Thewesternbalkans.
Trump’s visit to Beijing ended with a lot of energy talk but no concrete deals. According to Trump, Xi Jinping “agreed that they want to buy oil,” but China’s official statement on the summit made no mention of a commitment to buy oil. Expressing interest in buying oil from the United States is a way to appease Trump without actually making a firm commitment.
There has also been no progress on U.S. access to China’s critical minerals, a key U.S. goal.
The U.S. has given the green light to sell Nvidia’s H200 chips to Chinese companies, but Beijing is yet to buy them. “They want to try to develop their own,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One, although he added that the issue had been raised and “something could happen.” For its part, the Chinese government is pouring money into Huawei in the hope of reviving its own domestic chip industry to counter the U.S. one.
The summit gave the impression of stability and a positive approach overall, but it failed to produce any significant breakthroughs. The Chinese government said it had reached “common understandings” with Washington, while Trump said Chinese leader Xi Jinping had “become a true friend” and that the two powers had “resolved a lot of different issues,” inviting Xi to visit Washington in September. The deals signed—including China’s agreement to buy 200 Boeing planes and some U.S. oil and agricultural goods—were either smaller than expected or unclear in scope. The fact that the leaders’ body language was closely scrutinized shows how little progress was made.
Despite the lack of progress on Taiwan and of clear indications that Beijing will provide real assistance to the US in the Strait of Hormuz, the softening of the tone in relations and the modest step towards rebalancing trade are assessed by experts as a good start. In a broader geopolitical plan, Trump’s visit to Beijing demonstrated the achievement of parity in strategic relations between the two most powerful countries in the world – an outcome that the leadership in Beijing had planned in advance, and Washington was forced to accept. Xi Jinping describes the equality in the strategic hierarchy between China and the US with the new formula – relations of constructive strategic stability.
What does this new status quo (with all the conditionality of its future) portend for Europe?
European leaders breathed a sigh of relief after two days of talks in Beijing between Trump and Xi when it became clear that no major trade deal had been struck between the US and China. The lack of change in US policy towards Taiwan and the retention of control over the sale of more advanced US chips to China were seen as positive signs in European capitals.
The changing balance of power between the United States and China, epitomised by Washington’s retreat and Beijing’s assertiveness, does not bode well for Europe, however. The US is reducing its confrontation with China on trade at a time when the EU is preparing to toughen its approach to Beijing with more decisive trade measures. In this situation, Brussels risks finding itself alone and isolated. A huge challenge for the union is the looming escalation of China’s resistance to EU measures.
Sooner or later, the EU will have to back down. It cannot simultaneously emancipate himself from the US, confront China and wage war with Russia in Ukraine over a long period. Only weeks after Trump, the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin will arrive in Beijing. The European Union is left alone in the cold. This may also break the European officials who refuse to host the EU-China summit this year if Xi Jinping does not arrive in Brussels. Apparently they will have to be content with “only” Chinese Premier Li Qiang. The American approach currently radiates a desire to please Beijing. So does Moscow. It would not be surprising if some small autocrats in the Balkans, such as Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić, also get carried away by the new wind and ask to go on a pilgrimage to Beijing.
