In a little over one month from now, U.S President Donald Trump plans to land in Beijing for a one-on-one summit with Xi Jinping. The mandarin has maintained studied silence, neither confirming nor dismissing.
The South China Morning Post has its doubts, wondering how Xi could welcome the man who has done everything possible to undermine the bilateral relationship: whether it is kidnapping Maduro from Venezuela or waging war on Iran, both key partners of China.
Trump has also sought to undermine the WTO by forging bilateral free trade agreements that are not only unfair but have invited criticism for what is seen as bringing back colonialism in anotther form.
But Ryan Hass, Director of the China Center at the Brookings Institution, told StratNewsGlobal via email that there are visible gains for China if the Trump visit happens. It’s an opportunity to present China as a peer of the United States and Xi as a peer of Trump. This is especially important for Xi’s domestic image.
It will also send the message that China has arrived at the centre of the world stage and America no longer is in a position to push China around. Of course, India will figure below this world order.
Shaping the Global Narrative
Chinese media narratives will seek to frame the world as transitioning to a more multipolar order, which will be an implicit way of highlighting America’s declining clout within the international system.
Former US commerce secretary Gina Raimondo, believes that Washington’s strategy of restricting China’s access to advanced technologies is okay but cannot replace the need for sustained innovation at home.
She also underscored that national security considerations will remain non-negotiable, and that export controls are almost certain to feature prominently in the summit discussions.
Raimondo said the US must be “running faster and innovating faster”, and warned that commercial considerations should not blur national security requirements. Meaning that the US government should not allow companies to sell technology to China in exchange for revenue-sharing.
“It’s either a national security threat or it’s not,” she indicated, stressing the need for clarity and consistency in policy. She cautioned that Beijing consistently pushes for relaxation and clearer definitions of what falls within the US “national security” framework.
