Two high-profile Chinese and US experts engaged in a heated, one-on-one debate on the effects and implications of China's growth, broadcast on the Al Arabiya English Channel show Counterpoints. The video of the debate has proved quite popular on YouTube, garnering more than half a million views and 9,300 comments as of Monday.

Exchanges between Elliott Abrams, a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, and Chinese geopolitical expert Victor Gao on April 16 revolved around the Donald Trump administration's antagonistic moves against China in the escalating tariff war and in expanding the United States' military presence along China's coast.

Moderator Melinda Nucifora framed her questions in terms of how and why US policy treats China as a hostile threat to its global dominance rather than as a "win-win" partner in friendly competition.

While agreeing with Gao that "China's rise is inevitable", Abrams, a former US deputy national security adviser, accused China of "belligerence" as "China has used its power to threaten neighbors".

Abrams claimed that an example of this is "the Philippines being threatened by China", and the return of US military bases in the country being justified because the Philippines "is asking us for help, so we're helping".

In his rebuttal, Gao, vice-president of the Center for China and Globalization in Beijing, said US military presence in the Philippines is "illegal activity" under the Philippine constitution and its "explicit provisions", adding that "the US intends to use the Philippines as a proxy against China, and even wants to provoke some conflict between China and the Philippines so that it can benefit".

On tariffs, Gao said the US trade war against the world is a "wrong war" that "throws all the rules of the game out the window" and "damages free trade". "This manhandling of mankind" — the US imposition of additional tariffs against all trading partners — will see China "rise up to the occasion and strongly defend free trade", he added.

"China will fight to the end and China has now imposed a retaliatory tariff of 125 percent against all US imports to China.

"In essence, what China declares is that it is prepared to fight to the end: trade war, tariff war, technology war or real war. So the ball is in Trump's court. You decide and I will reciprocate. I will never succumb to the US pressure. And this is the moment of truth: China wants to defend free trade, the US wants to destroy free trade. The rest of the world is watching, and there will be a choice by the end of the day."

Abrams maintained that China's "belligerent behavior … has been growing slowly but steadily over the last 15 years… so it has nothing to do with Donald Trump" and that Trump's focus on the US domestic economy "means dealing with China and trade with China".

"It means dealing with the fact that most Americans have come to the conclusion that China today… is a greatly expansionist military and economic power that is trying to achieve dominance first in Asia, but then outside of Asia."

Gao countered: "If you want to strike China in the cheek, China will strike you back. That is the preferred decision and the determination of the Chinese nation. This is not belligerence; this is the minimum decency you need to apply to international relations. How can you demand (of) other countries 'I will slap you in the face, don't slap me back, otherwise I will punish you more'. That's the law of the jungle."

Questioned by Nucifora as to whether China "really has the power to be that sort of bold against the US", given the "much bigger defense budget" of the US, Gao replied: "By today, China and the US can both destroy each other, and cause Armageddon for mankind. China wants to pursue peace. The United States is agitating for war… possibly a perverse version of the proxy war, or cold war, or hot war. China wants to promote peace of all kinds.

"China wants to be the standard bearer of free trade now that the US abandoned free trade and uses bullying and intimidation to force other countries to follow its line of thinking. This is the moment of truth: Who is the standard bearer of free trade."

Abrams replied that "China does not practice free trade", mentioning what he called China's "massive theft of intellectual property", and stating that the US under Trump "above all wants to avoid war", citing Trump's efforts to conclude the Ukraine crisis and the conflict in Gaza, and the start of US negotiations with Iran.

Gao said: "About intellectual property … China now has more patents approved every year than the United States. China is a leading nation (for) protecting of IPR (intellectual property rights) … China is a fierce protector of intellectual property rights for its own good, for mankind's good."

Abrams stated that Trump is "protecting the economy and that's not a declaration of war". The US is aiming to "protect its own people and its own economy from practices that in his words have robbed the American people and the American economy over the last few decades", he added.

"Donald Trump is not threatening war against China, but the United States does have some treaties, treaties with Japan for example, and we're not prepared to see China run roughshod over the rights of all of its neighbors."

He further described China as being "dangerous". "I think we are in for a period of greater danger for all of those who are neighbors of China and for the United States."

Track record

Gao countered, "Since the end of the Cold War in 1991, how many wars has the United States been involved in? If the Americans pretend not to know, the world knows. How many wars has China been involved in? Zero. Let me emphasize: zero. This is the track record of China defending peace. And this is the track record of the United States being involved in war after war.

"According to the Chinese view, the world in the future… should be a world of peace. 'MAGA', or 'Make America Great Again', is fine, but you cannot achieve that at the expense of other countries. You cannot achieve your greatness by belittling or denigrating or relegating other countries to the lowest echelon of the hierarchy," Gao said.