Chinese political scientist and government adviser Zheng Yongnian offered a measured assessment of the recent summit between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump, emphasizing the importance of realism in evaluating Sino-American relations. The Washington meeting, marking the second summit between the two leaders this year, was seen as a step toward stabilizing the bilateral relationship amid ongoing economic and geopolitical tensions.

Zheng noted the existence of two opposing perspectives regarding China-U.S. relations: one of inevitable conflict over global dominance and another expecting swift resolution of differences. He advocated for a pragmatic approach, recognizing that both countries have coexisted as leading powers for decades and will likely continue to operate within a “de facto G2” framework characterized by intertwined cooperation and competition.

The summit’s outcomes, Zheng said, met expectations by reinforcing economic and trade ties and advancing political trust, albeit incrementally. He highlighted the structural complementarity between the Chinese and U.S. economies, pointing out that approximately 70% of their economic sectors are mutually supportive, while 20 to 30% remain competitive, especially in high-tech industries. The establishment of a bilateral dialogue on artificial intelligence represented a positive development despite differences in technical approaches and regulatory philosophies.

In terms of political trust, Zheng outlined a sequential process for China-U.S. relations: first stabilizing economic and trade ties, progressing then to political engagement, and eventually addressing security issues. While the summit signaled agreement in principle on military-to-military communication to prevent crises, full security cooperation remains tentative. Both sides continue to view each other as potential security threats, with concerns about Taiwan and the South China Sea underscoring sensitive sovereignty issues for China and geopolitical interests for the U.S. and its allies.

The Chinese readout referenced a “ninth point” concerning a memorandum of understanding on crisis communication and prevention, which the U.S. fact sheet notably did not mention. Instead, the White House emphasized calls for trilateral arms control negotiations involving the U.S., China, and Russia, reflecting differing priorities. Zheng suggested these discrepancies mirror the divergent security concerns each country prioritizes.

Looking ahead, Zheng underscored the significance of sustaining dialogue between Presidents Xi and Trump, who are expected to meet two more times before year-end summits at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum and the Group of 20 (G20). These meetings aim to further deepen economic ties and solidify consensus on stability, providing a basis for gradually addressing security challenges. He stressed that the relationship’s durability transcends the current U.S. administration, relying on shared recognition among Republicans and Democrats that conflict would be catastrophic globally.

Zheng highlighted several factors crucial to maintaining a stable bilateral relationship: continuous high-level communication; expanding economic interdependence that anchors mutual interests; bureaucratic coordination beyond diplomatic channels to implement agreements; and improving media narratives to reduce demonization and foster empathy on both sides.

Regarding regional dynamics, Zheng observed that middle powers such as Japan and the Philippines are likely to maneuver within the broader China-U.S. relationship rather than reshape it. He pointed out Japan’s efforts to assert greater security autonomy amid concerns about U.S. commitment but cautioned that trust between the two major powers ultimately frames the regional balance. He also stressed the need for reciprocal discussions on how to safeguard U.S. interests in the western Pacific and China’s interests in the eastern Pacific, aiming to avoid zero-sum mentality and exclusionary spheres of influence.

Zheng downplayed concerns about Taiwan being sidelined after the summit, noting the issue remains critical but complex. He urged a pragmatic, inclusive mindset to prevent Taiwan from becoming a flashpoint that could undermine broader cooperation. On the topic of rare earths and critical minerals, the absence of mention in China’s official list contrasted with U.S. concerns but did not indicate a hardline stance by Beijing. Rather, China would reserve such measures as a last resort while advocating for rational engagement.

The newly agreed-upon China-U.S. dialogue on artificial intelligence prompts cautious optimism. Although development models differ, with China promoting balanced regulation and the U.S. tilting toward rapid advancement, both sides recognize the need to manage security risks through government-led discussions rather than leaving them to commercial actors.

Finally, Zheng emphasized the importance of mutual respect and recognition of each side’s evolving position in global power hierarchies. He cautioned against nationalist narratives of “East versus West” decline and rise, arguing that neither China nor the United States can defeat the other without risking global chaos. Successful coexistence requires wise diplomacy, managing internal transformations, and preserving stable channels for communication and cooperation amid inevitable competition.