After Trump-Xi summit, Seoul faces real test of balance

U.S. President Donald Trump, left, and Chinese President Xi Jinping look at each other as they hold a bilateral meeting at Gimhae International Airport in Busan, Thursday, on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. Reuters-Yonhap

The long-awaited meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Busan on Thursday has patched up the escalating tension between the world's top two superpowers over trade and other issues.

While the brief but symbolic encounter on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meetings signaled a fragile pause in the rivalry, Seoul — as the host of APEC — is now placed at the center of the increasingly narrow diplomatic corridor, with its carefully calibrated foreign policy of “balance” now being tested in practice, not just in principle.

During the 100-minute meeting, the U.S. and Chinese leaders agreed that China will cooperate in preventing the inflow of fentanyl, a deadly synthetic opioid, into the U.S., and the U.S. in return will reduce tariffs on Chinese goods by 10 percent. China also agreed to suspend its export restrictions on rare earths exports for one year.

Trump called Xi “a great leader of a great nation,” and Xi responded by saying that the differences between the two countries were “normal” — indicating both attempted to prevent tensions from expanding.

Balance under pressure

For Korea, hosting the U.S.-China summit was a significant diplomatic achievement not only as a coordinator, but also a reminder of its strategic limitations, experts said.

According to Lee Dong-gyu, director of external affairs at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, it represented “the symbolic success and structural limits of Korea’s diplomacy.”

“Seoul gained visibility as the host,” he said. “But Beijing still sees Korea as aligned with Washington. The Lee Jae Myung administration’s stance on balanced diplomacy is convincing in theory, but difficult to put into practice.”

He added that the government’s real task is to turn slogans into policy, emphasizing that “balance today means managed diplomacy — maintaining flexibility without losing credibility with either side.”

The scholar explained that the president's “pragmatic diplomacy” seeks to distinguish itself from the previous Yoon Suk Yeol administration’s rigid pro-U.S. orientation. Yet, decades of alliance structures and military cooperation leave little room to maneuver.

“Korea cannot abandon the alliance with the U.S., but it can shape how China perceives that relationship,” he said. “With the upcoming bilateral talks between Lee and Xi, the goal for Seoul is to have Beijing understand the Lee government's foreign policy and build trust.”

Chung Jae-hung, a senior fellow at the Sejong Institute, said that Seoul’s main task is no longer mediation, but mitigation.

“The role of mediator is unrealistic,” he said. “What Korea can do is act as a buffer to cool tensions down when they rise.”

He urged Seoul to propose crisis-management channels that could prevent accidents in sensitive zones such as the West Sea or the Taiwan Strait.

“Rather than echoing the rhetoric of the U.S.-Japan axis, Korea should focus on stabilizing the regional order through quiet, consistent diplomacy,” he said.

Chung called this approach “conflict-relief diplomacy,” arguing that it aligns better with Korea’s status as a middle power than formal balancing between superpowers.

President Lee Jae Myung walks with U.S. President Donald Trump before their bilateral talks in Gyeongju, North Gyeongsang Province, Wednesday, on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. Reuters-Yonhap

From balancing to persuading

Kang Jun-young, a professor of Chinese studies at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, offered a more cautious perspective.

“Korea cannot truly mediate between the U.S. and China,” he said. “The U.S.-Korea alliance is military in nature, while relations with China are cooperative but not strategic.”

Kang warned that the president’s mention of developing nuclear-powered submarines during his summit with Trump could deepen Beijing’s suspicions.

“From China’s standpoint, that remark sounded like an endorsement of Washington’s nuclear posture,” he said. “Now that Seoul has met American expectations, it must turn to Beijing and explain its security situation rather than simply seek understanding.”

He argued that persuasion, rather than neutrality, should guide Korea’s next phase of diplomacy.

“The upcoming Korea-China summit should focus on explaining intentions rather than proclaiming balance,” he said. “Beijing does not demand perfect neutrality — it demands honesty.”

He added, “Balance is not about standing in the middle; it is about explaining, managing and persuading all at once.”