here in its strategy and that is why engagement with beijing is on the table. one thing i do wonder is the fact that this trip, as we know, was delayed for months, and now we re seeing the secretary of state antony blinken be the one to make it, do you think there is a potential here that it is washington that is more eager to smooth over relations than beijing? that is possible but at the same time the us has built a very strong strategy towards china that is not predicated on effective engagement. it is really predicated on investments at home to improve us core strengths, the marshalling of coalition of allies and partners, and the going out in the world to compete with china, to be able to offer the world alternatives in security, technology and trade. on top of those three pillars which can stand alone, there is this kind of push for engagementjust to keep the relationship on an even keel.
so there is really a balance washington is trying to strike here and that is why engagement with beijing is on the table. one thing i do wonder is the fact that this trip, as we know, was delayed for months, and now we re seeing the secretary of state antony blinken be the one to make it, do you think there is a potential here that it is washington who is more eager to smooth over relations than beijing? that is possible but at the same time the us has built a very strong strategy towards china that is not predicated on effective engagement. it is really predicated on investments at home to improve us core strengths, the marshalling of coalition of allies and partners, and the going out in the world to compete with china, to be able to offer the world alternatives in security, technology and trade. on top of those three pillars
additional pressure and looking for the united states to help to counterbalance that type of pressure from china. at the same time, they do not want to be caught up in some sort of conflict between the us and china and be forced to choose explicitly so there is really a balance washington is trying to strike here in its strategy and that is part of the reason why engagement with beijing is on the table. one thing i do wonder is the fact that this trip, of course, as we know, was delayed for months, and now we re seeing the secretary of state antony blinken be the one to make it. do you think there is the potential here that actually, at the end of the day, it is washington that is more eager to smooth over relations than beijing? that is possible but i think at the same time the us has built a very strong strategy towards china that is not predicated on effective engagement. it is really predicated on investments at home, to improve us core strengths,