The US continuous escalation of China-US trade frictions has violated the consensuses reached by the two heads of state in Argentina and Osaka and deviated from the right track of resolving differences through consultation.

Such moves of the US have undermined the foundation of mutual trust and increased uncertainties to the settlement of trade and economic disputes between the world’s top two economies.

It’s an international common practice to regard consensus as the code of conduct. The consensuses reached by the two leaders have set the direction to solving China-US economic and trade issues.

The two countries should fully understand the fact that there are enormous converging interests between them and the essence of the China-US economic and trade cooperation are mutual benefit and win-win. In doing so, they could solve the economic and trade issues through consultation on the basis of equality and mutual respect.

Obviously, some US politicians didn’t hold fast to these key points, as they lack the consciousness of abiding by consensuses.

Valuing consensus and keeping commitment is the basis and prerequisite for trade talks and problem solving. China always believes that the two sides should revolve trade disputes through negotiation and consultation.

China has actively engaged in trade talks with utmost sincerity and earnestly implemented the consensuses reached by the two leaders, as well as the outcomes of trade talks between delegations of the two countries.

In response to the concern of the US side, China completed relevant legal procedures in four months and listed all fentanyl-related substances as narcotics starting from May 1.

In July, Chinese enterprises started to inquire about the prices from US agricultural suppliers, and completed several agricultural goods purchases after the US side held out hopes that the Chinese side could increases imports from the US during the Osaka meeting in late June.

On August 1, the US announced its plan to impose new tariffs on Chinese imports, using the excuse that China was not following through the purchases. However, a Chinese purchase of US soybeans, cottons, sorghums and other agricultural produces was recorded that day in the export sales report from the US Department of Agriculture. Which side on earth is turning back on consensuses? Fact speaks louder than words.

Positive actions are needed to boost mutual trust and solve problems. Some people in the US moved against their commitment and the consensuses time and again, and the consequences provide evidence to the principle from an opposite angle.

They disturbed the progress of China-US trade consultations, kept adding uncertainties to the business of enterprises and brought many risk factors to the world economic development with tariff threats and escalated trade disputes. By doing so, the complicated trade issues get more difficult.

The economic and trade consultations must be based on equality and mutual respect, and both sides are called on to honor credibility and keep the commitment. The US politicians have to meet China halfway to implement the consensuses and get back to the right track with sincerity, if they truly want to reach a mutually beneficial agreement with the Chinese side.

(Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People’s Daily to express its views on foreign policy.)