Trump declared victory, but Xi secured the deal: Decoding the untold story of Busan talks

US President Donald Trump (L) talks to China's President Xi Jinping as they shake hands after their talks at the Gimhae Air Base, located next to the Gimhae International Airport in Busan on October 30, 2025. US (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / AFP)

When Donald Trump says a meeting went “12 out of 10,” it usually means one thing: he is already drafting a victory tweet. This week’s summit in Busan was no different. Trump emerged declaring “tremendous progress” after talks with China’s Xi Jinping, calling it a breakthrough that would “make America win again.” Yet as he spoke, the man sitting across the table, calm and expressionless, had already pocketed what he wanted: tariff cuts, a suspension of export restrictions, and breathing space for China’s tech industry.

What looked like a diplomatic win for Trump was, in substance, a quiet triumph for Xi. The optics belonged to Washington, but the leverage shifted to Beijing.

Trump’s style of diplomacy thrives on applause. From Air Force One, he told reporters the meeting had gone “better than anyone could imagine” and announced plans to visit China in April. For his domestic audience, it was another episode of “America Wins”: soybeans for farmers, promises on fentanyl, and a handshake with “a great leader of a great country.”

But while Trump was busy scripting his moment, China’s commerce ministry was busy scripting its advantage. Hours later, Beijing announced it would suspend rare earth export restrictions for one year. More quietly, the United States agreed to halve the 20 percent tariffs that Trump had earlier imposed, lowering overall tariffs on Chinese goods from about 57 percent to 47 percent. A temporary truce on technology exports and port fees completed the package.

To put it simply, Xi let Trump declare victory while resetting trade conditions almost to where they were before the tariff wars began.

Xi’s style could not be more different. In his public remarks, he offered Trump polite acknowledgment and a dose of subtle irony. “The recent twists and turns should be instructive,” Xi said, a line that sounded gracious but carried an unmistakable reminder of who was really steering the conversation.

Analysts said the outcome once again highlighted the contrast between optics and strategy. Jonathan Czin, a Brookings Institution fellow who earlier analysed Chinese politics at the CIA, told The New York Times, “It’s an approach that can safely be described as tactics without a strategy.” He added that Beijing had turned the talks into “a game of whack-a-mole” for the Trump administration, allowing China to dodge deeper reforms while scoring policy concessions.

In other words, Trump was celebrating a victory that essentially restored the pre-conflict status quo.

For now, both sides are projecting calm. Beijing calls this a period of “managed stability,” and Trump has promised that “relations have never been better.” Xi even borrowed Trump’s favorite slogan, telling his delegation that “constructive engagement” would “make both nations great again.”

But few observers are convinced this peace will last. The truce rests on temporary measures, not structural fixes. A single tariff announcement or export ban could undo the fragile balance overnight.

Political science professor Ja Ian Chong told The New York Times, “Maybe I’m jaded because I’ve seen this movie too many times, but these are issues that are relatively easy to roll back and also to accuse the other side of bad faith.”

For now, both leaders have what they need. Trump gets headlines for his campaign trail. Xi gets economic stability ahead of China’s next five-year plan discussions.

According to Al Jazeera, Asian leaders have come to understand one simple rule: the easiest way to win Trump’s goodwill is through flattery. From Tokyo to Seoul, regional heads have learned that a compliment often achieves more than confrontation. One diplomat told the publication, “If you want Trump on your side, make him feel like the hero.”

Xi, of course, has perfected this approach. He gave Trump space to boast, let him claim the moral high ground, and in return walked away with tariff relief and a stronger economic hand. The Chinese leader’s restraint has long been his most effective weapon against Trump’s theatrics.

While Xi and others have learned to indulge Trump’s appetite for praise, India has taken the opposite path. New Delhi has stood firm against Washington’s repeated tariff threats over its continued import of discounted Russian oil. Unlike many other capitals that sought to appease the Trump administration, India made it clear that its energy policy serves national priorities, not American politics.

This defiance contrasts sharply with Trump’s transactional style of diplomacy. By refusing to be pressured into policy changes, India has projected strategic maturity: a quality that Trump’s approach to Beijing has sorely lacked. For New Delhi, consistency has proved more effective than charm.

If Busan revealed anything, it was the widening gap between performance and power in global politics. Trump dominated the cameras, the quotes, and the headlines. Xi dominated the outcome.

Trump left South Korea proclaiming a triumph. Xi left with the tariffs reduced, trade restrictions eased, and America’s trade leverage blunted. The Chinese leader managed to secure what he wanted without ever raising his voice or contradicting his counterpart.

As one analyst put it succinctly, “Trump got the applause. Xi got the policy.”

In the end, the Busan meeting was less a negotiation than a masterclass in psychological diplomacy. Trump won the optics, Xi won the strategy, and India quietly proved that strength sometimes lies not in flattery, but in saying no.