Editor's note: Hamzah Rifaat Hussain, a former visiting fellow at the Stimson Center in Washington and former assistant researcher at the Islamabad Policy Research Institute, is a TV anchor at Indus News in Pakistan. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

It is now an established fact that the strategically misfiring Quad dialogue and the provocative AUKUS alliance are not and will not gain universal acceptance for peaceniks. The policy of containment vis a vis accelerating a nuclear arms race through encirclement in the Indo-Pacific is not conducive to bilateral relations between the U.S. and China, as stated by the Chinese Ambassador to the United States Qin Gang. 

Improving ties which have been described by many academics and politicians as the world's most important bilateral relationship of the 21st century, requires the dispensation of Western-sponsored nefarious designs towards trade, cooperation and prosperity.

There is no way around this fact either, as the de-escalation remarks have been echoed in every country where peace is considered a priority and warmongering is shunned. From the Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Hor Namhong to the United Nations Secretary-General at the 76th UNGA session, all major stakeholders are desirous of a constructive U.S.-China relationship based on mutual respect of state sovereignty and strong trading ties, which can potentially usher in a more prosperous future in the Indo-Pacific as well as globally. 

Pragmatism, however, is rooted in practicality as an instrument of policy, not rhetoric and with the absence of tensions as a prerequisite. This requires the Joe Biden administration to shun away its reckless neo-realism in favor of constructivism, of which the latter can adapt as a tool towards diffusion.

"There has been widespread misunderstanding over China," Ambassador Qin Gang echoed the sentiments of the majority of UN member states who have adopted pragmatic approaches, which is reflected in their stances on subjects concerning China such as groundless allegations of state misconduct in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region as well as claims over Chinese territory in Taiwan and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, which has been vociferously criticized otherwise.

Misunderstandings on China have been allowed to fester by hawkish American administrations and their puppet media outlets that have pursued national interests to the detriment of constructive and multifaceted cooperation with China, which goes beyond rambling and gloating over halfhearted information or flawed intelligence assessments. It is high time for the Biden administration to exercise strategic wisdom, given that despite all the malicious smear campaigns and provocative policies directed at Beijing, there are still calls from China to improve the bilateral relationship unconditionally. 

The United States has much to lose from adopting a confrontational path otherwise. Much of its foreign policymaking and the rationales presented for undertaking military courses of action has resulted in widespread skepticism expressed by major capitals in the international community regarding Washington D.C's ability to adopt leadership roles and become a champion of peace at the same time. 

Note that by persisting with AUKUS, Washington D.C. will position itself as a promoter of nuclear proliferation, which belies its history as a party to several nuclear reduction treaties such as the New START with Russia and export control organizations such as the Zangger Committee and the Nuclear Suppliers Group. For multilateralism and relations with China, this dualism deals a severe blow to constructive engagement.

Relieving this baggage means doing away with the Quad dialogue as a platform for China-bashing as well, given that it lacks the status of a formal organization or is a testament to apolitical cooperation. Continuing with a series of dialogues and championing hollow calls for promoting Indo-Pacific peace with an apparent aim at curbing China is a reinstatement of a typical Cold War mindset. 

According to an assessment from the National Committee on American Foreign Policy titled "Engagement Revisited: Progress Made and Lessons Learned from the U.S.- China Strategic and Economic Dialogue," historical confrontational approaches which respective U.S. administrations have adopted dating back to Gerald Ford's era and the appointment of advisors such as Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney to the White House stymied potential improvement in ties with China in a variety of areas during the dialogue process. History clearly does not support a confrontational approach, and it is worthwhile for the Biden administration to reflect on this retrospectively.

Worthwhile, too, in the long run, is for the United States to shelve nefarious regional designs which harm bilateral relations for shrewdness grounded in pragmatism. This is precisely how it should be. 

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