Editor's note: Wang Peng, a special commentator for CGTN, a research fellow at School of Marxism and Institute of State Governance, Huazhong University of Science and Technology. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

As China's lead negotiator, Vice Premier He Lifeng of the State Council, is heading to France to commence the sixth round of China-US economic and trade consultations, the world's attention is once again fixed on the relationship between the world's two largest economies.

From March 14 to 17, building on the consensus reached by the heads of state in Busan and in all previous phone calls, the two sides will sit down to address each other's core concerns. This meeting is not merely about balancing trade figures, but a critical test of whether the world's most important bilateral relationship can move beyond the zero-sum logic that has long defined great-power politics.

In this context, China offers a clear vision: a path forward that refuses both the fatalism of the Thucydides Trap and the exclusivity of a G2 condominium. This is not a stance born of weakness, but of a profound historical consciousness and a strategic clarity about the kind of international order required for the 21st century.

Breaking free from the trap of historical inevitability

The upcoming talks in Europe provide a timely opportunity to dispel the Western narrative that a rising power and an established one are destined for conflict. The Peloponnesian War, the ancient inspiration for the Thucydides Trap, was not just a structural clash but a tragedy fueled by domestic politics, miscalculation, and spiraling fear.

When policymakers view trade deficits or technological competition through this singular lens of inevitable confrontation, they risk creating the very conflict they claim to fear. The true danger lies in allowing this theory to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

China's development trajectory, however, offers a different script. Over the past four decades, China has lifted 800 million people from poverty without waging a foreign war, annexing territory, or seeking hegemony. Its commitment to peaceful development is enshrined in its national constitution, a principle tested and proven.

In contrast, the US's policy of pure containment has only deepened tensions, wasted resources, and hampered global cooperation on issues like climate change and pandemic response. As the two delegations meet in France, they face a choice: either manage their differences through dialogue or allow the jungle laws of a bygone era to dictate their future. The world cannot afford a return to lawlessness.

Rejecting the fantasy of a G2 condominium

Yet, as we seek a new equilibrium, we must also avoid the opposite extreme: the G2 fantasy. The idea that the United States and China or some specific countries should simply co-govern the world is a relic of 19th-century great-power politics, echoing the Concert of Europe, where a few powers dictated terms to the many. This logic fundamentally ignores the UN Charter's core principle of the sovereign equality of all nations. There are nearly 200 countries on this planet, and history is written by all, not a select few.

The Cold War detente between Washington and Moscow was no model of harmony. It was rather a tense pause before renewed confrontation, often leaving regions like Africa and Asia scarred by proxy wars. A modern-day G2 arrangement would not only alienate the Global South but would also trigger a destabilizing balancing act by Europe, India, Japan, and others.

China, as the world's largest developing nation, cannot accept a role that would undermine its identity and its mission to stand with the Global South. The purpose of the China-US relationship is not to rule the world, but to manage its own dynamics in a way that allows the entire international community to thrive.

The path forward: The three pillars of a new framework

So, where does this leave the world? China's answer is a new framework built on three pillars, directly applicable to the trade talks underway.

First, mutual respect. This means acknowledging that different political systems, values, and paths to development are not threats, but realities. In the trade context, this translates to respecting each other's core interests and development stages, rather than seeking to impose one's own economic model on the other.

Second, peaceful coexistence. This is not a passive acceptance of differences, but an active commitment to establishing firm boundaries against confrontation. The dialogue in France must aim to build guardrails, ensuring that competition does not veer into conflict. It means managing disagreements over issues such as technology or market access within a framework of stability.

Third, win-win cooperation. This is the most practical application of the list approach. The two sides should work to expand the list of shared projects, trade in goods and services, green energy transition, and public health security, while narrowing the list of disputes. For instance, even as the teams discuss complex trade issues, they can acknowledge that climate collaboration remains vital to the success of the Paris Agreement and that bilateral trade continues to hit record highs, demonstrating the deep interdependence of the two economies.

A defining moment in 2026

The year 2026 carries significant weight. It marks the beginning of China's 15th Five-Year Plan and America's 250th anniversary of independence.

This year could be a turning point. The upcoming economic and trade consultations in France are the first major step. By restoring and strengthening dialogue channels, the two sides can build tangible progress, not through grand declarations alone, but through steady, incremental steps that build trust and demonstrate a shared commitment to avoiding the pitfalls of the past.

This vision transcends the bilateral relationship itself. It is about the future of global governance. China's approach, centered on the UN's centrality, true multilateralism, and people-centered development, affirms that every nation has a role to play. When the United States engages constructively, it does not weaken its position but rather strengthens the stability of the global system as a whole.

The path is not easy, but the choices are clear. We can follow the old paths – the hunger for hegemony, the illusion of elite rule – which have left a trail of wars and inequality, or, we can walk a new path toward a stable, equitable, and prosperous future. As an ancient Chinese saying reminds us, true greatness lies not in dominance, but in stewardship. For the sake of humanity, the world must choose the latter, and the sixth round of trade talks can be where that journey gains its momentum.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X, formerly Twitter, to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)