Special for followers of codigopostalrd.net
On November 24, 2025, US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping held a telephone conversation that Trump described as “very positive” and indicative of “extremely strong” bilateral relations.
This was their first direct conversation since their face-to-face meeting on October 30, 2025, in Busan, South Korea, during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit.
The conversation covered topics such as trade, the fentanyl crisis, US agricultural exports (particularly soybeans), Russia’s war in Ukraine, and Taiwan.
Both leaders emphasized maintaining the positive momentum from the Busan talks, where they agreed to a one-year trade truce that included US tariff reductions on Chinese goods (from an average of 57% to 47%), the suspension of Chinese export controls on rare earth elements, and the suspension of certain port fees.
The call had an immediate and broader ripple effect in the economic, geopolitical, and diplomatic spheres.
The conversation reinforced the Busan commitments, with Trump highlighting the “significant progress” on agricultural products and fentanyl restrictions.
China pledged to resume “immediate purchases” of U.S. soybeans, which would benefit American farmers amid ongoing export delays.
This comes on top of the halving of tariffs related to fentanyl precursors, which could ease supply chain pressures for U.S. industries that rely on Chinese inputs.
U.S. stock markets reacted positively, with the Nasdaq rising between 2.5% and 2.7% in afternoon trading, boosted by gains in technology and chip stocks (e.g., Nvidia).
Analysts attributed this to reduced fears of renewed trade escalation, along with short covering and positioning during the holidays.
Broader indices, such as the S&P 500, also advanced, indicating investor confidence in the easing of restrictions. However, accumulated tariffs remain high (close to 50%), limiting the overall recovery.
Xi Jinping reiterated that “Taiwan’s return to China” is an integral part of the post-World War II international order, deeming reunification essential for global stability and invoking the shared alliances between the United States and China during World War II against fascism.
Trump did not address this issue publicly, but his emphasis underscores Beijing’s pressure amid US arms sales to Taiwan (e.g., $330 million for fighter jet parts) and Japan’s deployment of missiles near the island.
This could exacerbate regional tensions if the United States does not make immediate concessions.
The leaders also discussed the Russian invasion, with Xi urging both sides to “narrow their differences and address the root causes” to achieve a resolution.
Trump has previously expressed interest in swift peace agreements, and this exchange positions China as a potential mediator, although Beijing’s ties with Moscow limit its neutrality. It also links to Xi’s broader call to respect the results of World War II, indirectly linking Ukraine to norms against territorial aggression.
Trump’s enthusiastic speech contrasted with Xi’s more measured tone, who emphasized “equality, respect, and mutual benefit.”
This personal diplomacy reflects the interactions of his first term, fostering a “steady and positive trajectory” that could facilitate discussions on technology exports (for example, pending US approval of Nvidia H200 AI chips for China).
The call avoids immediate trade retaliation, providing some relief to US exporters and Chinese manufacturers. It also signals to allies (e.g., the EU and Japan) that Washington prioritizes de-escalation over confrontation, which could impact global supply chains.
Regarding fentanyl, greater cooperation could reduce overdose deaths in the US (more than 100,000 annually), although enforcement remains a challenge.
Planned high-level visits—Trump’s to Beijing in April 2026 and Xi’s state visit to the US later that year—could lead to a formalized trade agreement or technology pacts. However, failure to deliver on promises (e.g., access to rare earth elements) risks new tariffs, as seen during Trump’s first term.
Geopolitically, it could embolden the Chinese narrative on Taiwan, undermining US credibility in the Indo-Pacific region.
In the long term, while it stabilizes ties, the call highlights persistent asymmetries: US influence in trade has declined as China diversifies its partners (e.g., through the BRICS).
Brookings analysts observe a return to the previous status quo with little progress on key US objectives, such as technology restrictions, which could erode deterrence on issues like intellectual property theft.
Public reactions on X (formerly Twitter) were mixed: optimism from market analysts, sarcasm regarding the diplomatic rhetoric, and concern about Taiwan in geopolitical narratives.
The call represents a pragmatic thaw in US-China relations, prioritizing economic gains (trade, fentanyl) over flashpoints (Taiwan, Ukraine) and avoiding a downward spiral after Busan.
It validates Trump’s negotiating style, generating tangible benefits for American farmers and markets, while buying time for diplomacy. However, this highlights unresolved tensions: Xi’s assertive stance on Taiwan does not imply concessions on sovereignty, and structural problems such as technological rivalry persist.
Overall, this is more of a stabilizing interlude than a breakthrough: cooperation benefits both sides, but confrontation looms if momentum is lost. As Xi noted, “the vision of China and the United States helping each other achieve success… is a tangible and attainable prospect,” but achieving it requires overcoming deep strategic divisions.
Enviar comentarios
