By Ashok Nilakantan Ayers
BUSAN: US and China emerged victorious with a framework agreement here as President Trump suspended tariffs and China lent an ear to hear as for the first time in six years with an agreement that could reshape the contours of the world’s most consequential economic relationship.
In a wood-panelled conference room at Gimhae Air Base, President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping sat across from each other Thursday for the first time in six years, emerging 90 minutes later with a what seemed like a feasible framework agreement on trade relations.
The immediate headline: Trump announced a cut in tariffs on Chinese goods, lowering a fentanyl-related levy to 10% from 20%, bringing the average tariff on Chinese imports to 47% from 57%. It was a rare de-escalation in a trade conflict that has roiled global markets and supply chains since Trump’s first term.
“Overall, I guess on the scale of from zero to 10, with 10 being the best, I would say the meeting was a 12,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One, characteristically upbeat about the encounter.
The Busan meeting represented something of a diplomatic gamble for both leaders. Trump arrived with tariffs as his primary leverage—the economic cudgel he has wielded against allies and adversaries alike. Xi came bearing the weight of a slowing Chinese economy and mounting pressure from domestic manufacturers hurt by restricted access to American markets.
The framework hammered out by negotiators in the days preceding the summit focused on immediate confidence-building measures rather than comprehensive structural reforms. Trump secured Chinese commitments on two issues that have animated his base: fentanyl precursor chemicals and agricultural purchases. China, meanwhile, appeared to gain breathing room on tariffs and assurances of continued market access.
“Tremendous amounts of soybeans and other farm products are going to be purchased immediately” by China, Trump said, offering a lifeline to American farmers who have seen exports plummet during the trade hostilities. China had indeed purchased several cargoes from U.S. grain handlers earlier in the week, each shipment containing approximately two million bushels of soybeans—a “great start,” according to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins.
The fentanyl issue proved central to Trump’s willingness to reduce tariffs. The synthetic opioid has been blamed for more than 100,000 drug-overdose deaths annually in the United States, and Washington has pressed Beijing for years to control exports of precursor chemicals. Trump indicated Thursday that China was “taking very strong action” on the drug, justifying his tariff reduction.
Perhaps the most significant—and most ambiguous—element of the agreement concerned rare-earth minerals. Trump declared that a “roadblock” to importing these critical materials was gone, while U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said China had agreed to ease export controls.
Yet industry analysts expressed scepticism. Many expect China to maintain the export-control procedures it first implemented in April, with Beijing’s October enhancement of restrictions merely delayed by a year rather than eliminated. China dominates rare-earth production, controlling minerals vital to manufacturing everything from medical equipment to electric vehicle motors and defence systems.
The vagueness surrounding rare earths suggests the limitations of the Busan framework. While both sides appeared eager to project progress, the technical details remain subject to interpretation and further negotiation. Trump said he expected to sign a comprehensive trade deal “pretty soon,” though he acknowledged that stumbling blocks remained.
The U.S. also agreed to postpone plans to impose Section 301 port fees on Chinese-owned or Chinese-built vessels, a concession that came on the heels of South Korea’s commitment to invest $150 billion in American shipbuilding.
As revealing as the summit’s outcomes were the topics conspicuously absent from discussion. Trump stated flatly that Taiwan—the most dangerous potential flashpoint between Washington and Beijing—never came up during the meeting.
The omission is significant. Fears have percolated in Taipei that Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy might lead him to trade away American security commitments in exchange for economic concessions. By Trump’s account, at least, that Rubicon was not crossed in Busan.
There was no indication that U.S.-India relations, including India’s membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization alongside China, figured in the discussions. Similarly, Trump made no mention of whether Beijing sought to position itself as the sole reliable supplier of rare earths, potentially undercutting American efforts to develop alternative supply chains through partners like India.
The absence of these topics from Trump’s characteristically expansive debriefing suggests they either weren’t raised or were considered too sensitive to discuss publicly. China’s Foreign Ministry statement, released shortly after the summit, offered only that the two nations “reached a consensus on resolving” important economic and trade issues—diplomatic boilerplate that revealed little.
The visual optics told a story of cautious optimism. Photographs showed Trump and Xi seated at a long white table flanked by their respective trade and diplomatic teams, the setting clinical but cordial. Trump opened by calling it “a great honour” to meet with Xi, whom he described as “a great leader of a great country.”
Xi, speaking through an interpreter, offered his own olive branch: “I always believe that China’s development goes hand-in-hand with your vision to make America great again. Our two countries are fully able to help each other succeed and prosper together.”
The language was carefully calibrated—Xi acknowledging Trump’s domestic political priorities while asserting that American and Chinese interests need not be zero-sum.
Trump characterized the meeting as “very friendly” and “good for two very large, powerful countries.” He announced plans to visit China in April, with Xi expected to reciprocate with a U.S. visit thereafter—the kind of diplomatic choreography that signals both sides see value in continued engagement.
The two leaders also discussed Ukraine, with Trump saying they explored how China and the U.S. could work together “to get that war finished.” China has emerged as Russia’s strongest political and economic backer since Moscow’s invasion, providing dual-use materials critical to the Russian military. Any Chinese cooperation on Ukraine aligned with US would represent a significant diplomatic victory for Washington.
The Busan summit will likely be remembered as a inflection point—a moment when two superpowers stepped back from the brink of full economic decoupling and chose, however tentatively, to seek accommodation. Yet the agreement’s durability remains uncertain, fragile.
Trump’s 10-percentage-point tariff reduction still leaves duties at 47%—historically high levels that continue to distort trade flows. The rare-earths situation remains murky, with potential for renewed friction. And fundamental issues—intellectual property protections, market access, technology transfer, human rights—were apparently set aside in favour of more tractable, politically advantageous wins.
For now, both leaders appeared satisfied with the optics and the immediate deliverables. Markets responded with cautious approval. But the hard work of transforming a 90-minute meeting into a durable framework for managing the world’s most important bilateral relationship has only just begun.
The real test will come in the implementation, where diplomatic pleasantries give way to bureaucratic reality, and where both sides must balance domestic political pressures against the imperative of keeping the world’s two largest economies engaged rather than estranged. (IPA Service)
Is Xi Jinping Working For A Bipolar World Along With Donald Trump? 