Where is China-US trade relations headed?

Trade relations between China and the US have remained stable overall in the past year. According to data published by the US Department of Agriculture, China has already imported 340,000 tonnes ⁠of soybeans from the US, and trade in consumer goods and essential goods has also stayed at a steady level. 

The two sides are in close communication meanwhile. In September, China and the US held consultations on a reciprocal tariff reduction framework arrangement that would potentially cover $30 billion worth of products from each side. 

What grounds the stable bilateral trade relations in a time of a shifting international trade environment, and where is the trade relation between the two countries headed? 

CGTN spoke with multiple scholars who shared their thoughts on China-US trade. 

1. CGTN: Traditional manufacturing, agriculture and essential goods have long formed the foundation of China-US economic and trade cooperation. Beyond that, green economy, digital trade, new energy and cooperation among small and medium-sized enterprises are also seen as emerging areas with growth potential. How much room for growth do you think these new areas can create for China-US economic and trade cooperation?

Wang Honggang, director of the Institute of American Studies under the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations: Purchases of agricultural products, Boeing aircraft and fossil energy are tied to the current US administration's domestic electoral politics and have been repeatedly raised by the administration as requests to China. These are areas where the US side is likely to continue to raise requests and demands to China. They also constitute a practical foundation for stability and cooperation between China and the United States.

At the same time, the two sides have strong complementarities in the emerging fields you mentioned. If China and the United States can step up cooperation in these areas, it could potentially open a new "golden era" for bilateral economic and trade cooperation and help alleviate a number of domestic challenges in the United States, such as power shortages and high inflation.

The current obstacle is the US' tendency to view issues through an overly broad national security lens. It is understandable for each side to have its own national security concerns. Both China and the United States have them. However, amid political polarization and misperceptions of China in the US, Chinese investment often faces unfair treatment. Addressing these issues is something the two sides need to focus on at this stage.

2. CGTN: China has the world's most complete and comprehensive industrial supply chain, while its vast domestic market continues to unleash its potential, giving China confidence in responding to a trade conflict. At the same time, China has consistently advocated mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation in China-US economic and trade relations, and has called for resolving trade differences through dialogue and consultation. How do you view China's approach?

Zhang Tengjun, associate research fellow at the Institute of American Studies under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences: China's approach can be summed up in three key words: confident, sincere and principled.

Confidence comes from having the world's most complete industrial system, a vast domestic market and strong economic resilience, meaning that China is not afraid of pressure in any form. 

Sincerity is reflected in China's continued openness to dialogue and its preference for resolving differences through consultation rather than confrontation. 

Principle means upholding mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit, and never trading away its core interests or right to development.

These positions reflect China's responsibility to the people of both countries as well as to the stability of the global economy. Facts have repeatedly shown that pressure and threats cannot change China, while win-win cooperation is the only right choice.

3. CGTN: China and the United States have held multiple rounds of economic and trade consultations, with some issues making phased progress. How would you assess the outcomes achieved through these rounds of negotiations? Which breakthroughs do you believe have long-term value, and what issues should be prioritized in the next stage?

Sun Taiyi, associate professor of political science at Christopher Newport University in the United States: I think one important achievement is what has not happened. Washington has so far held back potential additional tariffs stemming from its Section 301 investigation into industrial overcapacity, while the proposed US arms package for Taiwan, reportedly worth up to $14 billion, has also remained on hold.

These do not resolve the underlying disputes, but they show that dialogue has helped prevent new sources of friction from immediately becoming new rounds of escalation. The development with greater long-term value may be the effort to establish a regular dialogue on artificial intelligence, including communication on major AI safety incidents. Temporary tariff concessions can buy time; durable communication mechanisms can change how competition is managed. 

Looking ahead, trade should remain a priority, particularly reducing barriers to goods that do not involve national security. The more China and the United States can separate genuine security concerns from ordinary commerce, the more room they will have to stabilize the economic relationship without pretending that strategic competition has disappeared.

4. CGTN: AI is reshaping global industrial and supply chains as well as trade patterns, creating new opportunities for cooperation while also intensifying competition over technology. Overall, what opportunities and challenges could cooperation in AI bring to China-US economic and trade relations?

Sun Taiyi: AI will remain one of the most competitive areas in China-US relations. The Trump administration explicitly talks about "winning the AI race," because leadership in AI could reshape productivity, industrial organization, and ultimately national power. And if either side were to achieve a major breakthrough toward artificial general intelligence, or AGI, it could potentially alter the technological balance between the two countries. So we should not expect competition over advanced chips, computing power, and frontier models to disappear.

But AI is unusual because the same technology that intensifies competition may also create stronger incentives for cooperation. In recent weeks, leading AI researchers and executives have raised concerns about autonomous systems escaping safeguards, cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, and other potentially catastrophic risks. That creates a category of threat that could affect China and the United States simultaneously. 

We are still far from AI arms control, but an AI dialogue, early-warning mechanisms, and notification of major incidents are realistic first steps, and the two sides have now agreed to pursue such a mechanism. China and the United States do not need to trust each other on AI in order to recognize that some AI risks are shared. Competition and risk management can exist at the same time.

5. CGTN: How would you assess the balance of cooperation and competition in China-US economic and trade relations? How do you expect this balance to evolve in the future?

Sun Taiyi: At least from Washington's perspective, competition will continue to outweigh cooperation, but that does not mean cooperation has no room to expand. In areas where both sides can clearly benefit and where national security is not directly involved, there is still considerable space for pragmatic cooperation. Trade in non-sensitive goods is one example. Artificial intelligence is another: China and the United States may compete fiercely over technological leadership, but both have an interest in better communication, early warning, and crisis management when AI creates risks for both sides.

What has changed is not necessarily goodwill or trust. What has increased is awareness of mutual vulnerability. After the rounds of tariffs, export controls, and countermeasures in 2025, both sides learned that escalation imposes significant costs both on the other side and on themselves. So I think the emerging pattern of constructive strategic stability is quite helpful: competition remains intense, but both sides increasingly see the need for stronger guardrails. The future is likely to be selective cooperation within a competitive relationship, rather than either comprehensive engagement or complete decoupling.

Read more:

Decoding 'constructive strategic stability' ahead of Xi's US visit