I don't think trade deficits are related to interest rates like budget deficits. It is a matter of consuming more than producing. Actually, it is not as simple because companies like Microsoft have few revenues from China. It is not like Microsoft does not produce, but they are not paid.
The balance of trade is given here. Yes the longer we consume more than we produce, the more of our country foreigners own. Its being going on for a while and Buffett said it has to be fixed now in 2003!
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/balance-of-trade
Take this for what it is - an opinion. I won't say I'm right and you're wrong. So here are my thoughts:
People commonly yell about the trade deficit being a terrible thing. They say foreigners will own our country, it's a sign of a weak GDP, the US loses influence, etc.
But to me, it's like anything else. If you run a deficit at the appropriate times, it's simply smart investing. If the USD is strong, then our purchasing power globally is increased significantly. During those times, we should be buying more from foreign countries than we sell. We get more for each dollar spent. It's awesome. If/when the dollar weakens, we should increase output to export more than we spend so that we get those dollars back on the cheap.
Aside from the theoretical scenario above, consider this. The balance of trade figure is inherently flawed, because it only shows the import/export of physical goods/merchandise. It doesn't give any perspective on value generated any other way. Consider another theoretical scenario:
You're a 18 year old kid living out in Houston Texas. Since the US is able to put its strong USD to use importing oil, it means that you don't have to go work in the oil fields. This frees you up to go to college, go on to get a graduate degree, and then you move out to Silicon Valley and start the next Facebook. Now, through your life you've been an obvious net importer of goods, because you haven't really contributed to creating anything for export. But does that mean you didn't add value to the country? No way.
Just another simplistic example, and by no means is it comprehensive - but I think it illustrates the fact that the balance of trade is just a number, and that number doesn't even come close to accurately representing the shifts of power between the US and foreign countries as you state.