Group 1 - The article discusses the historical context of China's competition with the United States, positioning China as the third major competitor after the Soviet Union and Japan since World War II [1][4]. - It highlights that the competition with the Soviet Union was primarily military and ideological, while the competition with Japan was mainly economic [2][3]. - The article asserts that China represents a comprehensive competitor to the U.S., encompassing military, economic, and technological challenges, combining elements of both previous competitors [4][5]. Group 2 - The article notes that since 2014, the power dynamics between the U.S. and China have been shifting, with China's economy surpassing the U.S. in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms [6]. - It references former President Obama's approach to countering China's rise through initiatives like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), aimed at excluding China from shaping global economic rules [7][8]. - The article contrasts the differing approaches of Obama and Trump towards China, indicating a significant shift in U.S. strategy under Trump, who viewed China as a strategic competitor [9][16]. Group 3 - The article details the timeline of U.S.-China relations, noting Trump's state visit to China in 2017 and the subsequent shift in U.S. policy towards viewing China as a strategic competitor [10][14]. - It discusses the escalation of trade conflicts starting in 2018, with the U.S. invoking Section 301 of its Trade Act to investigate China, leading to a series of tariffs and negotiations [20][21]. - The article emphasizes that the context of U.S.-China relations has evolved, with increasing pessimism from China regarding future economic ties due to rising tensions and geopolitical competition [33][34]. Group 4 - The article argues that the fundamental issue in U.S.-China relations is not merely economic factors like tariffs or trade agreements, but rather the long-term perception of the relationship's trajectory [35][36]. - It suggests that any future agreements must address both economic and geopolitical issues simultaneously, as avoiding these discussions is no longer feasible [40].