Beijing used a routine press briefing on 19 January to turn private-sector optimism into public diplomacy, highlighting recent survey results from the American Chamber of Commerce in China and fresh GDP figures as evidence that deeper commercial ties deliver mutual benefits. Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said the “success stories” of American companies in China validate the slogan “合则两利” — that cooperation brings advantage to both sides — and argued that stabilizing Sino‑US relations is in both countries’ interests.
The Chamber’s survey showed a noticeable rise in optimism among US firms operating in China: a majority reportedly expected solid profits last year, more than 70% said they had no plans to relocate China operations, and nearly six in ten planned to expand investment in the market. Guo used those figures to underline a simple claim — that positioning in China confers first‑mover advantages and attractive returns — and to invite foreign companies to take up what Beijing calls its “opportunity list” for high‑quality development.
The invocation of economic data gave the pitch added weight. Chinese authorities released headline figures showing national GDP topped 140 trillion yuan in 2025, a year‑on‑year gain of about 5%, and Beijing framed 2026 as the opening year of the 15th Five‑Year Plan, a period it says will renew domestic dynamism and lift China’s role as an engine of global growth and innovation.
The messaging matters because it comes at the intersection of commerce and geopolitics. Washington has been debating the balance between economic engagement and strategic competition with China, and US multinationals face mounting political pressure at home even as China’s market remains disproportionately large and dynamic. The Chamber’s findings — and Beijing’s decision to publicize them through an official spokesman — are meant to shape perceptions inside and outside corporate boardrooms about the relative costs of stepping back from China.
For foreign firms the calculus remains complex. China’s scale, consumer demand and evolving industrial capability present powerful commercial incentives to stay and invest, but firms must weigh those gains against regulatory unpredictability, technology controls, and the potential for intensified geopolitical spillovers. Beijing’s open invitation and promises of a welcoming policy environment may reduce near‑term uncertainty, yet they do not remove longer‑term structural pressures that are reshaping investment strategies.
What to watch next is how tangible Beijing’s offers become, and how US policy and investor sentiment respond. Concrete measures that lower market access barriers or clarify rules for foreign firms would reinforce the narrative of a stable investment climate, while fresh rounds of sanctions, export controls or political pressure in Washington could push some companies toward selective decoupling. Either way, the balance of incentives and risks for US companies in China will continue to influence global supply chains and the broader trajectory of Sino‑US relations.