Brendan S. Mulvaney, associate chair for the Languages and Cultures Department at the U.S. Naval Academy, and William Jones, Executive Intelligence Review Washington bureau chief, agreed with what former State councilor Dai Bingguo stressed in a speech yesterday that China and the U.S. should dial down the rhetoric on the South China Sea issue.
Some American observers said they agreed with what former State councilor Dai Bingguo emphasized in a speech on Tuesday that China and the U.S. should turn down the heat on the South China Sea issue.
"I think State councilor Dai made very good points yesterday, especially said that we need to lower the temperature, to cut back on the rhetoric, to continue to talk friendly," said Brendan S. Mulvaney, associate chair of the Languages and Cultures Department at the U.S. Naval Academy.
He made the remarks at a press conference at which experts from China and the U.S. shared the outcomes of a one-day dialogue on the South China Sea between Chinese and U.S. think tanks on Wednesday in Washington.
In his keynote speech at the dialogue on Tuesday, Dai said he would explore ways to genuinely "cool down" the South China Sea issue and "restore calm to this part of the world".
"We just need to be able to discuss when we have different opinions to solve these problems," Mulvaney said.
Chinese scholars including Wu Shicun, president of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies; Zhu Feng, director of the Collaborative Innovation Center of South China Sea Studies at Nanjing University, and Huang Renwei, vice-president of the Shanghai Academy of Social Science, talked about the history of South China Sea, why it is pressing to stop the arbitration case initiated unilaterally by the Philippines, and how the U.S. and China should work together on the issue.
American experts,including J. Stapleton Roy, former U.S. ambassador to China, and John Negroponte, former deputy secretary of state and professor of international affairs at George Washington University, shared views from the U.S. side.
Both sides agreed that the two sides to carry out more direct exchanges and communication.
"Yesterday, we had very meaningful exchanges with scholars and experts from U.S. think tanks and discussed how to view the disputes and the future of South China Sea issues form multiple perspectives and in a comprehensive way," Wu said."We also discussed the approaches and recommendations on resolving the South China Sea issues in a pragmatic way."
"We don't need to accept China's position, and China doesn't need to accept the U.S.' position, but we do need to understand each other's position, and they have doubts and concerns on things … then we can work to understand, to find ways to solve these issues and to manage them, most importantly, to prevent a crisis or a conflict from exploding," Mulvaney said.
William Jones, Washington bureau chief for Executive Intelligence Review, said: "We really hope given some sort of oversensitivity of this ruling issue at this moment - all the sides cool off. We are strongly calling for some sort of cool-its."
"We should reasonably and objectively handle the ruling and use this moment to boost understanding of China's claim over the South China Sea, then also use this opportunity to craft in some sort of waygood will and even the hospitality between a different country, ultimately, facilitates all settlement of this dispute on rocks and reefs," Jones said.
"I hope think tanks from both countries would keep exchanges on a regular track and provide intellectualsupport for bilateral decision makers to manage the China-U.S. relationship and formulate policies that are beneficial to bilateral interests in the new international order," Wu said.
Jones also said that if more exchanges of opinion like this week's are held not only between the governments but also between the people of the two countries, the public opinion in the U.S. mainstream about China's position in the South China Sea issue will be somehow different.
"It's very important that these dialogues occur because this is the only way that each side can really understand what the others are talking about. It doesn't necessarily change people, but for the long term, I think it has a positive effect on the mainstream in the U.S.," Jones said.
