As predicted, Nicolas Burns, US President Joe Biden's nominee for the United States ambassador to China, took a tough line in his Senate confirmation hearing in Washington on Wednesday.

In his speech, the former ambassador to NATO blew the dust off almost all the ruses in the China-bashing playbook of the previous US administration as if he were nominated by Biden's predecessor.

Burns was obviously attempting to prove to the senators his "political correctness" in lashing out at China with the well-worn lies of "genocide in Xinjiang" and "abuses in Tibet" and "bullying of Taiwan".

All these have been heard before ad infinitum, and, having been debunked, are nothing more than crowd-pleasers for his audience. So it is not the performance of Burns but the logic underlying it — only China-bashers will be approved for posts in the US administration — that was the most notable aspect of the hearing.

It shows that the Biden administration will have to be alert to Sino-US relations being hijacked by the anti-China mob in Congress who wish to lynch it for its audacity in stepping forward.

Burns is a veteran diplomat and knows what the job interview demands.

In fact, on different occasions over the past few years, he has argued China is not an enemy but a partner to work with for the US to address global challenges, and he has observed that diplomacy is about human relations.

He will know that although his fry-the-cold-rice speech might win him a warm response and the confirmation of the Senate, taking that line when he arrives in Beijing will not be in the best interest of Sino-US ties.

When he was nominated for the post in August, the Chinese foreign ministry expressed the hope that he will play a constructive role in promoting the healthy development of Sino-US relations, which shows the broad space he will have if he is really committed to improving bilateral relations.

Burns should cherish that positive reception from Beijing and take it as an invitation to work to improve relations with China.

With his rich work and research experience related to the Cold War and Soviet Union, Burns must be well aware of the essential differences between the situations now and then, and he can faithfully fulfill his role as an interlocutor by making them clear to Washington.

Both sides should take concrete actions to implement the consensuses the two leaders reached during their phone talk in September, and carry forward the positive momentum bilateral relations have demonstrated since then.

Hopefully Burns, if confirmed in the post, will be a promoter, not saboteur, of bilateral ties, and a bridge, not a hurdle, for exchanges.