China and China one belt, one road and one area of the security situation in China, held in November 19th, the Academy of Asia Pacific and global strategy of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences held a seminar on 2021. The meeting was jointly organized by the Foreign Policy Research Office of the Institute of world economy and politics of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and the Asia Pacific security and Diplomacy Research Office of the Institute of Asia Pacific and global strategies. Zhang Guochun, Secretary of the Party committee of the Institute of Asia Pacific and global strategies, and Zhang Zhixin, counselor of the Asia Department of the Ministry of foreign affairs, attended the meeting and delivered a speech. China's Social Sciences China one belt, one road, Peking University, Tsinghua University, Renmin University of China, China International Research Institute and other institutions, more than 20 international relations scholars and No.1 Hospital of Peking University medical experts, around COVID-19's "one belt and one road" advocacy framework under the framework of big powers relations, regional situation and health and safety issues. Zhang Jie, researcher of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Huang Yongguang, editor and reviewer, and Xiao He, associate researcher, presided over three links respectively. Zhang Guochun pointed out that in recent years, the international situation has been complex and changeable, and the Sino US game must be a long-term historical process. The United States is behind all the problems around China, from the Korean Peninsula to the dongnanhai, Taiwan and the South China Sea, to Southeast Asia, Myanmar, India and Pakistan. Therefore, the issue of China US relations is also a multilateral security issue, which needs to be grasped as a whole. An Gang, a researcher at the strategy and security research center of Tsinghua University, believes that this year is the year for the Biden government to review its China policy. The Biden administration solidified and deepened the long-term strategic competition planned during the Obama period and preliminarily tested during the trump period, and opened an era of high integration of us global strategy and China strategy. The long-term game between China and the United States has just begun. However, history will prove that the earth can accommodate the influence of China and the United States on their respective and common development, and the two sides also have some basis for consensus. However, at present, the positive list of China US relations is too short and the negative list is too long. Even in a very short positive list, there is a lack of track that can stabilize and continuously improve bilateral relations. There are major differences between China and the United States in the fields of economy and trade, science and technology, military and the Taiwan issue. Recently, the United States proposed to build an "India Pacific economic framework", involving trade facilitation, digital economy, supply chain flexibility, clean energy and other aspects, which deserves attention. With regard to the characteristics of China Russia relations in 2021 and the interaction between China, Russia and the United States, researcher Li Yonghui of the Russian Institute of Eastern Europe and Central Asia of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences believes that China Russia relations have withstood the test of the epidemic, and the two countries have politically supported each other and had close exchanges under the guidance of the head of state. This year marks the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Sino Russian Treaty of good neighborliness, friendship and cooperation. The two heads of state issued a joint statement announcing the five-year extension of the treaty. The provisions of the Treaty on non alignment, non confrontation and non targeting of third countries stipulate the principles of national exchanges in legal form, which is of great significance for China and Russia to deepen strategic cooperation. In the field of economic and trade cooperation, the economic and trade quality of the two countries was improved and upgraded during the epidemic. In addition to the smooth progress of major strategic projects, the two countries will also open up new areas of cooperation, including agriculture, finance and e-commerce, and will increase investment in scientific and technological innovation; In the field of people to people and cultural cooperation, the two countries share the same position on historical issues, especially on jointly safeguarding the victorious achievements of World War II; In the field of military cooperation, the two countries have close military cooperation in space, land and sea; In terms of international strategic cooperation, the two countries share the same or basically the same views on many hot issues. She believes that the main driving force for the development of China Russia relations comes from internal factors, and the external driving force of China Russia relations includes American factors. The structural contradiction between the United States and Russia is very prominent. However, since Biden's first priority is to contain China and hopes that Russia US relations are controllable and predictable, he hopes that the two countries will at least carry out limited cooperation. Putin is a pragmatist. He has both the idea of tough confrontation and the consciousness of changing relations with the West. Russia is currently in a relatively comfortable area in the Sino US Russian triangular relationship. It is the largest variable in the triangular relationship and will seek the greatest balance between China and the United States. In this context, China Russia relations should have two understandings. First, Russia should strive for the maximization of interests. Second, because the United States is extremely hostile to Putin, Sino Russian relations will be relatively stable for a long time, at least during Putin's term of office. With regard to the Japanese government after Kishida was elected prime minister, researcher LV Yaodong of the Institute of Japanese Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences pointed out that values diplomacy and human rights issues are the focus of the Kishida government's foreign relations. "Abe concept" still has an important impact on the Yasuda government, which is reflected in his active advocacy of "free and open Indo Pacific strategy". The Yasuda government strives to improve the Japan US alliance to a higher level and actively promote the institutionalization and normalization of the military exercise of the "four nation security mechanism" of the United States, Japan, Australia and India under the Indian Pacific concept. In particular, the so-called "importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait" has broken through the bottom line of the four point principled consensus between China and Japan. Although Kishida said that China and Japan need "dialogue", it is more based on Japan's interests, putting pressure on China to be a so-called responsible country from the so-called human rights issues, the Taiwan Strait issue and the Diaoyu Island issue. Next year marks the 50th anniversary of the normalization of diplomatic relations between China and Japan. It is necessary to review the spirit of the 1972 China Japan joint statement. Looking back on history, the logical starting point for the normalization of diplomatic relations between China and Japan is "no separation of politics and economy". In recent years, various signs have shown that Japan's policy towards China tends to engage in the separation of politics and economy, which requires great attention. Dr. Lou Chunhao, deputy director of the South Asia Institute of the Chinese Academy of modern sciences, analyzed the generalization of China India security competition and its impact assessment. He believes that the generalization of India's security competition with China is manifested in four aspects: the first is the field level, extending from political security to economic field. The Indian government has safeguarded economic issues and engaged in the so-called decoupling of industries from China with a "flexible supply chain". Second, at the regional level, India's thinking of "using the sea to control the land" is becoming more and more important. Now India increasingly feels that it is at a relative disadvantage in the competition and collision with China on land, and its advantage is its "situational awareness" in the Indian Ocean region and closed-loop maritime security cooperation with the United States, Japan and Australia. The third is the interactive level. From bilateral to multilateral, the third-party factors of China India security competition are becoming more and more prominent. The most typical is US India security cooperation. The fourth is the means level, from traditional means to non-traditional means. India hedges China's influence in the region by intervening in Pakistan's domestic problems and interfering with the construction of China Pakistan Economic Corridor. Researcher fan Jishe of the Central Party School talked about the nuclear proliferation risk and Geopolitical Security Impact of the trilateral security partnership between the United States, Britain and Australia. The cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia on nuclear powered submarines has taken advantage of the loophole in the international non-proliferation mechanism, that is, the nuclear materials used in the Naval Nuclear power reactor can be exempted from the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is contrary to the purpose and spirit of the Treaty on the non proliferation of nuclear weapons, brings the risk of the proliferation of nuclear materials and technology, and may lead to the further proliferation of nuclear powered submarines. In the cooperation of nuclear submarines among the three countries, geopolitical security considerations outweigh nuclear proliferation concerns, reflecting the double standards of the United States on non-proliferation issues. Such cooperation is the product of the eastward shift of the strategic focus of the United States, the adjustment of military strategy and the reconstruction of alliance relations. It takes place against the background of the downward trend of China US relations and will have an extremely negative impact on the security situation in the Asia Pacific region. In the long run, Australia's move is also detrimental to its own interests. First, Australia has lost its diplomatic autonomy and flexibility due to "choosing sides and standing in line". Second, the United States promotes Australia to play the role of "chief mate" in the Asia Pacific region. Australia's own defense spending will rise sharply, but the extent to which the United States can give back to Australia is extremely uncertain. Researcher Li Ying of the American Institute of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences focused on the situation on the Korean Peninsula. He believes that Biden has made considerable adjustments to his Peninsula Policy, and his policy towards North Korea serves the goal of "alliance priority" of the United States. On the North Korean nuclear issue, the United States emphasizes communication with its allies in South Korea and Japan. In terms of the US ROK alliance, the Biden administration's policy towards South Korea this year is to repair and reshape the alliance, pay attention to high-tech cooperation between the United States and South Korea, and strengthen trilateral interaction between the United States, Japan and South Korea. At present, the situation on the Korean Peninsula is in a stalemate. The United States, South Korea and North Korea each say their own words. Neither of the proposals of one side has received a positive response from the other two sides. The future development of the US South Korea alliance after the start of the South Korean election deserves attention. Moreover, the situation on the peninsula is also affected by the current environment of China US relations. Due to the fear of falling into the so-called "new cold war pattern", the DPRK and the ROK are actively preparing and are also committed to crisis management and control. Therefore, there may be a new opportunity for inter Korean interaction, so as to build a peace mechanism. Finally, the situation on the peninsula is closely related to the situation in the Taiwan Strait. The United States uses the US Japan alliance to continuously influence the situation in the Taiwan Strait, and is now linking the US ROK alliance with the situation in the Taiwan Strait, which deserves high attention. Dr. Zhao Hai, Institute of world economics and politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, shared the difficult definition and strategic debate of China US relations. Both China and the United States are trying to find a word suitable for defining the fundamental nature of China US relations, and there has been such a "definition dilemma" for a long time in history. Due to strategic differences and various interest differences, there are differences in understanding and defining bilateral relations between Chinese and American governments, and now the difficulties are becoming more and more obvious. Through the recent summit dialogue, for quite a long time to come, China US relations can be roughly defined according to "controlling competition and peaceful coexistence". In the era of emphasizing the "thucydide trap" at the strategic level, the reuse of the word "peaceful coexistence" means that both sides need to find appropriate ways to effectively prevent and control positive and direct conflicts and try to maintain regional and world peace. This is the starting point of the overall relationship prioritized by the leadership of China and the United States at the strategic level. Next, under the guidance of this new definition, China and the United States will make a series of specific policy adjustments. China needs to develop a universal international political and economic discourse system to define the status of the United States in China's international strategy and diplomatic strategy, and avoid the "practice" of being defined by the United States first in history and allowing China to accept its position, so as to achieve real equality and mutual respect between China and the United States. One belt, one road, Peking University Professor Zhai Kun taught from three aspects: eight years' knowledge form strategy evolution and order improvement. First is the growth one of the "one belt, one road" of international relations. "One belt, one road" has been the benchmark practice of international relations since twenty-first Century, and has brought about a fundamental, systematic and structural impact on international relations since 2013. It has also brought new stimulation to the development of international relations. This stimulus is embodied one way of "one belt, one road" from reality to academic research. The second one belt, one road and another link between China's internal and external financing development strategy, is the closer development of domestic and international development. The conclusion of China one belt, one road and eight years is that the development strategy of China's internal and external financing is more effective. International relations scholars began to look inward and pay more attention to the domestic power of international strategy and the spillover of domestic power. Finally, one belt, one road, is the most important innovation and integration process.