(upd) The Summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in Busan, South Korea, on October 30, 2025, marked a critical milestone in the ongoing geopolitical and economic confrontation between the two global superpowers.
Combining trade negotiations, strategic issues, and diplomatic maneuvers, the meeting of the two leaders left several matters unresolved, indicating both progress and deep challenges in U.S.–China relations, as BN had timely informed its readers.
One of the most significant issues of the summit was the course of the trade war that has characterized U.S.–China relations in recent years.
Since 2018, the two countries have been engaged in a bitter and complex trade war involving tariffs, retaliations, and various sanctions.
At the summit, both leaders presented an image of cooperation, with Trump praising Xi as a “great leader,” and the Chinese president appearing enthusiastic about the meeting, suggesting a positive atmosphere despite the tensions.
No framework agreement at the Summit
However, the main issue of the meeting was the possibility of a framework agreement to extend the current trade truce.
After the dramatic escalation of tensions in early October 2025, China imposed new restrictions on the export of rare earth elements, a critical resource used in products ranging from electronics to weapons.
This move was seen as a strategic maneuver by China to assert its economic power against the continuous U.S. tariffs, which had reached 145% on Chinese products.
The two leaders were expected to discuss ways to reduce these trade barriers and to extend the current truce, which expires on November 10.
Reports indicated some progress, with an agreement to reduce tariffs to 47% (which remains a significant economic burden for both economies) and a potential accord on rare earths.
However, the talks ultimately proved incomplete, especially on critical issues such as the final terms of export restrictions and the future of the broader trade agreement.
The duration of the summit—only two hours—showed that progress was not satisfactory, raising questions about the substantive depth of the negotiations.
According to CNN, this agreement may be considered bold, but it carries serious risks for the United States.
While it reduces tariffs toward China, it threatens to increase them for U.S. neighbors, who are also facing the problem of fentanyl.
Thus, the agreement may improve relations with Washington’s main economic rival but cause tensions with its traditional trade partners.
Nuclear deterrence and strategic alliances
Another major topic discussed at the summit was nuclear armament, particularly concerning China’s nuclear power.
Trump, in a surprise move shortly before the summit, announced that the U.S. would restart nuclear weapons testing, sending a message of a possible shift in American policy after decades of moratorium.
This move appeared to challenge the existing nuclear order, dominated by the U.S. and Russia.
The timing of this announcement is crucial, as the U.S. and Russia prepare for the expiration of the New START Treaty in 2026, with both countries seeking to include China in a new arms control agreement.
However, China firmly opposes participation in any denuclearization negotiations, arguing that it possesses a much smaller nuclear arsenal compared to the U.S. and Russia.
Trump’s announcement appeared aimed at pressuring China to reconsider its stance on nuclear disarmament.
The issue of Taiwan, although one of the most tense points in U.S.–China relations, was omitted from public discussions during the summit.
Despite ongoing statements from Washington about supporting Taiwan through arms sales, neither Trump nor Xi publicly mentioned the issue, indicating that both sides chose to sidestep it for the time being.
China deeply annoyed over U.S. nuclear tests
Trump stated that, “due to the testing programs of other countries,” he had instructed the Pentagon to begin nuclear weapons testing on an equal basis.
Trump’s statements heightened Beijing’s mistrust, and according to experts, the U.S. President’s decision “gives a blank check to China and Russia to resume full-scale nuclear tests.”
China, which conducted its last nuclear test in 1996, is actively expanding its arsenal, which, according to the New York Times, currently numbers around 600 warheads.
According to the American newspaper, satellite data suggest that China may be preparing the Lop Nur nuclear testing site for the resumption of underground testing.
Trump later clarified that his order referred to “other” countries, not China, but experts noted that even if the U.S. decided to resume testing, it would take about 18 months to prepare the Nevada Test Site.
War in Ukraine - Limited cooperation
The conflict in Ukraine, which has evolved into a decisive geopolitical factor in recent years, was also discussed at the summit.
Trump, as he has stated previously, expressed his desire to involve China in efforts to resolve the crisis.
However, China’s response was lukewarm.
According to analyst Ekaterina Zaklyazminskaya, an expert in Chinese foreign policy, Beijing is unlikely to exert any meaningful pressure on Russia, given their strategic partnership.
China has maintained a neutral stance on the Ukrainian conflict, emphasizing the need for dialogue and peaceful resolution.
China’s refusal to intervene directly in the conflict reflects its general policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states.
Despite Trump’s attempts to ask Beijing for “something” on Ukraine, it is clear that Xi does not intend to change China’s position.
A lost Opportunity for energy cooperation?
Energy cooperation, particularly in the oil and natural gas sectors, was an area that was expected to dominate the summit.
China, as the world’s largest energy importer, plays a central role in the global energy market.
However, discussions on expanding Russo-Chinese energy relations - especially amid Western sanctions against Russia - appeared problematic.
Zaklyazminskaya noted that while the U.S. raised the issue of energy cooperation, China adopted a cautious stance without offering major developments.
This hesitation may indicate that Beijing is reluctant to deepen its energy and economic ties with Russia, given the complex diplomatic and economic repercussions.
The U.S. - China rivalry
The Busan Summit highlights the great complexity of U.S. - China relations, which extend beyond trade and economic issues.
While both countries continue to engage in diplomatic efforts to resolve certain matters, such as trade and nuclear deterrence, their fundamental rivalry remains intense.
In particular, China’s rise as a global power continues to challenge U.S. dominance in the Asia-Pacific region, while economic competition between the two nations shows no signs of abating.
The trade war, nuclear deterrence, the Taiwan issue, and the conflict in Ukraine are all parts of a broader geopolitical confrontation likely to shape global politics for decades.
The failure to achieve a comprehensive trade agreement or significant progress on critical issues at the summit underscores the deep differences between the two powers.
Everything open – The Summit solved absolutely nothing
The outcome of the Busan Summit suggests that, despite cooperation efforts, the strategic goals of the two countries remain at odds.
The Xi-Trump Summit in Busan was a defining moment in the ongoing rivalry between the U.S. and China.
While both leaders displayed optimism and a willingness to cooperate, the lack of substantive progress on key issues such as trade, nuclear deterrence, and energy demonstrates the complexity of their relationship.
Unresolved matters surrounding the trade war, Taiwan, and the conflict in Ukraine will continue to dominate U.S.-China relations in the coming years.
As the two countries navigate this turbulent period, the world will be closely watching the evolution of their rivalry, especially within the framework of geopolitical developments and global market dynamics.
Whether the U.S. and China will manage to reach a lasting agreement or their competition will further escalate remains unclear - but the outcome of the Busan Summit shows that their leaders still have many obstacles ahead on the road to sustainable stability in their relations.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών