The meeting scheduled for Thursday (30/10/2025) between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the APEC Leaders’ Summit in Seoul brings to the forefront the steadily escalating trade tensions between the U.S. and China.
The discussion concerns the possibility of reaching a “grand deal” covering a wide range of issues: from the control of narcotics (fentanyl), trade, and export restrictions, to China’s strategy for political-military integration and even the education of Chinese students in the U.S..
Although the plan appears ambitious, there is no guarantee that it will be successfully achieved, as the very scale of the agreement could also become the cause of its failure.
The challenge is not only to reach an agreement but also how the two superpowers will manage their opposing strategic objectives without triggering new crises or further isolation.
China’s strategy in this context is not merely a confrontation of interests but also a power play, which could determine future balances on the global political and economic map.
China’s strategy: Realism and the need for an agreement
The most important factor for China is maintaining international stability while simultaneously safeguarding its national interests and sovereignty.
Despite various economic challenges in recent years, China continues to seek the resolution of tensions with the U.S. without accepting humiliating submission to Washington’s terms.
The need for a “grand compromise” comes at a time when the Chinese economy is adjusting post-pandemic, with investments limited and internal issues, such as the real estate sector crisis, making international cooperation and the avoidance of tensions vital for economic recovery.
Xi Jinping will aim to enhance China’s image as a responsible global actor, presenting the concessions offered to the Americans as a contribution to global security and stability, particularly regarding fentanyl control and trade modifications.
However, this stance is coupled with a strategy of strict maintenance of national sovereignty and the country’s economic independence.
China, partly due to its political culture and economic model, views international relations as a field for advancing its interests and maintaining control.
Therefore, the discussion around fentanyl will serve as the first indication of the Chinese approach: willing to offer something, but not without gaining something in return.
The U.S. and the pursuit of “big deals”
On the other hand, Donald Trump is known for his ability to focus on “big deals”, which generate significant media attention and could portray him as a hero to American voters.
However, from the Chinese perspective, an obsession with “big deals” can be dangerous, as it may overlook the deep strategic differences between the two countries, particularly in areas such as technology, strategic influence, and geopolitical balance.
China has repeatedly emphasized the need for a stronger and more permanent relationship with the U.S., but without relinquishing its sovereign rights and strategic priorities.
From this standpoint, a plan for a “big deal” covering multiple fronts could prove risky, as failure in any single element could cause the entire agreement to collapse.
China appears to prefer smaller, more stable agreements that do not expose the country to large-scale risks.
According to Russian analysts, Trump aims to reindustrialize the U.S. and must therefore introduce a protective policy toward China if Beijing does not make certain concessions.
"Over the past thirty years, the United States has grown significantly economically. Since the late 1970s, American capitalists have started establishing businesses abroad, primarily in China. As a result, the country has gradually retreated and lost technological supremacy. Economic cycles remain satisfied with this, but it does not suit the American industrialists who have bet on Trump," notes Kirill Kotkov, head of the Far East Studies Center in Saint Petersburg.
"I do not rule out that in the meeting between Xi and Trump, some form of consensus might be reached, meaning the parties could make mutual concessions. After that, Trump will once again announce a major success. However, all of these are temporary measures, and on the key issues, it is unlikely that a full agreement will be achieved," Kotkov added.
Trade and the “big deal” - What it means for China
On the trade front, China is called upon to respond to Washington’s ongoing demands for a reduction in the trade deficit and greater access to American markets.
However, the issues are not as simple as they appear.
China does not wish to be fully dependent on the U.S. market for its development, as strengthening its domestic market and the “Made in China 2025” strategy aim to reduce reliance on foreign markets and promote domestic innovation.
Washington, on the other hand, seeks immediate concessions from Beijing, both in terms of market access and technology transfer.
China, in turn, is highly cautious about further opening its markets or allowing American technology into sensitive sectors, as this could undermine its strategic goals in technology and strategic independence.
What makes trade a fragile issue is the uncertainty of the future.
Past concessions, such as those in the Phase One Agreement of 2020, did not yield results, as China failed to fulfill its promises regarding large purchases of American products.
Therefore, any new agreement must be accompanied by strict monitoring mechanisms and guarantees for the enforcement of commitments.
China’s doctrine: Cautious management of rivalry
In terms of diplomacy, China remains committed to the philosophy of strategic management, avoiding major confrontations and excessive provocations.
China’s record on the international stage demonstrates that the country prefers a prudent handling of relations with major powers through gradual and reciprocal actions.
Overly ambitious “grand deals” that encompass interconnected issues—such as fentanyl, trade, and technology—often fail to produce substantial results, since failure in one area can affect the resolution of all other issues.
History’s lessons show that “gradual integration” agreements tend to focus on more attainable goals.
During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union managed to advance through step-by-step nuclear arms reduction agreements, while the deal concerning Iran’s nuclear program remained limited to the enrichment aspects, without directly affecting the broader regional challenges.
China will agree on limited issues
Recognizing the pressure for an agreement, China may agree to a number of limited measures, such as fentanyl control and enhanced cooperation in the fields of clean energy and medical technology.
These limited agreements may prove more sustainable and less risky, as they focus on specific, measurable outcomes that could yield benefits for both sides.
In the technological sphere, the issue of “civil-military fusion” remains the most complex one, and China is likely to seek to maintain its autonomy in the field of technology, as it considers any imposition of restrictions by Washington a threat to its national security and its strategic competitive advantage.
Long-term strategy over political theater
For China, the main objective is not the achievement of a spectacular agreement, but the preservation of a stable framework of cooperation with the United States that safeguards its national interests and contributes to global stability.
The spectacle of a grand deal may capture attention, but the real challenge lies in long-term strategic management and the avoidance of an escalating confrontation that could lead to a geopolitical and economic crisis.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών