Editor's note: Bobby Naderi is a London-based journalist, guest contributor in print, radio and television, and documentary filmmaker. The article reflects the author's opinions, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

On March 18, top diplomats from China and the United States met in Anchorage, Alaska, to discuss the delicate process of resetting the pivotal relationship.

The Chinese delegation was led by the director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the CPC Central Committee Yang Jiechi and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. The U.S. delegation was led by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan. This was the first high-level talks between the two global economic powers since the start of the Biden administration. The opening session was full of rare harsh rebukes.

Thanks largely to the imperial project of upping the game, Blinken claimed at the beginning of the first meeting that "China's policies threaten the rules-based order that maintains global stability." Using a similar rhetoric, Sullivan argued: "We do not seek conflict, but we welcome stiff competition, and we will always stand up for our principles, for our people, and for our friends."

This did in no way sound like they were there to manage differences and find common ground to set the tone and direction for a relationship reset. Far from it, they seemed eternally eager to teeter at the edge of a confrontation cliff with China. This is not what the world really wants from the world's two biggest economies amid a pandemic.

In response, Yang said, "The United States uses its military force and financial hegemony to carry out long arm jurisdiction and suppress other countries." He then argued that the U.S. government abuses so-called notions of national security to obstruct normal trade exchanges, and incite some countries to attack China.

Interests, intentions and priorities

The first session took place amidst a vortex of American cynicism, counterproductive contention, conspiracy theories and bizarre accusations. On the U.S. side, it was full of wild convictions and truths that were obvious lies. This was despite the fact that the talks followed through on the outcomes of the phone call between President Xi Jinping and President Joe Biden on the Chinese New Year's Eve.

For Biden's senior officials, the emphasis was largely on the importance of preserving America's global hegemony, not opening the channels of communication with Beijing – even for areas of both cooperation and contention. Earlier, they had used the term "strategic conversation" to describe the event, but during the talks they had no realistic expectations regarding any outcome.

For the Chinese diplomats, however, this was still a chance to have candid talks and make their position clear on key issues - until both sides are ready to factor the delicate political equation for rapprochement and maybe more. Prior to the first session, they had called for a reset of relationship, starting with the removal of U.S. sanctions and ending tariffs on goods.

During the talks Yang once again said that China will continue to adhere to the values of peace, development, fairness, justice, democracy and freedom.

Here is the problem. The first round of talks was deliberately wrapped in imperial hubris, apparently not intended to thaw the big chill in relations but to appease America's perceived allies. Prior to the meeting, Blinken had said there was "no intent" for any subsequent engagements as he saw no "tangible outcomes" on what he called issues of concern.

If you had a crystal ball to peer into this, you could have seen that the initial discussion, after all, was just a stand-in for the U.S. getting ready to repeat yet another unproductive cycle, this time with Biden at the helm and with unforeseen consequences that could reverberate across the world. This did in no way look like Washington had any desire "to understand the interests, intentions and priorities," or to change the tone of the relationship and then weigh deeds not words on that front. This was about going back to the imperial roots.

Interventionist claims prevail

Biden's top foreign policy officials did not view the first day of talks as a venue for warm-hearted diplomacy with China. Instead, they indulged themselves in shell games and went astray. They allowed their interventionist claims and instincts prevail and further fuel tensions and distrust.

This was supposed to be about understanding the importance of diplomacy and taking the measure of each other's priorities. In its place, it turned out to be a chance for the U.S. to attack China and its domestic and regional policies.

The translation is that America's problem with China has not gone away under Biden's administration, only the conditions surrounding the relationship. On the eve of the talks, the State Department sanctioned Chinese officials over the national security law for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) that bans secession, subversion and collusion with foreign forces. It also issued a flurry of other actions directed at China, such as revoking Chinese telecoms licenses and subpoenas to multiple Chinese information technology companies over national security concerns.

These allegations and moves are politically and strategically central to Washington's interventionist arguments against early rapprochement, including from anti-China lobby machinations in Congress and the Pentagon. These fabrications and spins help press their confrontation case. They assume by sending the U.S. into great power bankruptcy in the South China Sea they can bring China to the bargaining table.

Have no doubt, China has far less to lose than the U.S. if Biden decides to continue on the current escalatory path. Given the tensions, the future is murky only for his administration.

The Anchorage talks provided yet another evidence that the world needs to lower the flag on the "indispensable nation" and its overblown sense of self-worth and confidence. If anyone even bothered to wonder what would happen, should the Biden administration try to dismantle the Chinese economy after the talks, would prove to be nothing but chimeras. With a host of internal and external problems, the self-appointed "global sheriff" can't dismantle the world's biggest economy. It would be a perilous undertaking.

In the current atmosphere, and as maintained by Yang, the U.S. government stands to gain if it abandons its zero-sum game, halts the wrong action of extended jurisdiction, and starts the process of resetting the pivotal relationship with China. It would be difficult but possible.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)