Just want to add a bit of notes on the Chinese diplomatic perspective with regards to the US. The way the Chinese leadership sees it, in the Korean War the US has shown its true colours, and all dealings with the US can refer back to that period of history to understand and predict the actions of the US, primarily in these few points:

1. The US respects only military power, and can only be forced into concessions on the negotiating table when they have not only faced the prospect of, but have experienced real losses. All of their words about ideals and international agreement is lip service, to dress up the fact that they use their vassal states like a cudgel to enforce their will and minimize losses to American lives.

2. The US will always wiggle and cheat on agreements they have made on the negotiating table, including with intimidation during negotiations such as flying fighter jets above the site of negotiations, white-glove actors to mask their involvement in agreement-breaking actions, and outright not talking about existing agreements as they push for acts of aggression. The only way to force them to acquesite to what they have agreed themselve is with force, either militarily, or economically.

3. The cyclical nature of the US’s two party system means that the newly elected head of state will always think of their predecessors as not doing enough to enforce the US’s interests abroad, and will attempt the same ways of wiggling and cheating on agreements, sometimes with new fronts of masked aggression, typically starting with a liberal “international concern” project lead by a front group of the CIA, all over again. maintainance of forceful resistance against them is not only necessary, but constant.

4. The US does not feel confortable when it doesn’t think it is the sole actor capable of complete domination in every region in the world, and they feel even less confortable when who they consider to be their enemy demonstrates capacity to inflict losses on them when they act to dominate. Therefore, US aggression, just like US infiltration and subversion always point to the same goal: submission by the local state into the system under US control, and they are not shy about switching over to using comprador and proxy powers to rule for them when direct confrontation would prove costly. The real way to deal with them is to resist against both ends. In this sense, I consider the general faction of Iranian liberals to be a comprador sector which the US considers to be useful in subversion.

Edit: spacing