Xi–Trump call: Beijing sets terms for responsible reengagement

Editor's note: Ge Lin is a CGTN economic commentator. This article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

In a phone call requested by US President Donald Trump on Thursday, Chinese President Xi Jinping laid out Beijing's terms for stabilizing the world's most consequential bilateral relationship. The message was unmistakable: cooperation is welcome, but it must be grounded in mutual respect, managed with discipline, and shielded from strategic miscalculation.

Statesmanship at the helm: Steering clear of disruptions remains the goal

In the phone call, President Xi employed a maritime metaphor to describe the China–US relationship, calling it a "giant ship" that must be carefully steered.

This metaphor underscores a deeper point: Unless both sides set a clear direction and manage the relationship with discipline, growing disturbances could cause it to drift dangerously off course. Such drift risks triggering systemic disruptions to global development and regional security – consequences neither side can afford to ignore.

The China–US relationship is inherently complex – marked by both overlapping interests and growing areas of competition. A diversity of voices is inevitable. Some reflect genuine differences in perspective; others, however, are driven by deliberate manipulation or calculated provocation.

Acknowledging the "various voices" is a recognition of political reality, but it is crucial to distinguish between constructive disagreement and disruptive interference.

Indeed, constructive disagreement – when rooted in mutual respect – can sharpen understanding and open paths toward resolution.

However, not all dissenting voices seek progress. Some opportunistic politicians may push extreme narratives for short-term gain, while ideologically driven actors, fueled by political obsessions, may intensify divisions. Meanwhile, certain regional competitors, as third-party players, may exploit tensions to advance their own interests in ways that could ultimately undermine the fundamental interests of both the US and China, as well as the broader stability of the world.

In moments of turbulence, it is not the loudest voices but the clearest vision that keeps the ship from drifting into dangerous waters. As the China–US relationship enters a new stage of complexity, it will be up to those at the helm to rise above the din. That is the statesmanship that President Xi's metaphor speaks to.

Between principle and goodwill: Articulating China's strategic logic

When President Xi stated that "the Chinese side is sincere about this, and at the same time has its principles," he was restating a longstanding framework for how China engages with the world.

His words reflect a fundamental insight: Principle and goodwill are inseparable and mutually reinforcing elements of effective interaction. Understanding this duality is essential, not only to decipher China's position, but to avoid costly misreadings of intent.

Goodwill does not mean yielding core interests, just as defending principles does not preclude the pursuit of common ground. To expect goodwill to manifest as unilateral concession is to misunderstand China's policy logic and political culture.

What some in Washington interpret as assertiveness or "pushback" – such as China's countermeasures in response to unilateral US tariffs – is, from Beijing's perspective, a necessary assertion of boundaries that prevents further miscalculation of China's red lines, thereby keeping the door to engagement from closing altogether.

The issue is not a lack of clarity from Beijing, but a tendency in Washington to filter others' actions through a lens shaped by its own political rhythms.

Another result of this tendency is Washington's recurring, yet often unfounded, doubts about China's reliability. For example, American skepticism about China's follow-through in implementing bilateral understandings often stems less from China's actions than from America's internal experience of policy reversals. The concern may feel familiar to Washington, but in the China context – it is misapplied.

"The Chinese," Xi emphasized, "always honor and deliver what has been promised." Beijing's affirmation that it has been "seriously and earnestly" executing the Geneva consensus should be read as both a reassurance and a subtle reminder: China expects the same from the US.

Asymmetric information breeds mistrust. Reducing it requires more than rhetorical clarity. It demands sustained, multi-tiered, and candid communication between leaders, institutions, and societies. A clearer grasp of each side's intentions, capacities, and limits will not erase rivalry, but may keep it from escalating into full-scale confrontation.

Managing competitive coexistence: Seeking win-win results in a bounded rivalry

At a time when structural competition between China and the US is becoming increasingly pronounced, it is worth noting that President Xi still called on both sides to "seek win-win results in the spirit of equality and respect for each other's concerns." The message signals a willingness to pursue shared development despite mounting headwinds. That such a tone continues to be set from Beijing at this juncture is not to be taken for granted, it reflects a deliberate and valuable exercise of responsible rationality.

A genuine pursuit of win-win outcomes begins with the spirit of equality and respect for each other's concerns. "Equality" here is not defined by symmetry in power, but by a recognition that each party's core concerns must be taken seriously. China's long-standing practice of treating countries of all sizes with the same diplomatic respect reflects this orientation.

Beyond attitudes, the ability to manage competition depends on at least some workable rules and functional mechanisms. As President Xi noted, "the two sides need to make good use of the economic and trade consultation mechanism already in place." The task now is to move such mechanisms from formality to functionality, and to make them serve real problem-solving purposes.

Such mechanisms serve to keep competition within certain boundaries, similar to a football match where players fiercely compete on a field marked by lines. Without these lines and basic rules to guide play, the game could quickly devolve into chaos and injuries.

Conclusion: A foundation for reengagement

Responsible leadership means rising above the noise of political contention. Dialogue itself demonstrates the ability to responsibly manage the world's most consequential bilateral relationship.

The Xi–Trump phone call has established basic guiding principles for this management. By reaffirming key values and setting a constructive tone, it lays the groundwork for more practical, issue-focused engagement at the working level.

(Cover via VCG)