【How Should We View Trump’s Visit to China?】 "China and the U.S. have consistently been in communication regarding Trump’s visit to China," is the standard response from the Foreign Ministry spokesperson in recent times.

The Foreign Ministry’s official announcements follow established procedures, but this doesn’t prevent us from observing his visit from other angles.

Bessent recently stated that, as far as he knows, Trump’s visit to China will no longer be postponed. The underlying implication is that before the visit, at least a non-war phase with Iran must be maintained. It’s not a peace phase yet, but what he can ensure is maintaining a level of conduct acceptable enough for China to welcome him.

This is the essence of the U.S.-Iran dynamic: war or peace, in its truest form.

Trump originally planned to visit China by late March, but the trip was delayed after the U.S. jointly with Israel launched military action against Iran.

In my personal view, the delay was likely forced—not necessarily because warfare itself made it impossible for him to travel, but rather due to clear signals from relevant parties: visiting China as an “aggressor” or “butcher” would create significant difficulties.

This led to a technical obstruction in the visit, forcing it to be postponed.

After all, this is not just any country Trump is visiting—it's China, a civilization with moral standards and a clear sense of right and wrong.

The Chinese are hospitable, but their hospitality has its own principles—moral values, ethics, standards, and etiquette.

The Chinese proverb goes: “When friends come, we offer fine wine; when enemies come, we raise our rifles.” Not everyone who walks through the door deserves fine wine.

Trump has committed acts universally condemned by morality and justice, yet still wants to come to China. He may not care, but for the host nation, what image does this send to the world? The host nation holds high moral and ethical standards; thus, it cannot blindly welcome every guest with fine wine regardless of their actions.

Imagine this: After devastating Gaza, Netanyahu travels abroad—would every country welcome him with open arms?

The same applies to the president.

From this perspective, the temporary ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran should be seen as a precondition for Trump’s visit to China.

He could choose to keep fighting, but then he should stay away. He cannot have both.

Coming to China during the height of hostilities would be disrespectful to the host nation, indirectly insulting the host by forcing them to accept a war-monger’s image.

He must make a choice: one or the other.

Currently, he has chosen to stop fighting and proceed with the visit.

This choice, from a side angle, reveals how much he values the outcome of his visit to China—more than unlimited pressure on Iran.

But precisely because of this visit, Iran is indirectly given a chance to catch its breath. All sides are now seizing the momentum to push for an end to the war.

If viewed from this angle, Trump’s visit may leave a unique mark in world history—one that might, thanks to the visit, open a path toward peace.

Could Trump restart the war after his visit to China?

The possibility cannot be ruled out.

A single visit won’t magically transform Trump’s soul. His deeply rooted worldview—based on interests and a “win-at-all-costs” mentality—combined with greed, cunning, and vanity, makes it extremely difficult for him to lay down arms immediately, let alone achieve enlightenment.

The best course of action is to intensify mediation efforts during and around the time of his visit, bring all parties closer together, and sign documents conducive to peace.

If so, warmly receiving Trump could carry special value—not merely for him, but more importantly for ourselves, Iran, the Middle East, and global common well-being.

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1864514308661248/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.