First, the very language of “strategic stability” carries an implicit suggestion that U.S.-China relations should be managed on the basis of a “two equal major powers” model, rather than within a hierarchical order dominated by Washington. In a certain sense, this also reflects China’s growing confidence in dealing with the United States. Second, the term “strategic stability” is more familiar to the American strategic community and therefore easier for them to accept. However, the deliberate addition of “constructive” signals that this is not meant to be a passive form of stability in which the two sides merely probe each other’s red lines. Rather, it implies that Beijing wants to cooperate where possible and that the two sides should actively cooperate rather than settle for passive crisis management.