Hong Kong, November 3 (ANI): The Chinese and American leaders met during the 32nd APEC Economic Ministers' Meeting in South Korea on 30 October, the first such face-to-face encounter in more than six years.

While it was positive that the world's two most powerful nations are talking, many remain concerned at the Trump administration's handling of China.

The conflab lasting less than two hours occurred at Gimhae Air Base in Busan. Trump was blessed with a handshake from Chairman Xi Jinping, praise for his role in bringing 'world peace', promises from China to buy American products, and a reprieve on rare earth export restrictions.

It came at little cost to China, for it was the USA that blinked first on tariffs. Xi indicated he was open to more commercial agreements, and China gained a truce on the trade war. Importantly, the most critical factor of all, President Donald Trump never once mentioned Taiwan. It 'never came up' in the meeting, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. 'That was not discussed, actually.'

This is despite Beijing ramping up a propaganda campaign against Taiwan in the week leading up to the APEC summit, a Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson warning that China 'will not rule out force' to stop Taiwanese independence, and China's revival of 'restoration day'.

Officially called Commemoration Day of Taiwan's Restoration, the latter is marked on 25 October, the day Japan officially surrendered in Taiwan in 1945.

Beijing's resurrection of this day is a strategic move designed to reinforce its historical claims over Taiwan and to promote reunification.

Taipei describes the day as a Chinese attempt to 'belittle our country and fabricate the claim that Taiwan belongs to the PRC'.

Ironically, the topic of the Ukraine war came up strongly, even if Taiwan did not. Xi said, 'The world today is confronted with many tough problems. China and the US can jointly shoulder our responsibility as major countries and work together to accomplish more great and concrete things for the good of our two countries and the whole world.'

Meanwhile, China continues an aggressive campaign of coercion against Taiwan. K. Tristan Tang, an Associate Fellow at the Research Project on China's Defence Affairs, assessed that 'China's military incursions into Taiwan's airspace and waters in early 2025 mark a shift from politically triggered responses to a sustained military presence.' He found that, 'Despite the absence of major political flashpoints, the PLA has intensified its air and naval operations, setting record highs in median-line crossings and warship activity. Joint combat readiness patrols have expanded in both frequency and scope, incorporating long-range missions and drone flights encircling Taiwan.'

Furthermore, 'Even during the traditionally subdued Lunar New Year period, Beijing escalated manoeuvres, dispelling the notion that cross-Strait tensions are solely driven by political catalysts. This sustained military presence reflects an evolving doctrine that prioritises operational dominance and training over diplomatic signalling. Taiwan's Ministry of National Defence data reveals a deliberate pattern of increased activity, underscoring Beijing's goal of enhancing the PLA's warfighting capability.'

In light of all this, Tang recommended, 'Analysts and policymakers must recalibrate their assessments, focusing not on political rhetoric but on the PLA's expanding operational footprint and long-term ambitions.'

As already mentioned, Trump failed to even mention Taiwan when meeting with Xi. Instead, he was concerned only about doing deals. This mercantile approach and ambivalence about China trampling others' sovereign rights would delight Xi and his CCP acolytes. It shows how everything is negotiable with Trump, perhaps even the future fate of Taiwan. This is underscored by Trump's, at times, shameful treatment of Ukraine and his ignorant repetition of Vladimir Putin's own talking points. Trump likes to praise his own deal-making expertise, but he often reveals a fragile grasp of underlying strategic concepts and sometimes even the basic notion of right and wrong.

Meanwhile, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth met his Chinese counterpart, Admiral Dong Jun, on the sidelines of the ASEAN Defence Ministers' Meeting Plus (ADMM+) in Kuala Lumpur. This face-to-face meeting followed a teleconference call with Dong on 9 September.

Hegseth said his one-to-one with the Chinese Minister of National Defence on 31 October was 'a good and constructive meeting'. In a readout Hegseth said, 'I highlighted the importance of maintaining a balance of power in the Indo-Pacific and emphasised US concerns about China's activities in the South China Sea, around Taiwan and towards US allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific.'

This was interesting language, with Hegseth speaking of a 'balance of power' in the Indo-Pacific region. Was this a tacit admission that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) is recognised as a peer to the US armed forces and that China is indeed a political force to be reckoned with in Asia?

Indeed, China continues to go all out to compete with the US militarily. To give one example, in September, Lieutenant General Douglas Schiess, the commander of US Space Forces - Space, discussed China's growing space capabilities. 'They're bringing on capability, I won't say daily, but at least monthly; that puts our assets at risk.' He added, 'China is definitely our biggest threat.'

China had more than 1,189 satellites in orbit as of mid-2025, representing an on-orbit increase of 927% since 2015. Schiess said China is building a 'kill chain', an attack process, to target US maritime, land and air forces 'at greater distances than we've ever seen. They're using space to be able to make those distances even greater. On top of that, they're adding counter-space capabilities that then put our assets at risk.' If China can debilitate, damage or destroy the US military's ability to conduct intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, communications and targeting from space, then China gains the ultimate high ground.

Schiess noted the PLA is catching up to the USA's space capabilities at an 'incredible pace'.

In his summary of his meeting with China's defence minister, Hegseth continued, 'The United States does not seek conflict; it will continue to stoutly defend its interests and ensure it has the capabilities in the region to do so ... We will continue discussions with the People's Liberation Army on matters of mutual importance.'

Later, Hegseth announced on social media, 'I just spoke to President Trump, and we agree - the relationship between the United States and China has never been better.'

This surprising statement seems to emanate from political spin doctoring rather than any reference to reality. A couple of bilateral meetings occur and the USA unrealistically thinks the relationship is the best it has ever been?

'The admiral and I agree that peace, stability and good relations are the best path for our two great and strong countries. As President Trump said, his historic 'G2 meeting' set the tone for everlasting peace and success for the US and China,' Hegseth said melodramatically.

'The Department of War will do the same - peace through strength, mutual respect and positive relations.'

Hegseth concluded, 'Admiral Dong and I also agreed that we should set up military-to-military channels to de-conflict and de-escalate any problems that arise. We have more meetings on that coming soon. God bless both China and the USA!' Such sentiments are naive, for China has regularly spurned hotlines and military communications channels in times of crisis.

Of more than 90 existing communications channels between the US and Chinese governments, most were dormant under Trump's first presidency from 2017-21.

Beijing later cut links with the US military completely after Nancy Pelosi, then-speaker of the House of Representatives, visited Taiwan. China is well versed in suspending communications whenever it feels aggrieved, so these promises of military-to-military channels are rather hollow.

Trump and Hegseth seem to think their sheer force of personality will win China over.

They also appear to think promises from Chinese officials can be taken at face value. Who remembers Xi's 2015 promise to Barack Obama in the White House Rose Garden that China would never militarize its outposts in the South China Sea? That was a blatant lie the Obama administration swallowed hook, line and sinker.

'Trust but verify' was the catchphrase Ronald Reagan used as the USA faced off the Soviet Union. The contemporary USA needs to do the same with Beijing. Interestingly, the US and Philippines announced at the ADMM+ meeting on 31 October that they were jointly setting up a Task Force Philippines to help protect Manila's interests in the South China Sea, especially against Chinese provocations, the latest of which have centred upon Second Thomas Shoal.

The US Indo-Pacific Command stated, 'Composed of approximately 60 service members led by a one-star general or flag officer, Task Force Philippines increases efficiency in bilateral coordination, improves operational and exercise execution, and boosts humanitarian assistance and disaster response preparedness. It does not involve new combat forces or offensive operations, unilateral deployments or permanent military basing. Task Force Philippines represents the steady evolution of the 74-year-old Philippine-US alliance as both our nations continue to uphold a secure and prosperous Indo-Pacific.'

Since 2022, when former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte stepped down, China began prosecuting a premeditated campaign of harassment and vindictiveness against Philippine law enforcement, military and fishermen in the South China Sea. This was because Manila finally stood up for itself and asserted rights over its legally entitled maritime territory.

Returning to the Trump-Xi meeting, the White House trumpeted the trade and economic deal as 'a massive victory that safeguards US economic strength and national security, while putting American workers, farmers and families first'.

Listing its 'victories', the US government said China had committed to halting the flow of fentanyl precursors to the USA, eliminating China's current and proposed export controls on rare earth elements and other critical minerals, ending Chinese retaliation against US semiconductor manufacturers and other major US companies, and opening China's market to US soybeans and other agricultural exports.

After promising on 9 October to implement controls on rare-earth materials, China has used that to score a negotiating success. Washington DC has backed down on a number of areas, including reducing tariffs on Chinese products by 10% and suspending heightened reciprocal tariffs till November next year. China's overall tariff level is now 47%. The USA will also suspend for one year end-user controls on Chinese listed entities. Balanced against this is the annual sale of 25 million metric tons of American soybeans from 2026-28, for example.

In many respects, China and its ally Russia have already scored striking victories through their information warfare and propaganda campaigns. For instance, in an interview aired on 31 October, Cheng Li-wun, chair-elect of Taiwan's main Kuomintang opposition party, declared that 'Vladimir Putin is not a dictator.'

She stated, 'After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the country quickly transitioned to democracy. It has had many years of elections ... Putin was elected via a democratic vote. That's why I was surprised that he was being labelled a dictator.'

When asked whether Putin started the war in Ukraine, Cheng replied, 'Of course not. The core reason the war broke out and continues today is NATO's repeated eastward expansion.'

If the very existence of Ukraine and its desire to secure itself is justification for Moscow's invasion, then what does it say about Taiwan's own status? By the same logic, does the KMT assert that China too is a democracy - after all, it has a National People's Congress and it is called the People's Republic of China? Would China be justified in invading Taiwan simply because its existence is a blight on the CCP?

After months of tit-for-tat exchanges and tensions between China and the USA, Beijing got what it wanted at the APEC meeting. Trump described the outcome as a 'twelve' on a scale of ten. Xi got good publicity, China came across as a well-meaning and responsible power and, even better, it still gets to harass and threaten Taiwan without hindrance. As the Chinese would say, the meeting with Trump was 'win-win'. (ANI)