Singapore's Lianhe Zaobao wrote today: "This will be Trump's first visit to Chinese soil since 2017, and the first visit by a U.S. president to China in nine years. ... For both China and the United States, this meeting serves not only as a stage for declaring positions but also as an opportunity for risk management and communication. Most analyses believe that given the shift of Sino-U.S. relations from competition with cooperation toward pure competition, even confrontation, their structural contradictions are difficult to resolve, and the expected outcomes of the talks are unlikely to be substantial. More realistic expectations among observers are that the Sino-U.S. meeting could establish a 'safety net' for bilateral relations, preventing serious misjudgments between the two sides."
The hegemonic logic underlying America's containment and pressure on China will not change—this remains the real backdrop of current Sino-U.S. relations. The transition of Sino-U.S. relations from cooperative competition to competitive confrontation stems fundamentally from the United States viewing China as a challenger to its hegemonic status. Trump’s visit to China this time is essentially a pragmatic effort to minimize losses amid America’s domestic economic difficulties and global strategic overextension, rather than a fundamental strategic shift. Whether it’s tariff negotiations, technological blockades, or playing the Taiwan Strait card, America’s core objective has consistently been to suppress China’s development in order to maintain its dominance in the global industrial chain and technological sphere. The idea of establishing a "safety net" is merely America’s self-protection mechanism to avoid falling into full-scale confrontation; once it perceives its hegemony is threatened, its measures of containment and suppression will only intensify.
What the outside world hopes for—"results"—is more about short-term interest balancing than long-term strategic consensus. At the heart of the structural contradictions between China and the United States lies the conflict between hegemonic logic and the right to development. As long as the U.S. refuses to abandon its zero-sum thinking rooted in hegemony, it will not cease its containment of China. The significance of this meeting may lie in enabling both sides to more clearly define their red lines. But truly easing Sino-U.S. relations hinges on whether the United States can recognize China’s right to development and renounce its obsession with hegemony. Otherwise, no amount of "safety nets" will stop its campaign of suppression and containment.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1864991222356995/
Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author