Summit that parted them away to their own paths

Choo Jae-woo

Despite all the hype, earnest U.S.-China relations watchers may not have expected much from the Beijing summit. Despite six meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping during U.S. President Donald Trump's three-day stay (May 13-15), no substantial breakthrough was made for the bilateral relationship. The impression Trump got from Xi is a major factor. In his Fox News interview on his second day, Xi said he wanted to be “China first,” like “America First.” In his interview, he said he could only be cordial to Xi as an invited guest. The summit therefore was full of jabs exchanged between the two leaders. Some landed well simply to satisfy themselves, as the two leaders only raised their fists at the close of the meeting, calling it “a moment of great respect.”

The recent summit between the U.S. and China did little to address the ongoing trade conflicts that have strained relations between the two nations. The lack of progress can be attributed to both sides’ unwillingness to make significant concessions, particularly from Washington. China’s demands, which have emerged from over six rounds of negotiations since May of last year in Geneva, are clear. Beijing seeks the relaxation of regulations governing the transfer of advanced U.S. technology, the export licensing of cutting-edge semiconductors and related software, as well as increased access to U.S. investment and capital markets. However, these requests pose substantial challenges for the U.S. government, making it unlikely that any of China’s key demands will be met in the near future.

As negotiations stalled, Trump offered a gesture before his visit to pique Chinese attention and encourage cooperation. He agreed with NVIDIA Chairman Jensen Huang in December to sell HB200 semiconductors to China if 25 percent of profits were repatriated to the U.S. Despite its intentional dig at his Chinese counterpart, this measure had little impact. Trump deferred to Xi to accept this offer, although reports indicated that China chose to invest in local production over U.S. sales. The success of DeepSeek, China's version of OpenAI, encouraged this strategy move. However, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who accompanied Trump to Beijing, questioned the December decision. On May 15, the last day of Trump's visit, Rubio told NBC News that U.S. high-tech policy is to dominate cutting-edge technologies that compete with China.

Xi criticized Trump, particularly about Taiwan, throughout the summit. Xi warned against the “Thucydides Trap,” which describes the dangerous dynamics of U.S.-China power competition, in his opening remarks. When questioned by the media about Taiwan's incursion, Trump seemed surprised and sidestepped the topic. Xi hit Trump again, pressing him to reconsider his January arms sales. Trump sighed and said he would think about it for a few days after hearing this. Trump retaliated with political insults when the conversation turned political, signaling that the exchange has far from ended.

Trump directed a pointed remark at Xi concerning the denuclearization of North Korea. However, the response from the Chinese leader remains uncertain, as neither side has provided additional information. Historical context offers valuable insights. In December 2018, at a lunch event in Buenos Aires during the G20 summit, Trump encouraged Xi to arrange a second meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Upon his return to Beijing, Xi communicated this message to Kim, which prompted Kim's visit in early January. The meeting laid the groundwork for the subsequent summit between the United States and North Korea, which occurred in Hanoi, Vietnam, the following month. The Chinese Communist Party’s official mouthpiece, People’s Daily, reported on this account, shedding light on the complex diplomatic exchanges between the leaders.

The two leaders reached a consensus regarding Iran, notably in their shared stance against the nation's nuclear aspirations, its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and the suggested toll system. In this context, China seemed prepared to align with the U.S. However, following the summit, China's position shifted to a more critical stance regarding solutions like the adoption of a U.N. resolution introduced the day after. Beijing expressed its opposition to the resolution, arguing that the war initiated by the U.S. was both unjust and illegal. Rubio has indicated that Washington does not expect Beijing to play a substantial role in resolving the conflict. It has been confirmed that Beijing aligns with Washington on critical matters concerning the resolution of the conflict.

At the conclusion of the summit, Trump successfully secured the sale of 200 aircrafts, surpassing Boeing’s expectations of 150. He also extracted a commitment from Xi to increase soybean imports beginning this year in addition to their agreement in 2025. Xi also promised to lower American beef and poultry nontariff barriers. However, Trump failed to persuade Xi to open China’s markets to U.S. exports, a crucial issue that will shape bilateral relations. The two leaders agreed to establish a U.S.-China trade and investment board to monitor mutually beneficial actions and interests. Despite the conditions, both nations appear to be sticking to their high-tech methods, which will lead to further competitiveness. Cooperation will be limited to the bottom layers of the economy, mainly primary and secondary industries.

The summit highlighted a crucial insight for South Korea: the necessity of avoiding an exaggerated perception of rivalry between the two dominant global powers. In the landscape of advanced technology, the U.S. and China have both indicated a strong commitment to competition, suggesting that any cooperation may be confined primarily to consumer goods. The U.S. maintains a leading role in global political dynamics, whereas China is anticipated to adopt a more reserved stance unless directly engaged in particular circumstances, such as a possible crisis in Taiwan. As an ally of the United States, South Korea must prioritize clarity in its strategy, vision and decision-making concerning national interests both now and in the coming years. South Korea stands at a crossroads, facing a critical decision that will shape its future. The nation must carefully evaluate its options to ensure alignment with opportunities that will enhance its national welfare.

Choo Jae-woo is a professor at Kyunghee University.