The Trump–Xi summit will test whether transactional diplomacy can contain an increasingly structural and competitive US–China rivalry. The more consequential questions concern Taiwan and the shifting US military posture in the Indo-Pacific, where concessions could have consequences beyond the immediate bargain.

The 24 September 2026 summit between Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping will be closely watched for answers on the future of international order, technology and great-power competition. The last meeting between the two in May 2026 produced problematic developments, with the US seemingly capitulating to Chinese demands for equality and parity through ‘constructive strategic stability’, and attempting to build consensus around negotiated bipolarity. Great power competition has not eased despite these efforts; both nations have continued to use economic leverage, domestic laws and diplomacy to undercut the other. Therefore, the contention points—Taiwan, AI, rare earths and chips, trade and a collapsing security order—have deepened since the last meeting.

When Xi Jinping steps off his plane in Washington, the imagery of his interactions will do much of the work the substance of the visit cannot. Xinhua already gave us a glimpse into what the Chinese side may be thinking by repeating the questions asked by Xi during the May meeting, where China appeared as an equal partner in maintaining global peace and stability:

Can China and the United States overcome the Thucydides Trap and create a new paradigm of major-country relations? Can we meet global challenges together and provide greater stability for the world? Can we build a bright future together for our bilateral relations in the interest of the well-being of the two peoples and the future of humanity?[1]

Can China and the United States overcome the Thucydides Trap and create a new paradigm of major-country relations? Can we meet global challenges together and provide greater stability for the world? Can we build a bright future together for our bilateral relations in the interest of the well-being of the two peoples and the future of humanity?[1]

Xi is very likely to use the same assertive, confident tone he used in May. Trump, on the other hand, would like to record this meeting as “great” but with a number attached. Essentially, this meeting may not yield real results on the ground; the optics will matter more to both leaders. The current consensus is that this meeting is not a reset, as nothing underlying has actually reset.

The trade truce struck in Busan in October 2025 suspended export controls on rare earths, which expires on 10 November 2026. If the truce is not extended or made permanent, the US will suffer from a supply shortage, hurting its semiconductor industry. Reportedly, China’s shipments of rare earth magnets to the US fell 13 per cent year on year to 512 tonnes in August.[2] This followed Beijing’s resumption of some export approvals after trade negotiations, and shipments recovered from their lows in 2025.[3]

This highlights that the relationship is trying to be transactional but is limited by strategic constraints. While rare earths give China significant leverage in negotiating the terms of the relationship, the US is not without leverage. But since Busan, the bilateral relationship has changed little, except for a sharp increase in senior meetings and phone calls, suggesting both leaders have concluded the relationship is precarious and dangerous but cannot be left unmanaged.

Trade talks are likely to yield the most visible results. China is now over halfway to its soybean target, politically positive for Trump’s farmer base, but its non-soybean agricultural pledge of US$ 17 billion has largely stalled.[4]  This is not an accidental bureaucratic error; it is a calculated move of selective compliance, a pattern visible in rare-earth licensing. China wants to keep the relationship manageable by buying enough headline-grabbing commodities, while letting harder negotiations slide. This is the tone of the relationship: manage it with non-strategic purchases to keep the........

© IDSA