Great little debate on the CFR site about China policy, trade and the next U.S. president. The free trade viewpoint is from Dan Ikenson at Cato, a person I am predisposed to agree with on a majority of trade policy issues. He’s been writing great stuff for years. His basic point is that the US should work within the framework of WTO. Makes sense, since the US helped to set it up and was quite involved in China’s accession.

The "opposing" viewpoint, written by Robert Scott, is full of the usual rhetoric, such as "level playing field". He compares China with 1980s Japan and claims that the US must "get tough" so that it’s companies can "win". Bleah.
It’s a good read, no matter what side of the policy debate you are on, but I’ll give you something from Ikenson that sums up the position I agree with quite nicely:

If a tougher stance means using the WTO Dispute Settlement Body [DSB] more systematically to achieve greater Chinese compliance with the vast obligations to which China agreed upon joining the WTO in 2001, the answer is “yes.” If it means supporting or encouraging provocative legislation or taking unilateral administrative actions to compel or punish China in a manner that would violate our own WTO obligations or would benefit a few litigious industries at the expense of broader economic interests, the answer is “no.”