The world is facing at least three crises today that cannot be resolved by any one country. Two are longer-term and arguably existential: the threat of uncontrolled artificial intelligence and the growing impact of climate change. One is shorter-term and damaging the global economy: the disruption of shipping lanes in the Middle East. All three require the kind of high-level international cooperation that helped manage other challenges, like the threat of nuclear warfare during the Cold War and the damage to the ozone layer.
Yet almost nobody expects meaningful progress during this week’s meetings in Washington between the leaders of the two most powerful countries, President Xi Jinping of China and President Donald Trump. Beneath the pomp of Mr. Xi’s visit, the agenda appears notably unambitious. At most, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent signaled that America can hope for commercial deals and modest A.I. safety progress.
The low expectations for the visit underline the damage that Mr. Trump is doing to American influence and global well-being. He is an undisciplined politician who puts his personal interests above the nation’s, running an administration that has no coherent strategy for solving major problems. He is instead often exacerbating the world’s biggest problems.
No matter who was president, negotiations with China would be difficult. Mr. Xi is an autocrat who has centralized authority, oppressed his country’s citizens and built partnerships with the world’s most repressive regimes. Yet Mr. Xi does tend to be a ruthless tactician, and China and the United States do have overlapping interests on several major issues, including A.I., climate change and Middle East shipping lanes.
The notion that Mr. Trump could effectively represent America’s interests on these issues seems ludicrous at this point. Even on his own terms, his signature second-term actions, like the tariffs and war in Iran, are failing. No wonder that China’s leaders reportedly see his presidency as a gift to their ambitions for greater global influence. Americans are left to imagine the progress that could have been attempted this week with another president.
The first area of potential cooperation is A.I. safety. The rapid advancement of A.I. capabilities requires government regulation to limit the possibility that such tools could become uncontrollable and destructive. No one country can assure its own safety from these dangers. International cooperation is needed to mitigate the threat.
American A.I. models pose great risks because they are the most powerful. But China’s models are not far behind and pose their own risks because they tend to be open-weight, with their internal rules available for other users to alter. Fortunately, China has reasons to want safeguards. China’s spy chief recently warned that A.I. threatens one-party control there. China, like every country, also fears biological weapons.
Mr. Trump evinces little concern about A.I.’s risks and little interest in regulating it. He has said that the United States must beat China in the A.I. race, without regard for safety. That race does matter, but there are ways for the United States both to compete with China and to work together on the risks. The right policy is a mix of competition and cooperation, as this country pursued with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Today, the United States should make the scientific investments to remain ahead of China while negotiating over shared threats like bioweapons and A.I. systems that escape human control.
A second issue on which America urgently needs China’s help is in the Middle East. In response to Mr. Trump’s reckless war, Iran has restricted traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, while the Houthis, a terrorist group allied with Iran, have expanded their disruption of traffic through the Red Sea. The price of oil has risen worldwide as a result.
Persuading Mr. Xi to pressure Iran to reopen the strait would not be easy. Mr. Trump is damaging America’s international status so badly that the Chinese leader can follow the dictum attributed to Napoleon: “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” Still, China has an interest in the free flow of oil and lower energy prices. China’s economic growth has weakened in recent years, and higher oil prices do not help. The government’s stated position in talks with Iran is that it should reopen the strait. China certainly has the leverage to push Iran for a deal: It has been Iran’s largest customer for oil, buying 90 percent of its exports in recent years.
If anything, the third issue — climate change — is the one on which U.S.-China talks could offer the most promise if Mr. Trump were not president. China once was an obstacle to climate progress, complicating the attempts of the Obama administration to negotiate a global framework. Over the past decade, though, China has increasingly been willing to address climate change. Its world-leading renewable energy industry would benefit from international agreements that increase reliance on batteries and electric cars.
These three issues obviously do not represent a complete agenda for an ideal U.S.-China summit. Several others would be even trickier, including China’s support for Iran’s and Russia’s militaries and China’s increasing aggression toward Taiwan and several Asian countries. Realistically, any one meeting would probably not make much progress on the thorniest issues. But the United States and China are not merely rivals for international power; they also have shared interests in global stability.
American presidents going back more than 100 years have believed the country had an interest in taking a leading role in the world. America is far from perfect. But when it led, the world often benefited through expanded prosperity, security and democracy. The progress enhanced this country’s global prestige and influence along the way.
Mr. Trump shows little care for these benefits. He uses international relations to seek personal enrichment, praise from sycophants and equal standing with authoritarians. His flailing presidency leaves Americans with the thinnest of hopes for this week’s summit: that he does not further damage the national interest.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected].
Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp and Threads.
The post Don’t Give Trump the Benefit of Low Expectations appeared first on New York Times.
