Former Australian prime minister Paul Keating, respected for his exceptional ability to capture political essence in sharply concise observations, recently noted that China has built an economy, "with industrial breadth and depth that the US not only does not possess but cannot hope to emulate."

Keating's summary of China's industrial prowess is right on the money. And we know that this extraordinary growth in China's manufacturing economy has given rise to serious anxiety in the US, especially among certain elite groups in the US. 

But when you look past how political populists retell this story in the US, often opportunistically, it becomes clear how so many aspects of the US' formidable economic and intellectual proficiency remain as robust as ever. Moreover, these strengths fit remarkably well with those that China has strikingly developed over the last several decades.

The US remains home to many exceptional government and private-sector (hard and soft science) research institutions, which are particularly well-regarded internationally. It also houses a range of the world's most respected universities. Its services sector, ranging across communications, financial management and logistics, for example, is world-leading in many respects. And its news and entertainment mass media capacity remain in a leading position.

We know that when China and the US have largely worked together in the past, the win-win benefits have been clear. China has provided the US with the widest range of goods of growing quality at highly competitive prices, greatly increasing general consumer choice while helping to tame US inflation over many years. At the same time, this trade interaction has also played a role in helping China to lift 800 million people out of absolute poverty.

These developments have not been painless, as over the years local manufacturing has shrunk significantly in the US. But the US continues to be a world leader in artificial intelligence (AI) and across a range of other cutting-edge high-tech development zones.

Imagine, for a moment, what might happen if the US could begin to transit away from the "trade war" mind-set currently shaping so much of its unbalanced - and self-harming - foreign policy, and initiate a full, constructive review of what could be achieved, for the US, China and the world, based on a shift back to pragmatic, China-US cooperation.

As it happens, US Senator Bernie Sanders recently provided a very good primary checklist of where globally cooperative energy should be focused:

"In the year 2025, one might have hoped that the global community would be working together to address the existential threat of climate change; working to prevent future pandemics; working to address the massive levels of income and wealth inequality that exists; working to improve the standard of living of struggling people all over the world." 

Now consider what joint China-US research could achieve in advancing the special and positive potential of AI. Imagine how a renewed cooperative spirit could allow China to help the US revamp its infrastructure in the most general sense - including public transport of all kinds, renewable energy, fire service upgrades and the provision of affordable and modular public housing. At the same time, the best of American services expertise could help address China's huge long-term needs in health care, elderly care, pension provision, as well as areas such as individual savings and wealth management.

Even a series of initial steps in the direction outlined above could help rebuild a return to a level of basic mutual, watchful trust. The re-establishment of a measurable improvement in shared confidence would, in turn, help underpin ultimately productive outcomes from the sort of regular, candid, tough but constructive China-US trade negotiations that we are bound to need in the future.

Looking beyond this, a pathway could also be built to allow the US to jointly advance the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative. This would surely be a good thing.

Although some may wonder if this outline is just too wishful, when you think about it carefully, the facts actually speak for themselves. Moving the more fevered ideology away from its position of paramount influence would result in far-reaching, win-win outcomes, clearly visible and there to be taken.