Success of Trump-Xi summit lies in what happens afterwards

Nong Hong, PhD, is executive director and senior fellow at the China-america-studies" class="entity-link entity-organization" data-entity-id="128604" data-entity-type="organization">Institute for China-America Studies in Washington, US, and a senior fellow with the Beijing-club-for-international-dialogue" class="entity-link entity-organization" data-entity-id="128605" data-entity-type="organization">Beijing Club for International Dialogue.Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to meet US President Donald Trump in Washington this week, after the May talks in Beijing and before the November Apec summit in Shenzhen. This sequence of diplomacy will test if the commitment to building a “constructive China-US relationship of strategic stability” translates into practical arrangements.The Washington meeting faces clear limits. Differences over trade, technology, industrial policy, Taiwan and regional security are deeply embedded in the relationship.Washington will want results Trump can present at home: tariff reductions, greater Chinese purchases of agricultural and energy products, reliable access to critical minerals and new commercial contracts. Beijing will seek greater consistency in US policy, particularly on Taiwan, technology restrictions and trade measures.There is room for a phased agreement, provided it rests on reciprocity and addresses major concerns for both sides.trade offers the most immediate opportunity. The two economic teams are discussing a tariff reduction framework covering around US$30 billion worth of goods from each side. The meeting could produce agreement on product lists, implementation schedules or additional market access. It would help businesses in both countries and reduce some of the pressure that tariff uncertainty has placed on Asia-Pacific supply chains.The lasting value of any package will depend on implementation. After rounds of tariff increases, suspensions and policy reversals, new purchase commitments or tariff adjustments could quickly lose value if overtaken by disputes over technology, subsidies or national security. A credible outcome requires clear timetables, working-level channels and procedures to manage disagreements.