The much-anticipated Xi-Trump summit in Beijing on Thursday and Friday was preceded by intense speculation in Washington over what each side hoped to gain. On the American side, commentators spoke of the five B’s — Boeing, beef, beans, the Board of Trade, and the Board of Investment. China’s priorities, meanwhile, were said to center on the three T’s — tariffs, technology, and Taiwan.

The composition of United States President Donald Trump’s business delegation spoke volumes about corporate America’s eagerness to expand its footprint in the Chinese market. Although few concrete business deals emerged, the summit achieved something potentially more important: easing geopolitical tensions and restoring a degree of predictability to the world’s most consequential bilateral relationship.

The visit was widely described as “historic” and a “new starting point” in Sino-US relations, and not without reason. For a day and a half, the pomp and pageantry commanded global attention. Yet beyond the symbolism, it was President Xi Jinping’s firm articulation of China’s position on Taiwan, together with his reframing of the relationship as one of “constructive strategic stability”, that may ultimately prove most consequential.

On Taiwan, President Xi delivered perhaps his strongest warning to date, stressing that mishandling the issue could make Sino-US relations “dangerous” and push both countries toward confrontation, even conflict.

For decades, the US has viewed arms sales to Taiwan as both commercially profitable and strategically useful in counterbalancing China’s growing military and economic influence. Yet Xi’s warning served as a reminder that any crisis over Taiwan — home to around 90 percent of the global leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing capacity — could trigger economic disruption far exceeding that caused by instability in the Strait of Hormuz.

Although few details of the Taiwan discussions were released, President Trump’s subsequent remarks to Fox News were revealing. He said he was “not looking to have somebody go independent”, implicitly rejecting claims of Taiwan independence. He also remarked that he was “not supposed to travel 9,500 miles (15,300 kilometers) to fight a war”, while expressing hope that China would “cool down”. These comments suggest that Xi’s message resonated in Washington.

If the US wishes to avoid drifting into a dangerous confrontation with China over Taiwan question, the Trump administration may need to reassess the scale and trajectory of its arms commitments to the island.

The other major issue hovering over the summit was Iran. With the Strait of Hormuz disrupted and regional tensions escalating, President Trump was likely seeking China’s cooperation in stabilizing energy flows and containing the crisis without further resort to military force. Yet the absence of substantive public discussion on Iran — apart from Trump’s suggestion that China could buy more American oil — indicates that little progress may have been made on this front.

Equally significant was the emphasis on building a “constructive China-US relationship of strategic stability”. In today’s fractured geopolitical environment, stability has become an increasingly scarce commodity. The conflict involving Iran, disruptions to maritime trade routes, and broader geopolitical rivalries have all deepened global uncertainty.

Since Trump’s return to the White House, the US has injected considerable volatility into global trade and geopolitics. If Washington genuinely seeks greater stability, it may ultimately need to reimagine China not simply as a strategic rival, but also as an indispensable partner in managing global order.

At a time of profound uncertainty, people everywhere are searching for predictability, stability and competent leadership. In this context, Hong Kong also has a role to play. By demonstrating resilience, openness and vibrancy under the “one country, two systems” framework, the city (Hong Kong) can contribute — however modestly — to China’s broader project of national rejuvenation

China’s ability to withstand and push back against Trump’s renewed trade war in 2025 — through its leverage over supply chains, rare-earth minerals and critical minerals — has demonstrated the resilience and strategic depth of the Chinese economy. Far from being trapped in the logic of inevitable great-power conflict embodied in the so-called Thucydides Trap, China has emerged as a peer power capable of contributing to global certainty and stability.

Even so, a genuine reset in Sino-US relations will not come easily. Although Trump appears to respect President Xi personally, his administration remains heavily influenced by China hawks who either underestimate contemporary China or view its rise primarily through the lens of strategic anxiety.

The two countries remain locked in intense competition across critical sectors, especially artificial intelligence, which is rapidly becoming the defining technology of future economic and military leadership. Numerous contentious issues still require careful management.

Nevertheless, diplomacy is regaining momentum. President Xi is expected to visit the US in the fall of this year, while the APEC leaders’ meeting in Shenzhen in November, and a possible encounter at the G20 summit, could provide further opportunities for sustained dialogue and crisis management.

Much of the Western media coverage of Trump’s Beijing visit concluded that China emerged with the stronger diplomatic position, aided by disciplined messaging, strategic framing and confident statecraft. Since the escalation of Trump’s trade wars and the conflict involving Iran, international opinion polls have increasingly shown China viewed more favorably than the US in many parts of the world.

At a time of profound uncertainty, people everywhere are searching for predictability, stability and competent leadership. In this context, Hong Kong also has a role to play. By demonstrating resilience, openness and vibrancy under the “one country, two systems” framework, the city can contribute — however modestly — to China’s broader project of national rejuvenation.

The author is convenor of the Executive Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.