At the 25th China-EU Summit in Beijing, Chinese and European leaders acknowledged both overlapping interests and deep divergences, especially over China’s seeming alignment with Russia and the Ukraine war. While Beijing seeks improved economic ties with Europe, it continues to prioritize geopolitical security and its strategic rivalry with the U.S. over European concerns, limiting the prospects for major diplomatic improvements.

Court rulings could weaken the U.S. administration’s tough stance in trade talks and give trading partners more room to maneuver. But policy uncertainty means that high-stakes trade negotiations could go either way.

The U.S. national security community is publicizing its anxieties about China’s military build-up and Beijing’s security partnership with Russia, Iran, and North Korea.

Regional trade alliances and economic integration — especially the one emerging between China, ASEAN and countries in the Persian Gulf — are offering stability for a global economy on the edge. The world’s poles are shifting to fill the gap left by an increasingly isolationist United States.

America’s tariff agenda has taken global trade hostage to begin this year. While the strongman tactics employed by Trump’s administration are netting favorable results in some ways, China has been able to hold out from the pressure, showing flaws in America’s plan.

By drawing a parallel between U.S. interest in Greenland and its stance on Taiwan, China has mounted a carefully calibrated rhetorical response that highlights perceived inconsistencies in American positions on sovereignty, positions itself as a defender of international norms, and gently tests the cohesion of Western alliances.

The deal will spell the end of WTO’s system of setting tariffs by consensus, which has been in operation since the inception of the world body in 1995. It will usher in a new era in which Washington alone will set tariff rates.

The U.S.-dominated international system is unraveling as major powers and Global South countries reject American pressure and assert their independence. Without a shift toward cooperation and respect for multipolarity, the U.S. risks becoming the target of a hostile global realignment rather than leading a stable new order.

The extreme radicalism of the U.S. president’s thinking, coupled with the chaotic nature of his policies and their implementation, has significantly accelerated fragmentation and may even precipitate the collapse of the global governance structure.

Arbitrary policies introduced by the U.S. president have accelerated a shift of the international order and introduced new dynamics to relations between major powers. Most countries are reluctant to follow Trump’s lead because they have little to gain by doing so. Several are quietly thinking about ways to turn his disruptions into opportunity.