By South China Morning Post | Created at 2026-06-09 20:56:50 | Updated at 2026-06-11 01:34:44
1 day ago
On a state visit to China last month, US President Donald Trump shocked his political base with a series of rhetorical concessions. In an interview, he warmly endorsed Chinese students studying in America, supported China-linked acquisition of US farmland, and dismissed concerns over state espionage as a routine, two-way reality.
It was not the first time Trump’s softer stance on China clashed with his own administration’s hardline approach. Even before the summit, he repeatedly suggested allowing Chinese carmakers into the US market – a
policy non-starter across the executive branch and both sides of the congressional aisle.
While Trump’s warmer rhetoric has raised hopes in Beijing, his government continues to pursue the restrictive policies that define Washington’s broader China strategy, raising questions about the durability of the truce between Washington and Beijing.
Some experts say that Trump’s musings highlighted a purely transactional approach towards China, resulting in a verbal positivity that rarely translates into major policy shifts. However, others argue that his tone reflects a growing appetite for a less adversarial relationship with Beijing, which creates an opportunity to restabilise bilateral ties.
“Converting Trump’s positivity into actual policy changes is a very different thing that will run up against a deeply institutionalised Washington consensus on China risk,” David Meale, China practice head at the Eurasia Group and the former deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in Beijing, told the South China Morning Post.
Xi Jinping gives Donald Trump an ‘extremely rare’ private tour of Beijing’s Zhongnanhai
Ahead of the president’s trip to China, John Moolenaar, a Republican congressman from Michigan and chairman of the House Select Committee on China, advised the president in an interview to “recognise [that] we don’t want to sell them our best technologies that could be used by their military against our men and women in the armed forces”.
