Tangle - The Trump–Xi summit.

Starting point is 00:00:00 From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, a place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we're going to be talking about President Trump's China Summit, the meeting with China's President Xi. we're going to break down exactly what happened, share some views from the left and the right, some international writers as well, and then my take. Before we jump in, I want to give you a quick heads up that on my last stop of the little whirlwind college speaking tour I had, I implored college students at St. Olaf to choose decency. And in this kind of a crazy divided moment, I asked them to be one of the fair ones, be curious, be open-minded,

Starting point is 00:01:07 be willing to say you're wrong. I did this in an effort to try and bring them into a future where maybe our politics aren't quite so divided. And I decided to share this talk with our audience. So I actually recorded a version of the talk for the podcast last week and we published the talk in its full form in the newsletter on Friday. Both are members-only additions. So I encourage you guys to go check it out if you haven't yet. And with that, I'm going to pass it over to Audrey, who's doing the podcast today. John and Will are out this week in Alaska recording a YouTube video I'm very excited about.

Starting point is 00:01:46 So I'm going to be joined by a little rotating cast of some Tangle co-hosts this week on the pod. And today's Audrey's turn. So with that, I'm going to send it over to her for the breakdown of today's story, and I'll be back from my take. Thanks, Isaac. Let's get right into it with today's quick hits.

Starting point is 00:02:10 Number one, President Trump warned, that Iran would be hit much harder if the country's leaders do not offer a more favorable deal to end the war. Separately, on Saturday, a drone strike damaged a nuclear power plant in the United Arab Emirates in what authorities are calling an unprovoked terrorist attack. Number two, the Supreme Court rejected a request by Democratic officials in Virginia to use a new congressional map, recently approved by voters but struck down by the Supreme Court of Virginia. Number three, Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth McDonough rejected the inclusion of $1 billion for a new White House ballroom from a recent $72 billion Republican funding package largely focused on immigration enforcement. McDonough ruled the ballroom funding violated the bird rule for including non-budgetary items during reconciliation.

Starting point is 00:02:59 Number four. The World Health Organization has declared a public health emergency after an Ebola outbreak caused 350 reported cases and 91st1. deaths in Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Six Americans have been exposed to the disease, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Number five. Republican Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana failed to advance to a runoff in the Republican primary for his Senate seat. Instead, Louisiana State Treasurer John Fleming and Trump endorsed U.S. Representative Julia Letlow will face off on June 27th. Cassidy's loss follows a Trump-backed effort to oust him over public breaks from the president.

Starting point is 00:03:38 President Trump, the guest of honor at a lavish state dinner at China's great hall of the people in the heart of Beijing. The president toasted by Chinese president Xi Jinping and joined by family, staff, and more than a dozen of the United States most prominent business leaders, including ally Elon Musk and the heads of Apple and Nvidia. It's a very special relationship and I want to thank you again. On Friday, President Donald Trump departed China after a two-day summit with Chinese president Xi Jinping, in which the leaders discussed trade deals, diplomatic relations, the Iran war, and other issues. Trump and Xi each spoke favorably about the other and emphasized their interest in a mutually beneficial relationship between the countries, though no major deals were immediately announced. Trump's state trip to China was the first U.S. presidential

Starting point is 00:04:39 visit to the country since Trump's 2017 visit during his first term. The summit was held against the backdrop of rising U.S.-China tensions during Trump's second term. In April 2025, Trump levied significant tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting China to impose export controls on rare earth materials. Trump and Xi later agreed to a trade truce in October. The Trump administration also placed strict export controls on the sale of advanced artificial intelligence chips to China. Separately, the Trump administration has begun sanctioning Chinese actors

Starting point is 00:05:10 for allegedly aiding Iran in its war with the United States. On April 24th, the Treasury Department announced sanctions against a Chinese oil refinery for buying billions of dollars of Iranian oil. On May 8th, the State Department sanctioned four China-based entities for, quote, providing satellite imagery that enables Iran's military strikes against U.S. forces in the Middle East, end quote. President Trump was accompanied on the trip by senior administration officials as well as business executives, including NVIDIA's Jensen Huang, Tesla's Elon Musk, and Apple's Tim Cook.

Starting point is 00:05:42 According to U.S. trade representative Jameson Greer, the executives had an opportunity to talk with President Xi regarding their businesses, though Greer said AI chip exports were not discussed. She reportedly indicated that China would increasingly open up to U.S. businesses. No major deals were formally announced after the summit, but President Trump said fantastic trade deals had been reached. He claimed that China agreed to buy 200 Boeing planes and more American oil and agricultural products, but China has not confirmed its plans. Trump also said that he and Xi agreed that the war in Iran should end and the Strait of Hormuz should reopen to commercial traffic. However, China did not address Iran in its post-Summit comments, and the country's foreign ministry

Starting point is 00:06:25 released a statement during the summit that said the United States should not have started the war. U.S. policy on Taiwan was also a notable point of discussion. After a closed-door meeting with President Xi and President Trump, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson said, quote, If the Taiwan question is handled properly, the bilateral relationship will enjoy overall stability. Otherwise, the two countries will have clashes and even conflicts, putting the entire relationship in great jeopardy. End quote. Trump told reporters that Xi asked him if the U.S. would intervene if China invaded Taiwan,

Starting point is 00:06:58 to which Trump said he responded, there's only one person that knows that, you know who it is, me. President Trump praised the Chinese president at several points during the summit. He told President Xi, quote, You're a great leader. Sometimes people don't like me saying it, but I say it anyway, because it's true. It's an honor to be your friend, end quote. Before departing, Trump invited Xi to the White House in September,

Starting point is 00:07:21 and Chinese officials confirmed the president will visit the United States in the fall. Next up, we'll share views from the left, right, and foreign policy experts on the summit. And then I'll pass it off to executive editor Isaac Saul for his take. We'll be right back after this quick break. First up, what the left is saying. The left says Trump has weakened the U.S. standing with China. Others called Trump's position on Taiwan risky. In Slate, Fred Kaplan said Trump gave Xi Jinping exactly what he wanted.

Starting point is 00:08:07 The best thing to say about the U.S.-China summit in Beijing on Thursday and Friday is that our allies' worst fears didn't come true. Aside from that, President Donald Trump failed to fulfill his fondest hopes for the meeting, while his host, President Xi Jinping, accomplished his own bedrock goals, though not not much more. Trump boasted to reporters after the summit that he and Xi had made fantastic deals, but the only example he cited, Xi's agreement to buy 200 jet planes from Boeing was less than impressive. Boeing stock plunged by 4% because shareholders had anticipated that China would buy 500 planes. Xi sees the United States as a declining empire. Trump's praise of Xi in the social media

Starting point is 00:08:46 post and many more times during the summit itself, lauding the Chinese dictator as a great leader and really a friend, only reaffirmed Xi's main goal in this summit to solidify China's standing as a peer power of the United States. She, who cares little about friendship, was interested only in preserving his power, reinforcing China's growing stature, and ensuring that it can rise and flourish in a somewhat stable world. In that context of competitions, Trump flew home with little. Shee walked back to the palace, reassured. In Brookings, Ryan Haas wrote about Trump's dangerous Taiwan Gamble. During the run-up to U.S. President Donald Trump's visit to Beijing, he remained ambiguous about his views on Taiwan.

Starting point is 00:09:28 When asked in interviews, he regularly lamented that Taiwan stole America's semiconductor industry, while adding a note of reassurance that there would not be a war in the Taiwan Strait under his watch. He would recount that he and Chinese President Xi Jinping shared an understanding about avoiding conflict over Taiwan. The net effect of his comments was to suggest that his views on Taiwan independence were closer to Beijing's preferences, that Taiwan had a greater responsibility to avoid provoking conflict, and that America's security support for Taiwan was negotiable with China. Beijing will seize on Trump's recent comments to signal to Taiwan's 23 million people that Trump cares more about his relationship with Xi than he does about them.

Starting point is 00:10:07 Trump is giving up credibility without extracting benefits from Beijing. This is not just a policy shift. It is a shift from deterrence to deal-making in a domain where there is no deal to be made, beyond offering unilateral concessions that undermine deterrence. If Trump acts on his musings about treating Taiwan arms sales as a source of leverage, it would crater the confidence of America's security commitments, not just in Taiwan, but among America's allies globally. Next up, what the right is saying.

Starting point is 00:10:46 The right is mixed on the summit, with some glad that the U.S. did not concede to Chinese interests. Others think the summit is proof that American power is declining. The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote a book, the Good News as No News Summit. The main rule of presidential cemetery with an adversary is first, do no harm. By that standard, President Trump's Beijing parley with Chinese leader Xi Jinping this week was a success. It didn't achieve much, but it also didn't appear to give away anything notable to the wily dictator.

Starting point is 00:11:17 Mr. Trump boasted about fantastic Chinese purchases to come of U.S. soybeans and aircraft, but China didn't confirm the sales. Mr. Trump also said the two now agree on Iran and the Strait of Hormon. moves, but there was no overt agreement from Mr. Shee. The good news is that the president doesn't seem to have granted Mr. She's wish that the U.S. allow the sale of advanced computer tips to China. This is a Communist Party priority as it seeks to catch up with the U.S. on AI. But Mr. Xi promised Barack Obama that China would stop its cyber raids on U.S. companies and agencies, and China kept on stealing American secrets and embedding malware in U.S. systems. This attempt at AI arms control won't amount to much

Starting point is 00:11:58 unless the Trump team is as naive as Mr. Obama. In the American conservative, Jude Rousseau argued, Trump's visit to China emphasizes American strategic weakness. Few would say that the first Trump administration was a total success, but at the level of theory there was a certain coherence to it. On the China side of things, Elbridge Colby articulated the line of thought in the 2018 National Defense Strategy. The U.S., Colby wrote, should boost its partnerships in the Indo-Pacific

Starting point is 00:12:26 to prevent China from establishing hegemony in the region. Corollaries were a de-emphasis on the Middle Eastern theater, which is not enormously important for American interests, and a real defense buildup, particularly a naval buildup. We have spent the past decade twiddling our thumbs and have little to show for it. So it's difficult not to look at President Donald Trump's visit to Beijing this week

Starting point is 00:12:47 and feel kind of bummed out. Xi Jinping said that he doesn't want an Iranian toll booth in the Hormuz, which is good, I guess, but it's embarrassing that the administration is treating China getting on board with our position as manna from heaven. When the gang gets home and sleeps off the jet lag, well, we're still going to be at war in a peripheral theater, one that looks like it hurts us more than it hurts China, by the way,

Starting point is 00:13:09 whatever the big brains on Twitter are saying, a sub-war navy and a largely compromised economy. It's hard not to feel that China is very serious and we are not. Finally, what foreign policy experts are saying. Foreign policy experts observed how Trump's visit differed from previous state visits to China. Some argue that Trump's novel attitude toward China won't get the results he wants. In foreign policy, James Palmer said the Trump-She summit was remarkably banal. You could be forgiven reading and watching the Chinese press this week for entirely missing

Starting point is 00:13:44 U.S. President Donald Trump's visit to Beijing. As it turned out, the lack of dramatics on the Chinese side was appropriate. Trump's visit was a snooze fest. She stuck to political banalities, speaking about familiar red lines. Taiwan, democracy and human rights, China's path and system, and China's development right, referring to its ability to move up the global economic ladder without being pushed down by Washington.

Starting point is 00:14:08 Yet previous U.S. presidential visits were met with far more fanfare in China's tightly controlled media, even when little of consequence emerged. Why was Beijing so muted this time around? One reason is unpredictability. Other U.S. presidents visiting China have stuck to an agreed-on agenda and have been controlled and careful in their speech.

Starting point is 00:14:28 No one expects this from Trump. Chinese leaders also sought validation through recognition from Washington. The United States was recognized as the global superpower, and China gains status in the eyes of its own citizens by portraying itself as a peer and a gracious host. China no longer needs that validation from the United States. Its global primacy is more than sufficiently established, not just as a manufacturing superpower, but also as a technological and scientific giant. In Responsible Stadecraft, Michael D. Swain wrote,

Starting point is 00:15:00 On China, Trump wants to be Mr. Nice Guy now. It appears that the president does not look at China as a conventional security threat, and certainly not an existential one. Yes, Beijing poses an economic problem, perhaps even an economic threat, but a very manageable one that can produce a great outcome for both countries. He believes this can be achieved by working with his great friend Xi Jinping in a kind of personalized a G-2 relationship. He apparently thinks that if he can make some great deals with Xi on Taiwan, on trade,

Starting point is 00:15:29 and technology, etc., the great power problem will be resolved, and he can take another step toward his long-coveted Nobel Peace Prize. The problem with Trump's novel treatment of the China-U.S. relationship is rather obvious, however. Great-power relations are not real estate deals. Enduring, positive changes in those relations can only occur if leaders' decisions reflect compromises, involving deep-seated structural and political interests across their respective societies and polities. Given Trump's general unpredictability and impulsiveness,

Starting point is 00:16:01 and she's apparent unwillingness to rule on the basis of a genuine collective leadership structure, Trump's desired, personalized G2 is unlikely to prove sustainable or even achievable. That's it for what the left, right, and foreign policy experts are saying. Now let's head to Isaac for his take. All right, that is it for the left, the right, and some foreign policy experts are saying, which brings us to my take. Few topics leave me feeling as conflicted as the U.S.-China relationship. Those conflicts appear in broad strokes in every element of the relationship. China is a country run by an authoritarian leader who is serving indefinitely, destroying any political opposition, sometimes disappearing them,

Starting point is 00:16:55 and using a vast state-sponsored spy network to crush dissent. Yet there's nothing wrong with the Chinese people who are living under the thumb of that rule. China is an economic powerhouse whose relationship with us creates a great deal of prosperity and wealth, yet that relationship also creates a dependency that makes our economy vulnerable. China has an advanced modern military that could make us pay

Starting point is 00:17:19 for any direct confrontation, yet that threat has so far mutually deterred both superpowers from an open conflict in places like the South China Sea. Every facet of our relationship to China is a double-sided coin, a handshake between two sides holding weapons behind their backs. Take Taiwan, a topic that dominated the summit. She has made it clear that addressing Taiwan is his top priority with U.S. policy, and his remarks once again left a lot of people worrying about an imminent Chinese takeover. During his administration, President Joe Biden made waves for saying unequivocally that we'd defend Taiwan with our military.

Starting point is 00:17:59 I argued that we'd have little choice. Biden's fo'pa, rather, was making the subtext explicit. Of course, the U.S. would want to defend Taiwan. It is too important as a supplier of U.S. semiconductors in its position in the First Island chain and as a democracy in defiance of she's totalitarian regime. But there's a reason you don't say that kind of thing out loud. Open war with China would be catastrophic for both China and the U.S. And promising it is chilling. Our conflict with Iran, which is orders of magnitude weaker in almost every imaginable way, is already dragging the U.S. and global economy.

Starting point is 00:18:39 Imagine the impacts of a conflict between the world's two economic superpowers to say nothing of the potential death toll. And Taiwan is far from the only sticking point. China has a long-standing policy of deploying hackers to come after American government, government and private entities. She once promised President Barack Obama the cyber incursions would stop, but they never did. If anything, the espionage is getting more audacious. We just found out the mayor of a Los Angeles suburb was actually a Chinese spy. Former Representative Eric Swalwell, the Democrat from California, was infamously embroiled in controversy for his ties to a woman

Starting point is 00:19:15 who ended up being a Chinese spy. Yet, what do we expect? Our hackers are constantly going after China, our spies are all throughout the country. Our espionage efforts are robust. It's hard to blame a global power for returning the favor. What about our trade relationships? On the one hand, China supplies the U.S. with cheap goods in abundance. From consumer electronics to kids' toys to complex medical devices, our supply chain depends on cheaply manufactured Chinese goods. Today, we take this arrangement for granted and frequently overlook its benefits. On the other hand, China's manufacturing Behemoth has significantly contributed to the decline of our own industrial economy. We've become reliant on a global adversary to supply us with things our consumers want and need

Starting point is 00:20:01 creating an obvious vulnerability. And of course, there are the tariffs, another vital element of trade. When President Biden slapped tariffs on Chinese automakers to try to keep their electric vehicles out of the U.S., I was deeply conflicted about the approach. Then President Trump significantly up the ante, launching a full-on trade war to try to limit China's economic influence and reinvigorate U.S. manufacturing. Imports from China have since fallen. In 2025, they totaled $308.4 billion down nearly 30% from 2024. The spirit of both administration's approach is appealing. Let's protect our workers and our factories and our American-made goods. Let's not welcome competition from a country that is overly subsidized and totally relying on unethical labor practices to make those cheap goods.

Starting point is 00:20:53 But what has the approach brought us? Are U.S. made electric vehicles improving? Have our automakers caught up? What about the rest of the manufacturing sector? Are tariffs improving life for Americans? Are production costs staying controlled? Even if these outcomes are coming, they will take time and patience, but the signals for many of them are not particularly strong. With all those elements to consider, I'm left wondering what exactly is set to change after the latest Trump-Shee summit. Trump claims we scored some groundbreaking trade deals and the relationship has never been better, but China is confirming exactly nothing. Much-hyped soybeans sales have been hyped before, as the Wall Street Journal editorial board noted under what the right is saying.

Starting point is 00:21:35 The board also celebrated the no-news summit, which it framed as a good thing, and I suppose I can see the rationale. After all, Trump is not negotiating from a point. place of strength. The U.S. economic sentiment is terrible. The war in Iran is deeply unpopular, and Trump's tariffs have been on again, off again, with exceptions carved out in nearly every industry, and most global leaders have learned by now that they can fix their Trump-related issues with a phone call and some well-time flattery. With that backdrop, what could Trump have reasonably accomplished? In short, I don't think the president gave Xi everything he wanted, nor do I think we got much of anything. Trump, the China hawk, seems to have evolved yet again, and it's not at all clear

Starting point is 00:22:17 to me what his policy position really is on issues like Taiwan or tariffs. The administration will say that's the point, but it wasn't so long ago that a tough on China posture was the centerpiece of Trump's foreign policy. For now, the story seems to be that not much really happened at all, despite much hype and despite the president's envoy asserting some wins it's hard to ascertain the veracity of. All right, that is it for my take. I'm going to send it over to managing editor Ari Weitzman who has a staff dissent today, and then I'll be back for your questions answered. This is Tangos Managing Editor Ari Weizman with a staff dissent. I disagree with the interpretation that Isaac and the punditry class in general gave of Trump's summit with Xi as unproductive.

Starting point is 00:23:05 Yes, the complicated U.S.-China relationship has a lot of open questions that this summit didn't shed any light on. And yes, summits like these often come with expectations of some larger redefinition of the relationship. But given the dominance of the Iran war on the geopolitical scene at the moment, I think it's actually quite significant that President Xi agreed that the Strait of Hormuz must remain open and that Iran can't develop a nuclear weapon. Given that China has been ambiguously encouraging, we could say, the Iranians into conflict, and that they've been hurt less than the Americans by the Hermuse Blockade, she could easily have chosen to play hardball with Trump.

Starting point is 00:23:46 Instead, he's showing a desire to cooperate and avoid conflict between the two superpowers. Trump gets the blame for instigating the war that stands in the way of progress in all of these other areas, but he should also get some credit for getting she to publicly commit to a cooperative posture.

Starting point is 00:24:04 That isn't a lot, but it is not nothing. We'll be right back after this question. quick break. All right, thanks, Ari. I'll resist the urge to get the final word here and move on to your questions answered. This one's from Julian in New York, New York. Julian said, I'm just curious, is there any movement to end gerrymandering nationwide with an interstate compact? There's that national popular vote thing that's supposed to be triggered when enough states adopted to make it decisive in elections. Why not an agreement between states that when all of the states adopted commits each state to promptly enacting an independent redistricting commission.

Starting point is 00:24:55 And if any state thereafter opted out, the others would be free to opt out as well. But its terms would be triggered again if the threshold adoption requirements were again met. Okay, this is an interesting idea. I've never really heard anything like this. For context, the national popular vote interstate compact is a bill that any state can pass for itself that would pledge all of its electoral votes in a presidential election to the winner of the national popular vote, rather than the winner of its statewide vote. If a total number of states whose electoral votes exceed 270 pass the same statewide bill, that would mean the winner

Starting point is 00:25:31 of the popular vote would automatically win the electoral college, effectively making that system obsolete. We've covered that initiative in past editions. You can find previous newsletter links in the episode description. Your proposal is almost the exact opposite of that compact. Instead of asking states to join an agreement to trigger a de facto national change, you're proposing something close to a kill switch or mutually assured destruction. Essentially, a group of states all agree to pass laws that require only decadal census-based redistricting managed by independent commissions, and if any state abdicates, then all states are free to. Maybe that would work, but there are a couple of reasons why it might not. First, any state that thinks its majority political party would gain an advantage if all states

Starting point is 00:26:16 openly gerrymandered simply break the pact whenever they feel the field was tilted in their favor. Second, it would be very difficult to get enough states to agree to such a pact. Passing a federal law would be much more straightforward. That initiative is having enough trouble as it is. Democrats have repeatedly introduced the redistricting reform act most recently in 2025, which would ban mid-decade redistricting and require every state to establish independent redistricting commissions. Currently, Senate Republicans have no incentive to pass such a bill, but the problem goes back much further. Representative Zoe Lofgren, the Democrat from California, introduced a version of the bill in eight consecutive congresses, but it failed to advance out of committee because it lacks support from Democratic leaders.

Starting point is 00:27:01 It's possible the political calculation changes after the midterms, but until then, gerrymandering reform is not likely to grow past the patchwork of specific state-by-state regulations. All right, that is it for your question. I'm going to send it back to Audrey for the rest of the pod, and I'll see you guys tomorrow. Have a good one. Peace. Thanks, Isaac. To wrap things up, we have our Have a Nice Day story. When Ahmed Nassir and Preston, ages 6 and 7, were hospitalized at the same time for the same life-threatening heart condition, they each experienced the anxiety and uncertainty of not knowing

Starting point is 00:27:36 what was ahead for them. But over the course of nearly a year in the hospital together, they became best friends, leaning on one another for support as they waited for heart. heart transplants. Then, in a rare occurrence, all three received heart transplants within 10 days of one another. They're now recovering well, and their friendships are as strong as ever. Dr. Joseph Spinner, who's on the boys' care team, said, quote, I think these children teach us how to be grateful for what we have. It's amazing that they can be so sick yet have such a positive attitude, end quote. K-H-O-U-11 has the story, and you can find it in the show notes. All right, everybody, that's it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like

Starting point is 00:28:14 like to support our work, please go to reetangle.com, where you can send up for a newsletter membership, podcast membership, or a bundled membership that gets you a discount on both. We'll be right back here tomorrow. For Isaac and the rest of the crew, this is John Law signing off. Have a great day, y'all, y'all, and founder is me. Isaac Saul, and our executive producer is John Wall. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by managing editor Ari Weitzman with senior editor Will Kayback and associate editors Audrey Moorhead, Lindsay Canuth, and Bailey Saul. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website at retangle.com.

Tangle - The Trump–Xi summit.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.