Analysis: Trade Deal or Truce? Questions as Trump Meets with China‘s Xi
As President Trump meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping,expectations are tempered: a potential “uneasy trade truce” appears more likely than a thorough,long-term trade deal.Experts suggest this outcome, while a “positive step” toward stabilizing world markets and maintaining U.S.-China trade,may fall short of addressing the broader strategic competition between the two nations.
The focus of discussions remains heavily weighted towards trade, particularly addressing tariffs and market access. However, a key point of contention – U.S. restrictions on high-tech exports to China, specifically advanced semiconductor chips crucial for artificial intelligence – remains largely unresolved. Officials from both countries have remained tight-lipped regarding any agreements on this front.
This reluctance to ease tech restrictions stems from concerns about bolstering China’s military capabilities. Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia, William Burns, emphasized that the technology competition is “the most sensitive… in terms of where this relationship will head, which country will emerge more powerful.” He warned that granting China easier access to advanced semiconductors would directly benefit the Chinese army in its competition with the U.S. military in the Indo-Pacific region.
Recent actions by the Trump administration have already sparked debate. In August, export controls were eased to allow Nvidia, a leading AI chip manufacturer, to increase semiconductor sales to China. This unusual agreement stipulates that Nvidia will remit 15% of its revenue from these sales to the U.S. Treasury.
this move drew criticism from within Trump’s former administration. Matthew Pottinger, who served as Trump’s top China advisor during his first term, argued in a podcast interview that the deal risked sacrificing a vital strategic technology advantage “for $20 billion and Nvidia’s bottom line.”
Underlying these concerns is a perceived disconnect in priorities between the two leaders. While Trump appears primarily focused on trade and commercial agreements, Xi Jinping’s ambitions extend to displacing the United States as the dominant economic and military power in Asia.
Several China experts suggest the administration lacks a cohesive long-term strategy. Bonnie Glaser of the german marshall Fund of the United States stated, “It has a trade strategy, not a China strategy.” Jonathan Czin, a former CIA analyst at the Brookings Institution, echoed this sentiment, describing the administration’s approach as “tactics without strategy,” and noting a “trade and technology myopia” that overlooks broader issues like China’s coercive actions in the South China Sea. He added that “China doesn’t want to have that bigger,broader conversation.”
Even if a temporary truce is achieved, experts predict continued friction. Burns cautioned that the two countries will “remain fierce trade rivals,” anticipating “friction ahead and further trade duels well into 2026.” Czin warned of “more sudden moves from Beijing ahead.”
Ultimately, Trump’s legacy in U.S.-China relations will be defined not solely by trade deals, but by the ongoing competition for economic and military influence in the Pacific Rim – a challenge that will persist nonetheless of the outcome of this week’s meetings.
