The visit of Donald Trump to Beijing “ended with great pomp but with no great clarity regarding the concrete results achieved,” summarizes The Guardian. While the American president assured on Friday, May 15 that he had “resolved” with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping “many different problems that others would not have been able to solve,” he provided “few details on the nature of these solutions.”
Chinese leader, in Trump’s mind, also claimed on Friday to have found “an important consensus with the American president on multiple issues – including the maintenance of stable Sino-American economic and trade relations,” reported China Daily. But he too has been generally sparing with details.
As noted by Al-Jazeera, even though both parties issued “detailed statements on the subjects discussed by Trump and Xi” during these two days, these “only overlap on a limited number of points,” with the White House reports “mentioning issues not mentioned in the Chinese Foreign Ministry statements, and vice versa.”
“The heart of the relationship has not changed,” concludes Amanda Hsiao, director of the China section at the Eurasia Group consulting and analysis firm, in the Guardian. “Despite all the ceremonial and spectacle,” she declares, “this summit ‘will not, ultimately, be very important.'”
The National Review, a conservative publication, comments that “Whatever pleasantries exchanged in Beijing, China remains intent on annexing Taiwan and surpassing the United States as the world’s top power.”
“Meetings like the one in Beijing should, in the tradition of Cold War summits, aim to prevent rivalry from escalating into conflict,” adds the review. “However, innocuous comments from a Chinese spokesperson suggest that some progress has been made in this regard.”
For several media outlets, perhaps the most significant accomplishment of the summit is that although “Trump left Beijing without any immediate signs that the United States and China have resolved the thorny issues that poison their tumultuous relationship,” according to CNN, “he leaves with a freshly stabilized relationship with the Chinese leader.”
“In light of the deterioration of relations in recent years, the fact that the two leaders parted ways warmly and agreed on the importance of their ties indicates an evolution towards stabilization, at a time when a destabilized world earnestly craves geopolitical calm,” the network adds.
The South China Morning Post concurs, observing that “the lack of substance of the summit” has “shifted the focus to appearance, spectacle, overall ambiance, and personal affinities.” Although the announcements were “disappointing,” it is necessary to recognize “the great importance” of these “positive” aspects when dealing with two superpowers like China and the United States.
