Three distinct aspects of the timing of the Xi-Trump phone call:

First: This call took place after the U.S. and China reached a compromise in Geneva, followed by several rounds of renewed confrontation. As we know, although both sides agreed to lower tariffs in Geneva, the U.S. did not stop targeting China afterward. It continued actions such as halting AI chip supplies, blocking aviation technology, restricting Chinese students, and allowing its Defense Secretary to launch wild verbal attacks on China at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. However, the harsh reality is this: it’s not China that needs the U.S. more, but the other way around. That’s why China has responded calmly throughout. It was precisely the U.S.’s inability to cope with China’s composure that led to this presidential call.

Second: The call happened under China’s initiative, after multiple U.S. attempts to schedule it. Trump and the White House had expressed their desire for a call many times, but it didn’t materialize. Then, between the afternoon of May 22 and the afternoon of May 23, China received calls from leaders or senior officials of France, the U.S., and Germany. The French and German leaders spoke directly with the Chinese President, while the U.S. only managed to connect with a Vice Foreign Minister.

Then on June 2, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said President Trump might speak with the Chinese President that week. U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent and other American officials also said the two leaders would soon talk. But when asked during China’s regular foreign ministry press conference, China’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian responded: “There’s no information to offer.” This kind of response—neither confirming nor denying—usually indicates that something is in the works, but hasn’t yet been finalized or announced. That the Chinese side gave no firm commitment shows the call was possible but not yet set. In short, the initiative lay with Beijing.

Third: This China–U.S. presidential call happened after the Russia–U.S. leaders’ conversation. According to reports, on June 4 (local time), Russian Presidential Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said President Putin had a phone call with President Trump that lasted an hour and 15 minutes. They discussed Ukraine’s drone attacks on Russian airports and other recent assaults. Putin firmly stated that Russia would retaliate. They also touched on the Iran nuclear issue, with Trump saying Iran must “quickly make a decision” and suggesting he and Putin shared the view that Iran shouldn’t develop nuclear weapons. Trump added that Putin had offered to help resolve the issue quickly, potentially influencing Iran.

Clearly, this call was Putin’s way of patching up a prior misstep. As analyst Zhan Hao previously argued, after the attacks on Russian airports, Moscow should have suspended negotiations and responded forcefully before returning to the table—thus maintaining the upper hand. Instead, talks resumed immediately after the attacks, weakening Russia’s position and sending all the wrong signals. Realizing this, Putin made the call to Trump—essentially to say: “We’re about to hit back at Ukraine. Hope you understand.” And while at it, he pitched himself as a potential helper in solving the Iran issue—meaning Russia might persuade Iran to halt nuclear development, accept inspections, and destroy enriched uranium.

Placing the China–U.S. call after the Russia–U.S. one was excellent timing. The Russia–U.S. call signaled that both sides want to de-escalate the Ukraine crisis, but neither currently has the strength or will to lead. In fact, Trump appears to have temporarily lost interest altogether. Both sides showed weakness. Against this backdrop, China agreed to Trump’s call from a position of clear psychological advantage.

In terms of great power rivalry, among China, the U.S., Russia, and Europe, China now holds the strongest psychological edge. This was the ideal moment to “give Trump a lesson”—especially to undercut the combative front he’d been putting on days prior.

China was clearly the more proactive party in this exchange. Unusually, it released the readout before the U.S. did. And that readout conveyed four heavyweight signals:

Firstly, the U.S. needs to learn to to approach China–U.S. relations from a higher strategic perspective and steer them in the right direction. The Chinese President emphasized the need to “steer the course” of relations and “remove disruptions,” implicitly pointing out that the U.S. has veered off course. If the rudder isn’t held steady, the relationship will be turbulent. This is a clear warning to Trump.

Secondly, both sides should make full use of trade consultation mechanisms and aim for a win-win outcome. The President emphasized that these mechanisms were proposed by the U.S.—a significant step toward resolving disputes through dialogue. But they’ll only work if the U.S. respects equality and mutual concerns. If the U.S. only thinks of itself, agreement is impossible.

Thirdly, China has both sincerity and principles—it keeps its word and follows through. The President made it clear: coercion, tricks, or double deals won’t work on China. The U.S. must respect China’s bottom lines. China has been seriously implementing the agreements, and the U.S. should do the same. China also asked the U.S. to withdraw negative measures—especially the punitive tariffs. If the U.S. won’t budge on this, it’s unrealistic to expect China to do everything.

Finally, the U.S. must handle the Taiwan issue prudently to avoid being dragged into conflict. President Xi Jinping highlighted the Taiwan issue in light of escalating separatist activities and provocative u.s. rhetoric (e.g., the US Defense Secretary saying the U.S. must “protect Taiwan”). These could push China and the U.S. into conflict. China has already begun accelerating the unification process. Eventually, China will act. The best U.S. choice is to support China’s unification. If the U.S. interferes, conflict will be inevitable—and the U.S. must be ready for the consequences. The Trump administration must avoid being led into a strategic trap by Taiwan separatists.

This was a direct and unambiguous warning to the U.S. on Taiwan. There is zero room for misinterpretation. The sooner China unifies Taiwan, the sooner China–U.S. relations can normalize. The earlier Trump understands this, the better.

How did Trump respond? According to Xinhua’s readout:

“Trump expressed great respect for President Xi Jinping, said U.S.–China relations are very important, and that the U.S. is pleased to see China’s strong economic growth. He noted that U.S.–China cooperation can accomplish many great things and affirmed the U.S. will continue to uphold the one-China policy. He called the Geneva economic talks a success, said the two sides reached a good agreement, and that the U.S. is willing to work with China to implement it. He also said the U.S. welcomes Chinese students to study in America.”

Trump’s remarks warrant close attention. since he only makes commitments when he genuinely respects the other side, his expression of “great respect for president xi” signals a willingness to cooperate. Saying U.S.–China cooperation can “accomplish many great things” is true—but only if the U.S. brings sincerity and predictability. Otherwise, even good things will be ruined by U.S. volatility.

Trump added that the U.S. is ready to work with China to implement the agreement. Now we’ll see what actions follow. If the U.S. drops all tariffs, then it’s serious. If not, it hasn’t tried hard enough.

As for welcoming Chinese students, this is really a symbolic gesture. Given Trump’s and his cabinet’s stance, STEM students from China won’t realistically be welcome anytime soon. That door has closed—and the U.S. doesn’t plan to reopen it.

Trump’s own social media post about the call said it was “very good,” and that the two teams would meet again soon. He said participants would include the Treasury Secretary, Commerce Secretary, and U.S. Trade Representative. He also mentioned that the Chinese President warmly invited him and the First Lady to visit China—an invitation for which he expressed sincere thanks.

This invitation was no accident either. For it to happen, Trump must first respond to China’s concerns. Otherwise, what’s the point of meeting? So the next round of talks will likely focus on two things: how to implement the agreement, and how to prepare Trump’s visit to China. These two go hand-in-hand. No implementation, no visit.

At this point, America’s room to maneuver is shrinking. China now controls the tone and tempo of presidential-level exchanges. Trump is being maneuvered into making a series of commitments. And if he breaks them, China will respond every time—making things harder and harder for the U.S.

Editor: Zhiyu Wang