Bristling Interrupts Amity in Panel on U.S.-China-Europe Ties

DAVOS, Switzerland â€" When asked if China, the United States and Europe can all play nicely together, attendees of the World Economic Forum would be expected to be largely optimistic, even if they disagreed on a few particulars.

But tensions briefly flared at a panel discussion on the topic here, as a Chinese billionaire took umbrage over invocations of the troubles over the South China Sea.

One of the panelists, the Chinese mogul Wang Jianlin, said he was offended by what he described as efforts to inject politics into an economic discussion. Joseph S. Nye Jr., a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, had mentioned the dispute between China and Japan over the region as an example of countries needing to learn how to balance “hard” military power and “soft” economic and political power.

Professor Nye cited comments by Hu Jintao, the former president of China, about the Chinese government’s need to increase its soft power. And he added that the United States had similarly struck a poor balance between the two types of power when it invaded Iraq in 2003. Europe, he said, had appeared to strike the best balance.

But Mr. Wang still appeared unhappy with the broaching of the topic.

“I’m not happy with what I’ve been hearing from the professor,” the mogul said through a translator. “You shouldn’t deviate into politics.”

Professor Nye later apologized for causing offense, saying that he only wanted to offer advice on how China could enhance its soft power.

Still, many of the panelists â€" who also included Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs; Nick Clegg, Britain’s deputy prime minister; and Angel Gurría, the secretary general of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development â€" found common ground on most topics.

- Trade is generally good, and governments should come around to the idea that except for clear-cut examples of national security violations, cross-border deals should be approved. The troubles that bedeviled efforts by Shuanghui of China to buy the American meat processor Smithfield Foods emerged as a clear example of bad protectionism, but something that should eventually disappear.

“Over time, it will get easier,” Mr. Blankfein said.

- Don’t count the United States out. Professor Nye said that even when China catches up to American gross domestic product, it will still need 40 to 50 years to catch up to U.S. per capita income.

- Level playing fields are important. Mr. Gurría asked whether Chinese companies investing in the United States and Europe were receiving preferential tax treatment. And both Professor Nye and Mr. Blankfein noted that the existence of state-owned enterprises, like some of China’s biggest corporate players, could possess inherent advantages over their fully privatized counterparts.

Ultimately, Mr. Clegg delivered a quintessentially World Economics Forum-type conclusion: working together will help everyone.

“If major powers were able to align their strategic interest, that’d be a very, very good thing,” he said. “We do need to be open, but civilized about these things. Otherwise, we’re not going to achieve our goals.”