The principle of Thucydides Trap, originally based on the conflicts between Greek Sparta and its rising rival Athens, was that conflict becomes the default when an emerging power begins to challenge a dominant rival. In interviews with Professor Allison at Davos and elsewhere, he consistently emphasised a single point: while structural contradictions are inevitable, human wisdom must prevail over historical destiny.

With President Trump’s current visit to China and the establishment of a new positioning for China-US relations - ‘Constructive Strategic Stability’  -the ‘Questions of History, the World, and the People’ previously posed by President Xi have finally found a clear, realist footnote. This positioning is no longer an abstract, grand vision; it is a ‘strategic contract’ forged from the realities of power dynamics and a shared consensus on survival.

How relations have evolved

The economic relationship between China and the US has long been regarded as the ‘ballast’ and ‘propeller’ of the bilateral bond. However, this ballast is undergoing a profound structural metamorphosis. In earlier decades, the trade relationship was often characterised by the phrase ‘800 million shirts for one Boeing aircraft’. This reflected the early stages of China as the ‘world’s factory’, relying on labour-intensive exports of garments and toys to exchange for American high-tech aviation.

I recall covering the early stages of the trade war in 2017 when ‘intermediate goods’ was the buzzword for understanding bilateral trade. At that time, an iPhone assembled in China featured design from California and key components from Japan and South Korea; China contributed only low-cost assembly labour. The ‘trade deficit’ debated so fiercely then often ignored the reality of global value chains, where the lion’s share of profit flowed back to American corporations.

Nine years later, as we re-examine the economic landscape between Beijing and Washington, the structure has fundamentally shifted. China has evolved from the era of ‘8亿 (800 million) trousers’ to a burgeoning epoch of robotics, artificial intelligence , and electric vehicles. The resulting competition is unavoidable, yet it has brought a new clarity: challenges such as AI safety, cross-border pandemics, and climate change (even if the current US administration remains sceptical) are ‘existential challenges’ that transcend national borders. These threats compel the two nations, amidst intense strategic competition, to carve out a ‘limited yet precise’ path for cooperation.

Even in the eyes of Washington’s staunchest hawks, the reality of this shift is inescapable. In recent days, the sight of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio giving a ‘thumbs up’ while gazing at the starlit ceiling of the Great Hall of the People , or the Chinese-style attire and ‘tiger-head pouch’ worn by Elon Musk’s young son, serve as micro-footnotes to this macro transformation.

A long history of interconnection

As a journalist who spent seven years stationed in the United States, I know intimately that the resilience of this relationship has never existed solely in diplomatic communiqués. At the Chinese Historical Society of America (CHSA) in San Francisco, I once stood for a long time staring at the rudimentary tools left by the Chinese labourers who built the First Transcontinental Railroad. They recorded blood, sweat, and a monumental contribution. From the Flying Tigers who fought side-by-side against fascism in WWII to the ‘Ping-Pong Diplomacy’ that thawed the icy silence, these bonds have played a role at every historical turning point.

Today, these ties are reviving in unexpected ways in the digital age. From the ‘Pickleball’ craze sweeping America to the ‘Chinaxxing’ tag trending on TikTok—where American youths share their authentic experiences of travelling in China—to US netizens singing and dancing along to the melodies of a Chinese ‘Auntie’, this bottom-up emotional exchange is deconstructing the cold narratives of politicians.

A former CNN colleague once shared a story with me about interviewing a ‘bangbang’ (porter) on the streets of Chongqing. The man, drenched in sweat, told him his greatest wish was to work hard to buy a car and send his daughter to the best school. My colleague remarked: “Isn’t that the purest form of the American Dream? The ‘Chinese Dream’ and the ‘American Dream’ are essentially the same.” The shared values of family responsibility, the pursuit of efficiency, and the belief in prosperity through hard work are deeply synchronised in the genes of both peoples. If Tsinghua University and the Peking Union Medical College are monuments to early cooperation, today’s scientists working side-by-side in labs and netizens engaging spontaneously on social media are writing the next chapters of this human connection.

The Four Stabilities

As President Trump’s motorcade swept past Beijing’s Central Axis towards the Temple of Heaven, the weight of history met the realism of modern diplomacy. The beauty of Chinese architecture is encapsulated in the concept of ‘Zhonghe’ (Centrality and Harmony). Within the red walls and blue tiles of the Temple of Heaven lies a dynamic balance—not a pursuit of absolute uniformity, but a search for coordination amidst opposites.

The newly established ‘Four Stabilities’— stability based on cooperation, healthy stability through moderated competition, routine stability through controllable differences, and enduring stability with the prospect of peace —represent a departure from earlier romanticism in favour of this ‘Zhonghe’ wisdom. This is a higher form of pragmatism. It acknowledges ‘cooperation without excluding competition,’ as competition drives efficiency; it insists on ‘peace without evading differences,’ as a mature relationship requires no feigned harmony. For too long, the West has misunderstood the Chinese concept of ‘Win-Win’ as China wanting to ‘win twice.’ The true Dao of ‘Zhonghe’ is that the world is not a zero-sum game; the vast Pacific Ocean is wide enough for two great powers to compete in their respective orbits and shake hands where they intersect.

A shared future

As the United States approaches its 250th anniversary, facing a China with five millennia of civilisational composure, both sides are learning how to manage expectations in an imperfect world. Compared to previous frameworks, ‘Constructive Strategic Stability’ is more honest: it accepts competition but rejects chaos; it acknowledges differences but pursues a lasting peace .

As President Trump noted at the state banquet, the American founding fathers held a profound respect for the wisdom of Confucius. Transcending the Thucydides Trap does not require the erasure of differences, but rather, like the structural integrity of the Hall of Prayer for Good Harvests, achieving steadfastness through the balanced intersection of diverse forces. The Pacific is indeed wide enough for two great nations. Seeking cooperation within competition and anchoring peace amidst differences may well be the most stable strategic dividend our generation can offer the world.

Du Yubin is a journalist and producer for CGTN. He was stationed in Washington, D.C. and London for six years each, focusing on China-US and China-EU relations. He has over 15 years of experience in international communication and new media. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own.

The projections highlight how climate change could reshape weather patterns across parts of Asia, with some cities expected to face simultaneous temperature increases and declining annual rainfall.

A visual analysis published by World Visualized, based on the climate research, identified Yangon, Manila and Jakarta among the cities projected to face some of the sharpest combinations of rising heat and falling precipitation by mid-century.

Yangon, formerly known as Rangoon, could experience average temperatures rising by about 5.9 degrees Celsius alongside a projected annual rainfall decline of roughly 162 millimetres.

Manila is projected to warm by approximately 3.9 degrees Celsius while losing around 155 millimetres of annual precipitation, while Jakarta could see temperatures increase by 3.1 degrees Celsius with rainfall decreasing by nearly 196 millimetres.

Climate scientists warn that hotter and drier conditions could intensify drought risks, strain water supplies and increase the frequency of heat-related illnesses in densely populated urban areas.

Other cities highlighted in the projections, including Hiroshima, Taipei and Macau, are expected to become significantly drier even with more moderate temperature increases.

Meanwhile, Tehran, Tashkent and Jaipur are projected to experience some of the sharpest temperature increases in the study despite relatively smaller declines in rainfall. Tehran could warm by more than 6 degrees Celsius under high-emissions scenarios by 2050.

The findings align with broader warnings from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has repeatedly identified Asia as one of the regions most vulnerable to climate-related disasters, including extreme heat, flooding, droughts and food insecurity.

According to the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), Asia has warmed faster than the global average in recent decades, with climate impacts increasingly affecting economic productivity, infrastructure and public health.

Cities such as Jakarta and Manila already face major environmental pressures linked to flooding, sea-level rise and rapid urbanisation. Experts warn that reduced rainfall combined with rising temperatures could place additional stress on energy systems and drinking water supplies.

Urban planners and climate researchers say governments across Asia may need to accelerate investment in heat-resilient infrastructure, sustainable water management and climate adaptation policies to reduce long-term risks.

The projections also reinforce concerns that developing countries in Asia could face disproportionate economic and social consequences from climate change despite contributing less historically to global greenhouse gas emissions.

And a new study has dug into how the system perpetuates this inequality and exposed an even more chilling division - the environmental damage imbalance.

In terms of work, Low and Middle Income (LMI) countries need to invest more than 100,000 hours of labour to generate €1 million in exports, according to Osama Diab of the Catholic University of Leuven. That compares with 7,500 hours in wealthy nations, 13 times less. Prices of the commodities on which many LMI countries depend on are artificially deflated as a result of policies to depress local currency valuations, encouraged by the International Monetary Fund and other international institutions, Diab argues.

This creates the incredible situation where natural disasters such as droughts, crop failures or even conflicts can deliver an economic boost by depressing supply and forcing prices up. Because these commodities are essential to many global businesses, there is large scope for prices to rise without hurting demand, Diab writes in his paper The Monetary Dimension of Ecological Damage in the Global South in  Third World Quarterly . He gives the examples of cocoa and copper, observing that a 30% drop in supply could lead to price rises of 88% and 70% respectively.

The environmental cost

The divide is not just about undervalued labour. Another feature of inequality in the global economy concerns the environment. A million euros of exports from poorer countries generate 27 times more environmental damage than the same value for richer nations, according to Diab's analysis. This is led by the poisoning of water supplies as well as pollution on land. Greenhouse gas emissions are 2.7 times higher.

Wealthy countries are essentially exporting their pollution and then taking advantage of price discrepancies to buy up the "cleaned" products they want. How long can this continue?

Image via depositphotos.com

[This article was corrected on 14/5/2026 to replace a reference to the World Bank with the International Monetary Fund]

While a flare-up in the Middle East delayed this meeting by a month, the cooling of tensions with Iran has finally cleared the flight path for what many view as the most consequential diplomatic inflexion point of 2026. 

Amid a fragile global recovery and uncertainty in international markets, the Beijing meeting is being closely watched for whether both powers can move from "crisis management" to a more sustainable form of strategic equilibrium, with implications for broader global economic stability. 

At their first meeting on Thursday morning, President Xi congratulated the United States on its 250 th  anniversary, while President Trump praised Xi as “a great leader,” setting a warm and friendly tone for the opening of the summit.

President Xi noted that China and the US should be partners, not rivals, emphasising that the relationship between the two countries would have implications not only for their peoples, but also for the future of the world . President Trump addressed that this is going to be the biggest summit, as a top business delegation was with him. 

A U.S. official said the two sides are expected to continue discussions on establishing new mechanisms for trade and investment coordination, with cooperation in agriculture, aerospace, and energy also likely to feature prominently.

Beijing, meanwhile, has framed the visit as an opportunity to stabilise bilateral ties amid growing global uncertainty. In remarks on Monday, China’s Foreign Ministry emphasised the need to expand mutually beneficial cooperation, manage differences, and “inject greater stability and certainty into a turbulent and changing world.”

Guidance from strategic analysts

Analysts broadly agree that the summit reflects a shared near-term interest in stabilising China–US relations, even as deeper strategic tensions remain unresolved. 

Zhao Hai, director of the International Politics Program at the National Institute for Global Strategy, points out that the primary "product" of this summit needs to be predictability. For the private sector, the specific policy is often less damaging than the volatility of not knowing what the policy will be tomorrow. 

This mirrors the “managed strategic competition” framework championed by former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. The goal in Beijing is not necessarily to bridge a decade-long trust deficit in a three-day summit, but to prevent further accidental escalation. He said that careful coordination and transparent dialogue are essential to maintaining stability over the long term.

Economic frictions and business impacts

While Chinese state media frame economic relations as both a stabilising foundation and a key driver of broader China–US ties, US tariff policy continues to sit at the centre of bilateral disagreement. 

While Beijing views these measures as "unreasonable restrictions," the Trump administration continues to utilize them as its primary tool of economic leverage. 

John McLean, chairman of the China–UK Business Development Centre, noted that shifting US tariff policies are creating deep uncertainty, prompting many companies to delay or reconsider long-term investment plans. 

The economic data, however, tells a more nuanced story of self-inflicted wounds. A recent study by the Kiel Institute, a leading German economic research body, found that foreign exporters absorb only about 4% of the tariff burden, with the remaining 96% falling on US business and consumers. 

These findings underscore that while tariffs are often framed as protecting American industries, their indirect effects are influencing pricing, supply chains, and investment decisions.

For small and medium-sized enterprises, the consequences are particularly acute. Philip Crawley, who operates a laser equipment import business in California, reported that tariffs imposed last year cost his company millions, forcing it to slow operations, reduce employee pay, and postpone hiring plans. 

Glen Calder, president of Calder Brothers in South Carolina, said his steel costs increased by 25% even before US tariffs took effect, as markets anticipated higher trade barriers.  

Strategic competition may be conducted at the state level, but its economic consequences are frequently absorbed by businesses, workers, and consumers navigating unpredictable policy environments.

Continued investment interest in China

Perhaps the most surprising element of the current climate is the resilience of corporate interest. Despite these challenges, many US businesses continue to view China as a critical market. 

According to the American Chamber of Commerce in China, around 60% of American companies still plan to invest in the Chinese market, reflecting enduring confidence in China’s economic opportunities. 

The rationale is clear: China accounts for roughly 17% of global GDP, contributes about 30% of global economic growth, and is projected to export nearly $4 trillion in exports in 2025. 

Its sheer economic scale and growth make it important for companies to overlook, providing strong incentives to maintain or expand investment even amid uncertainty.

Looking ahead: Cooperation and strategic stability

President Xi noted in today’s meeting that success in one is an opportunity for the other. China has maintained a relatively consistent stance toward Washington, rooted in the idea that the Pacific is large enough for both powers. This summit offers a rare window to clarify intentions and move beyond the zero-sum rhetoric that has dominated the 2020s.

Reducing uncertainty in trade, investment, and technology will benefit businesses and global markets alike, reinforcing long-term stability, which is a shared asset, not a concession. Reducing the "noise" in trade and technology isn't just a win for diplomats. It’s the oxygen required for global markets to breathe again.

The article solely represents the views of Chen Ziqi, a Beijing-based journalist with CGTN, known for covering cross-cultural and international stories.