The Social Foundation of China-US Relations: The Potential of People-to-People Diplomacy Amid Strategic Competition

Muna Chand

China-US relations are commonly examined through the lenses of trade competition, technological restrictions, military power and international influence. These issues shape the strategic relationship between the two countries. Yet government decisions and high-level negotiations alone cannot explain the full character of bilateral relations. Direct contact between citizens, cooperation among universities, cultural exchanges and commercial relationships also help build mutual understanding between the two societies. Even when political differences persist, such connections can preserve opportunities for dialogue.

Ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the United States, a Global Times editorial introduced the concept of “everyday diplomats,” highlighting how food, commerce and cultural experiences connect ordinary people across national boundaries. Viewed within the broader framework of international relations, this idea raises an important question: How can people-to-people engagement contribute to strategic stability between two major powers engaged in intense political competition?

THE REAL MEANING OF PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE DIPLOMACY

Diplomacy is a formal responsibility of governments. Decisions concerning treaties, security arrangements, trade regulations and international obligations remain within the authority of states. People-to-people diplomacy cannot replace these functions. Its role is to introduce societies to one another’s experiences, aspirations and realities. Citizens with firsthand knowledge of another country may approach political disagreements from a broader perspective.

An essential distinction must be maintained between cultural attraction and political agreement. An American citizen who learns Chinese or uses Chinese products does not necessarily support every policy of the Chinese government. Similarly, a Chinese citizen who watches American films, studies in the United States or uses American services does not automatically endorse US foreign policy. The value of people-to-people engagement lies in allowing individuals to develop their own understanding through independent experience.

Such contact can help prevent political disagreements from becoming permanent hostility between societies. When direct interaction declines, perceptions of another country may become increasingly dependent on political statements, media coverage and social media narratives. Personal experience does not necessarily overturn existing views, but it provides an opportunity to examine them against reality.

THE LONG-TERM SIGNIFICANCE OF YOUTH EXCHANGES

In November 2023, China announced an initiative to invite 50,000 young Americans for study and exchange programs over five years. According to China’s Ministry of Education, the target was achieved two and a half years ahead of schedule. Young people from all 50 US states and Washington, DC, participated in educational, cultural, scientific and sporting activities across different regions of China.

The significance of this initiative should not be measured solely by the number of participants. Its lasting value depends on the quality of their experiences, the continuity of relationships after their visits and the extent to which educational and research cooperation develops. A single visit may not produce an immediate political outcome. However, the personal and institutional connections it creates may become useful channels of communication in the future.

The importance of youth exchanges becomes clearer when they are connected to science and technology. Challenges involving artificial intelligence, climate change, public health, clean energy and marine pollution cannot be resolved entirely within national borders. Although China and the United States compete in these fields, dialogue on scientific evidence, research methods and risk management remains necessary. Cooperation among students and researchers can provide a practical foundation for such engagement.

Nevertheless, educational exchanges also involve questions of intellectual property protection, research security, individual freedom and reciprocal access. Sustainable programs require both sides to address these issues through clear rules and credible arrangements. The pursuit of friendship should not diminish legal and institutional responsibilities.

LESSONS FROM HISTORY

The Ping-Pong Diplomacy of 1971 remains a historic example of people-to-people engagement in China-US relations. The visit of American table tennis players to China helped create a favorable environment for the normalization of bilateral relations. However, treating that event as the sole cause of the diplomatic transformation would be an incomplete interpretation of history. The strategic circumstances of the period and the diplomatic decisions of both governments were also decisive.

This experience illustrates the relationship between public engagement and formal diplomacy. Contact between citizens can help create an atmosphere conducive to dialogue, but difficult political and security questions must ultimately be addressed by governments. High-level negotiations can establish an institutional framework for cooperation, while relationships between citizens can provide social continuity.

The same principle remains relevant to contemporary China-US relations. Meetings between national leaders are important, but stable relations also require regular diplomatic communication, military contacts, trade negotiations and educational cooperation. The relationship cannot be adequately assessed through the outcome of a single summit or dispute.

ECONOMIC INTERDEPENDENCE AND ITS LIMITATIONS

China and the United States are major centers of the global economy. Trade, investment and supply chains connect businesses and consumers in both countries. The presence of American companies in the Chinese market and the expansion of Chinese businesses in the United States demonstrate the practical dimensions of this economic relationship.

Economic interdependence, however, should not be mistaken for an automatic guarantee of political stability. Countries with extensive commercial ties can still experience serious disagreements over tariffs, market access, technology, investment security and industrial policy. Economic connections do not eliminate disputes. Instead, they demonstrate why maintaining dialogue is necessary for managing them.

Contact among businesses and consumers can also help political leaders understand the real-world consequences of economic decisions. Trade restrictions and uncertainty affect not only major corporations but also smaller businesses, workers and consumers. The stability of commercial relations is therefore closely connected to the practical interests of citizens in both countries.

STRATEGIC STABILITY DOES NOT MEAN THE END OF COMPETITION

China and the United States have different political systems, security priorities and perspectives on international order. Expecting these differences to disappear in the near future would be unrealistic. The purpose of a stable relationship is not to establish identical positions on every issue, but to develop mechanisms that prevent disagreements from escalating into uncontrolled confrontation.

This requires regular dialogue, clear communication, respect for international law and discussions grounded in evidence rather than assumptions. People-to-people diplomacy can support this process, but it cannot automatically resolve security miscalculations or commercial disputes. The institutional responsibility for strategic stability remains with states and their leaders.

Relationships between citizens can nevertheless help reduce the tendency to portray another society through a single political image. It is possible to maintain a critical view of another government’s decisions while preserving respectful relationships with its people. This distinction is important for mature international relations.

WHAT THIS MEANS FOR COUNTRIES SUCH AS NEPAL

The consequences of China-US relations extend far beyond the two countries. Other nations are affected through trade, technology, climate finance, development cooperation and decisions within international institutions. For developing countries such as Nepal, an international environment that allows relations with both powers to advance according to national needs and priorities is important.

China is Nepal’s neighbor, while Nepal also maintains a longstanding diplomatic and development partnership with the United States. Continued dialogue between the two powers can help create an environment in which Nepal pursues opportunities in development, education, technology and international cooperation without unnecessary pressure toward geopolitical polarization. Nevertheless, Nepal’s interests do not depend solely on the relationship between China and the United States. Its own diplomatic decision-making capacity, institutional preparedness and clarity of national priorities are equally important.

The lesson for Nepal also extends to people-to-people diplomacy. In developing relations with neighboring countries and other partners, official visits should be complemented by exchanges among universities, research institutions, media organizations, businesses and civil society. Such relationships should develop through mutual respect, independent participation and evidence-based understanding.

CONCLUSION

Examining the importance of people-to-people engagement raised by the Global Times editorial within a broader strategic context leads to an important conclusion: relationships between citizens cannot replace formal diplomacy, but they can provide a social foundation that helps sustain it. The value of cultural programs, commercial contacts and youth exchanges cannot be measured solely by their immediate political outcomes.

High-level dialogue between Xi Jinping and Donald Trump can help determine the formal priorities of bilateral relations. Translating those priorities into practice will require sustained efforts by institutions in both countries. People-to-people engagement has the potential to support that process, although both its influence and its limitations must be understood realistically.

China and the United States may continue to compete, and significant disagreements may persist. Yet competition does not eliminate the need for dialogue. Respectful engagement between the two societies, combined with responsible diplomacy between their governments, provides a practical foundation for strategic stability.