President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping are set to meet Thursday in Busan, South Korea. U.S. and Chinese negotiators seem close to a series of understandings on tariffs and technology, rare earths and soybeans, and maybe even fentanyl and TikTok. But after the smiles and handshakes, the two countries will find themselves back grappling with essentially the same rifts they faced when Trump took office.
Even if Trump and Xi actually bless a trade agreement, the world’s two largest economies are likely to sign a very small deal. Because without establishing a long-term strategy, any deal Trump signs will fall short of what both countries need to advance peace and economic prosperity.
The U.S. president’s famously transactional tactics can’t begin to lay the groundwork for a complex relationship with a rising geopolitical rival, let alone a country that thrives on long-term planning and single-party control.
Sustainable strategy trumps transactional tactics
Whatever personal chemistry—or at least, civility—Trump and Xi might establish won’t matter much if each country sees the other as the main source of the world’s problems. If the American consensus is that China cheats on trade and dreams of global domination, the Chinese view is that America is just the latest in a long line of colonial powers that plot to keep their country down.
This may be a very different Cold War from the U.S.-Soviet standoff, but it’s still a standoff that requires both sides to develop guidelines for a fractious relationship. And Washington needs a strategy to shape those guidelines. Beyond simply “getting tough” on China, we need to ask what we really want and what we can realistically expect.
Topping the list should be a plan to mitigate China’s excess industrial capacity, which produces 30% of the world’s manufactured goods, while only half are for domestic use. This year, its merchandise trade surplus is on track to beat the roughly $1 trillion in cars, solar panels and other goods that flooded other markets in 2024. Rather than forcing lopsided trade deals on allies and friends, Washington would do better to organize a common message to Chinese leaders that a business model that fuels deflation at home and anger abroad is untenable.
China’s expansive lending to developing countries poses another risk. The Belt and Road Initiative has made generous loans and investments that have accelerated growth and built markets for Chinese trade. But the terms of these transactions have saddled many borrowers with unsustainable debts that are confoundingly difficult to restructure. By one estimate, 75 of the world’s poorest countries must come up with $22 billion in loan repayments this year, making China more of a debt collector than a development banker and risks driving these countries even deeper into poverty.
Diplomatically, Beijing and Washington should be spending at least as much time addressing conflicts. When the day comes that Russian President Vladimir Putin decides to negotiate a cease-fire in Ukraine, can China help ensure the deal sticks? The Chinese did remarkably little when American bombers attacked Iranian nuclear facilities, but could they still help nudge the Supreme Leader to strike a peace deal as negotiations resume?
Then there are the hotspots in China’s own backyard. Whatever trading relationship emerges from the ongoing talks is only as strong as the peace in the Asia Pacific. If nothing else, there should be robust discussions about an unpredictable leader in North Korea, Beijing’s territorial claims in the South China Sea and, of course, Taiwan. Trump pointedly refuses to discuss how the U.S. would react to an attack from the mainland, which Xi may well interpret as a green light.
The benefits of a long-term strategy
And then there are the upsides that come from regular discussions of difficult issues: climate policy, Arctic issues, cybersecurity protocols, artificial intelligence guidelines, intellectual property protection, pandemic preparedness, food safety, United Nations reform, space exploration, financial market access, deep-sea mining rules, quantum computing standards, student visas, human rights and so much more.
It would also make sense to include key Congressional Democrats in these conversations, too, so the process isn’t interrupted by the next presidential campaign. This would also benefit China, which will want need reassurance that any agreement will last longer than Trump’s administration.
After three decades of growing interdependence, China and America are focused intensely on untangling their relationship so they depend less on each other for key supply chains. This means that bilateral trading volumes and financial flows will continue to dwindle.
But the world’s two largest economies and geopolitical rivals can’t settle for conversations around terbium and H100 chips. Xi Jinping has a strategy for “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” by 2049, the 100th anniversary of the Communist Revolution. After this week’s meeting, Donald Trump could outline how the United States plans to engage with China between now and then, where there is room for cooperation and where he has red lines.
But that would require some uncharacteristically strategic thinking from a famously improvisational president.
The post A Trump Deal Won’t Help the U.S.-China Relationship appeared first on TIME.
