Seoul: U.S. President Donald Trump engaged in a phone conversation with Chinese President Xi Jinping on November 24, following their summit in Busan nearly a month earlier. The hour-long discussion was described as warm, with Trump reaffirming his plans to visit China in April and extending an invitation for Xi to visit the United States next year. Trump later took to social media to announce that the two leaders had made "meaningful progress" in maintaining the Busan agreement and were able to "focus on the big picture."
According to Yonhap News Agency, China's Xinhua News Agency reported that the conversation included exchanges on bilateral relations, Taiwan, and the war in Ukraine. Trump reportedly acknowledged the seriousness with which China regards the Taiwan issue, a comment that comes amid tension in China-Japan relations following Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's remarks regarding Japan's stance on Taiwan. Trump's apparent neutrality on the matter may unsettle Japan, though he did not publicly address the Taiwan comment in his statements.
In response, Trump held a separate call with Prime Minister Takaichi the following day. The prime minister stated that Trump briefed her on the U.S.-China developments, including his conversation with Xi. However, Trump again refrained from publicly supporting Japan's position on Taiwan. Takaichi confirmed ongoing "close coordination between Japan and the United States," but did not specify whether the Taiwan dispute was addressed during their discussion.
Trump's approach to diplomacy, which often prioritizes national interests over alliances, is not new. This stance has raised questions amid the current China-Japan confrontation. His proposals for ending the Russia-Ukraine war have also faced criticism in Europe for appearing to align more closely with Russia's interests than those of Ukraine or NATO allies. Ukraine and Japan now face the latest iteration of his deal-based diplomacy. His recent imposition of a 20 percent tariff on Taiwan, despite its strategic importance in countering China, followed by pressure for U.S. investment commitments, is another example of this approach.
Korea, too, remains cautious. Despite concluding trade and security negotiations at the Gyeongju summit, potential disputes may arise in the implementation phase. Trade tensions could emerge over investment allocations or profit-sharing mechanisms, while security differences might reemerge over North Korea's denuclearization, the strategic flexibility of U.S. forces in Korea, and Korea's possible pursuit of nuclear-powered submarines. Many in Seoul are concerned that Washington may prioritize short-term U.S. interests over alliance principles.
The possibility of a U.S.-China "big deal" cannot be dismissed, and the Korea-U.S. alliance may face new challenges. Korea will need to adopt a more cautious approach towards Washington and ensure its foreign policy is rooted firmly in national interest, reflecting the complex diplomatic and security environment of today.