington attacks his nation while defending Taiwan, hasn’t helped allay suspicions. China considers Taiwan part of its territory.

The senior Chinese official said Zhu’s comments did not reflect government policy.

“Ever since 1964, China gave its word to the rest of the world: Under no circumstances, at no time, will China use its nuclear weapons first,” he said. “This has always been our policy.”

Energy and environmental issues also are likely to be on the agenda when Hu and Bush meet. In recent weeks, Chinese officials have urged the U.S. not to politicize trade and economic issues, a reference to the controversy over an $18.5-billion bid by Chinese oil giant CNOOC Ltd. to buy Unocal.

The bid was withdrawn after Congress threatened to block it on national security grounds.

“The Chinese are not really sure how we see their rise,” said a congressional staffer, who asked not to be identified because he wasn’t speaking in an official capacity.

“They see evidence with CNOOC of our thinking, ‘It’s OK for you to be rich, but don’t buy land in Hollywood.’ ”