Is it true that from the perspective of Beijing, the success of the delayed but still forthcoming Trump-Xi summit will be measured “by whether the United States will adopt a correct perception of China and a more positive definition of bilateral relations, whether the two sides can agree on the right way to deal with each other, and whether it will bring about stability and cooperation in the remaining years of Trump’s term” (Brookings Institution, March 27, 2026)?
I fear that the publisher of the article from which these words are quoted is being infiltrated by copywriters for the Chinese Communist Party. I may not be far wrong. The author, Wu Xinbo, is a professor at Fudan University in Shanghai. He seems to belong to the camp of sympathetic but concerned third-party observers who are only trying to neutrally advise and facilitate, albeit in a way that just happens to serve the prejudices and purposes of the CCP.
Much of Wu’s statement is plausible. Surely Xi, who professes his eagerness to achieve “mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation” with the United States, would prefer that the U.S. government have a “positive,” i.e., rose-colored, view of bilateral relations, one enabled by turning a blind eye to all CCP predations and ambitions lest bilateral comity be impaired. Wu does not explain that this is what sustaining the hoped-for win-lose positivity would have to entail, however.
Explication of terms
“Stability.” Maybe Xi and the CCP want the kind of stability that the U.S. president could promote by spending the rest of his term staring at the wall. Wu Xinbo is probably not alluding to the kind of stability according to which the CCP stops doing destabilizing things domestically or in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea or throughout the world. The CCP thinks that it promotes stability by crushing dissent and opposition at home and abroad and digitally torpedoing foreign communications networks. Is consolidation of evil doings the kind of stability to be sought, opposition to evil doings the kind of destabilization to be avoided? Would the talks be successful in Beijing’s view if Trump assented to this proposition? Must President Trump renounce and reverse the U.S. actions in Venezuela and Iran to ensure that the talks succeed in Beijing’s view?
“Cooperation.” Of course, Xi would love to get unreserved U.S. cooperation with whatever the CCP wants the U.S. to do. This would be “the right way to deal with each other.” Will Trump agree?
“Correct perception of China.” The last thing Xi Jinping wants is for President Trump and U.S. policymakers to have a correct perception of China and its government. Does the professor not know this? But “correct” is one of those omnidextrous code words which here may mean something like “consistent with the assertions, fantasies, and will of the Chinese Communist Party.”
Am I being unfair to Wu Xinbo? Here’s another just-trying-to-help thingy in his ruminations:
While many specific issues will be on their agenda, the Taiwan question is China’s priority item. In December 2025, two months after his meeting with Xi in Busan, Trump announced a historic arms sale package worth $11.1 billion to Taiwan, which alarmed and infuriated Beijing. Given China’s sensitivity regarding the Taiwan issue and the current tension across the Taiwan Strait, Beijing will undoubtedly urge Washington to commit to serious self-constraint on future arms sales to Taiwan as well as on the handling of U.S.-Taiwan relations. Beijing would also expect Trump to make some open statements to update U.S. Taiwan policy, expressing opposition to Taiwan independence and sympathy to China’s goal of peaceful reunification…. [A] new understanding over the Taiwan issue will serve a common goal: stabilizing Sino-U.S. relations and reducing tensions in the Taiwan Strait.
An “updated” understanding that serves the “common goal” of “stabilizing Sino-U.S. relations and reducing tensions in the Taiwan Strait” requires merely that the U.S. abandon Taiwan. How difficult it would be for the CCP to tamp down tensions in the Taiwan Strait otherwise! The poor, poor, beleaguered Chinese Communist Party.
