Donald Trump, the President of the United States, traveled to China at the height of geopolitical tensions, the energy crisis, tariff wars, turmoil in global markets, and competition among major powers; a visit that, more than ever before, intensified and accelerated the rise of a new global order centered on the East.
From whatever angle one examines this event, Trump’s visit was undoubtedly not an ordinary diplomatic event within the conventional relations of two international powers; rather, it was part of the process of redefining the global order — an order that, after decades of unquestioned American dominance, has now entered a phase of gradual erosion and transition toward more complex structures of power.
The Growing Pressure of Major Variables on Global Equations
Trump’s trip to China took place at a time when several major variables were simultaneously placing the world under pressure:
- The Strait of Hormuz crisis and concerns over disruptions to the flow of global energy
- Escalating tariff and trade tensions
- Intensifying competition over strategic technologies such as artificial intelligence and semiconductors
- Inflationary pressures on the U.S. economy
- Fears of the return of another major recession
- Intensified competition over the architecture of the future global order
Under such circumstances, both Washington and Beijing understand that the world has entered an era in which “managing competition” has become more important than competition itself.
Accordingly, this analysis, while evaluating the perspectives and objectives of the United States and China as two major powers regarding the meeting of the two leaders in Beijing — and the share and role of each in the strategic equations of today’s turbulent world — will examine this critical concern: how the world is preparing to accept a new strategic order, how this order will take shape, and what its consequences for stability in today’s unstable world will be.
The American Perspective: Containing Crisis Without the Collapse of the American Order
There is no doubt that the United States seeks to ensure that international crises are contained and managed in a way that simultaneously guarantees the survival and continuity of the American order. Precisely for this reason, from Washington’s perspective, this trip pursued several objectives at once in order to secure the aforementioned goal in America’s preferred manner:
One. Preventing the global economy from entering a security-financial shock: Washington fully understands that if the Persian Gulf crisis, disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, rising energy prices, and the trade war with China intensify simultaneously, the global economy under American leadership will enter a stage that could be described as “geopolitical inflation” — a situation in which prices rise not because of economic prosperity, but due to insecurity, war, and disruptions in supply chains.
Under such conditions, Trump needed to calm the markets, prevent capital flight, and convey the message that Washington is still capable of managing its greatest rival through negotiation.
Two. Preventing the emergence of an anti-Western power bloc: Yet there was an even more important objective: preventing the formation of an anti-Western power bloc.
Today, more than anything else, the United States is concerned about the convergence of three powers:
- Iran’s energy resources and geopolitical position,
- Russia’s military and security capacity, and
- China’s industrial and financial power.
The linkage of these three axes could weaken many of America’s traditional instruments of power — from sanctions and tariffs to financial and maritime control.
For this reason, part of Washington’s objective during this trip was likely to prevent Beijing’s full alignment with Tehran and Moscow, or at least to draw China into a form of “controlled neutrality.”
Three. Containing the energy crisis: On the other hand, during Trump’s visit to China, the United States was also seeking to contain the energy crisis as the third objective of the trip.
The reality is that Hormuz is not merely an issue concerning Iran and the Persian Gulf; it is the energy artery of East Asia. China, Japan, South Korea, and a significant portion of the global economy depend on the stability of this route. Washington understands that any uncontrolled conflict in the region could directly pressure global economic growth and, consequently, the American economy.
In the economic sphere as well, the real war between the United States and China is no longer merely a tariff war; rather, it is a competition over the future of global technology. Artificial intelligence, semiconductors, data, communication networks, and supply chains have now become part of the national security of major powers. The United States is attempting to contain China’s technological rise without pushing the global economy into sudden collapse.
China’s Perspective: A Safe and Gradual Passage Beyond the Unipolar World
China’s perspective on this trip, however, is entirely different. Beijing views the world not through the ideological lens of the Cold War, but from the perspective of “civilizational stability and the development of power.” Unlike the United States, China is less inclined toward the classic “friend-enemy” dichotomy and focuses more on preserving stability, sustaining trade, and gradually expanding its influence.
China no longer tolerates the unipolar world based on the American order, yet at the same time it fears the sudden collapse of the global order dominated by the United States.
From Beijing’s perspective, the post-Soviet order had three dangerous characteristics:
- The dominance of the dollar over the global financial system;
- American naval supremacy over energy and trade routes;
- The West’s political use of concepts such as human rights and regime change.
For this reason, projects such as BRICS, the digital yuan, non-dollar trade, parallel banking systems, and the “Belt and Road Initiative” are not merely economic plans for China; rather, they are considered part of the country’s national security and strategic independence project.
Nevertheless, China does not seek a chaotic world.
Beijing supports a “controlled multipolarity” — a world in which the United States is no longer the sole decision-maker, yet the structure of the global economy does not collapse. China still needs Western markets, global trade, and stable supply chains, and it does not want competition with the United States to turn into an all-out war.
From this perspective, Beijing regards this trip as an important sign: that the United States has realized it cannot manage global crises without China. For Chinese elites, this issue is not merely a diplomatic success; it is part of “China’s historical return” to the position of a central power within the international system.
Hormuz, Energy, and the Shared Fear of Collapse
One of the most important dimensions of Trump’s visit to China was the issue of energy and the security of maritime routes.
China is the world’s largest importer of energy, and any crisis in the Persian Gulf could place severe pressure on the country’s economy. Contrary to some assumptions, Beijing does not welcome chronic instability in the Middle East, because its economic growth depends on the stability of global trade.
At the same time, the United States also understands that the world’s entry into an uncontrolled energy crisis could push Western economies into a phase of stagflation. Therefore, despite their intense rivalry, both powers share one point of agreement: neither currently seeks the complete collapse of the global economic order.
What Stage Is the World In?
Perhaps the most important outcome of this trip is that the world has not yet entered the stage of a “complete rupture of blocs.”
The United States and China are competing, yet they still need one another. Financial, energy, technological, and global trade chains remain so deeply intertwined that no power can simply eliminate the other.
As a result, the most likely scenario ahead is neither a classic Cold War nor lasting peace, but rather a form of “controlled competition”:
– Limited tariff wars
– Intense technological rivalry
– Proxy conflicts
– Economic and security pressures, accompanied by the preservation of negotiation channels and efforts to prevent the collapse of the global economy.
In reality, Trump’s visit to China can be interpreted as a negotiation over the “speed of global transformation” — an effort to manage the transition from a unipolar order to a more complex system in which power will be distributed among several major poles.
And perhaps the most important question of the present century is precisely this: Will the post-American world emerge through negotiation and gradual recalibration, or will it be born out of major economic, security, and geopolitical crises?
