Live: President Trump Hosts State Dinner at the White House for Chinese President Xi Jinping

The program broadcasts live the state dinner hosted by Trump at the White House for Xi Jinping, and reports on the welcoming ceremony, bilateral talks, and speeches by the leaders of both countries during Xi Jinping's visit to the US. The program invites multiple experts to analyze issues such as Taiwan, artificial intelligence, a trade truce, Iran, rare earths, US arms sales to Taiwan, and strategic stability, introduces guests, the menu, gifts, and panda diplomacy, and discusses the symbolic significance and possible outcomes of the summit.

Video Link:

Full Text:

Welcome to Voice of America's special program on the US-China summit, broadcast for you on September 24, 2026, at 6:30 PM Eastern Time. I am Fan Dongning, broadcasting live from Washington, D.C., the capital of the United States. President Trump is scheduled to host a state dinner at the White House at 7:00 PM with First Lady Melania to entertain visiting Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife Peng Liyuan, and at around 8:00 PM, the two will deliver speeches.

Tonight, Voice of America will take you to experience live the state dinner hosted by President Trump at the White House for Chinese President Xi Jinping, review important figures from the US and Chinese political and business circles in attendance, and interpret the arrangements of the state dinner details, including the participating guests, dishes, toast speeches, singing performances, and other diplomatic etiquette behind the political implications and signals. We have also invited three experts to provide in-depth on-site analysis of this globally anticipated US-China summit. Next, we will first through a VOA television report bring you the welcoming ceremony held by President Trump for Xi Jinping at the White House this morning and some important issues of this US-China summit. Let's watch the report.

On Thursday morning, the South Lawn of the White House was covered with a red carpet. US President Trump and First Lady Melania welcomed the car carrying Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife Peng Liyuan to the music of the US Armed Forces Honor Guard. After arriving, the two guests took photos with President Trump and his wife, recording this historic moment. The leaders of the US and China then delivered speeches in the entrance hall of the White House State Floor, attended by US cabinet officials and Chinese officials.

President Trump said that Chairman Xi Jinping's visit coincides with the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States, and he will take Xi and his wife to visit the National Archives to learn about American history. Chairman Xi and Peng Liyuan's visit this time coincides with the important moment of the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States. Tomorrow we will visit the National Archives to see the greatest treasures of this proud history, including the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.

President Trump also emphasized in his speech that the US and China hand in hand cooperate to create a better future. It was the encounter between the US Marines and the Chinese people that inspired them to adopt a respectful, still-used Chinese word "Republic" (Gonghe). The Marines use it to express great enthusiasm, but in Chinese, its literal meaning is working together.

President Trump emphasized his personal relationship with Xi Jinping over the years, stating that both sides have already made progress in areas such as trade and hoping to continue cooperation in the future to address security and technological challenges. During this visit, we will also discuss urgent issues concerning security, technology, and super intelligence. The decisions we make today in these areas can promote peace and prosperity for decades to come. If we focus on our common interests, I believe that looking back through history, we can achieve a great deal.

Chinese President Xi Jinping also mentioned the issue of artificial intelligence in his speech. Both China and the US are major powers in artificial intelligence, and they have both the ability and the responsibility to develop and properly manage artificial intelligence, ensuring that its development always remains under human control and benefits the people.

Xi Jinping further announced that two giant pandas, Pingping and Fushuang, will arrive at the Atlanta Zoo. Giant pandas are envoys of friendship between the peoples of China and the United States. Today I am happy to share some good news: in just a few days, giant pandas Pingping and Fushuang will settle at the Atlanta Zoo and meet the American people.

Following his speech, the two leaders and the first ladies proceeded to the White House Rose Garden for a military review. After the military review, President Trump and President Xi Jinping held bilateral talks, while the two first ladies visited the Smithsonian National Museum of Asian Art. This three-day visit includes bilateral talks as well as a state dinner hosted for the heads of state. Reporting from Washington by Voice of America.

Now, here at today's Voice of America special program on the US-China summit, we have also invited two guests to provide an in-depth analysis of this summit. One is Mr. Robert Daly, Director of the Kissinger Institute on China and the United States at the University of Maryland. Welcome. Thank you. The other is Mr. Xu Yuran, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute. Mr. Xu, welcome. Hello everyone, hello to all our viewers.

Before we consult our two guests on site, regarding the protocol with which President Trump received Xi Jinping, I interviewed Professor Miles Yu, Director of the China Center at the Hudson Institute, a little earlier. Let's first listen to what he had to say.

Up to now, the CCP has only made verbal commitments to the United States on any issue, without signing any written agreements. Nothing was signed in May, and looking at it now, there probably won't be any signings. Because Xi Jinping simply wants to create the surface impression that he has reached some sort of strategic stability with the US, but in reality, both sides are buying time while never letting down their guard against each other.

Look, within the US government, Mr. Trump calls his personal relationships with great powers and other national leaders good friends, but in reality, his cabinet members and various cabinet departments crack down on the CCP across all fronts practically every week. They sued Huawei, implemented technology controls, and the Department of Justice, the State Department, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Commerce take concrete actions in this regard every single week.

So I think that while US-China relations look relatively harmonious on the surface with all these spectacles and state dinners, this is actually just like the height of the US-Soviet Cold War in the late 1950s, when President Eisenhower invited Khrushchev to the United States for a tour, complete with high-level reception. In that sense, I think the two major powers need this kind of psychological stability, but in reality, the institutional and power-based confrontation between the two countries has never stopped.

Alright, after listening to Professor Miles Yu's remarks, and before we turn to our guests, let's take a quick look at the live footage from today's White House state dinner. Currently, the White House has rolled out the red carpet, and many guests are about to arrive to attend the state dinner hosted by President Trump in the East Room of the White House for Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Although the White House has not yet released the specific guest list, according to media reports and predictions, attendees expected at this banquet include Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, and former Apple CEO Tim Cook. Of course, there are also many AI magnates, including the founders of Anthropic and OpenAI, who will likely be present, as AI is a major topic this time.

So, looking at the live footage and Professor Professor Yu's analysis, let me first ask Mr. Robert Daly next to me. Professor Miles Yu believes that when observing this US-China summit, we shouldn't look at how lavish tonight's state dinner menu is, how long the red carpet is rolled out, whether someone actually went to the airport to greet them, or how high the diplomatic protocol is. Instead, we should look at whether the Chinese side has fulfilled some of the policy commitments it made in May during the entire summit. I wonder what your view is?

I agree completely with everything Miles Yu said; I think all of those points are correct. Look, there is a red carpet, there are military band performances, and so on, but the major problems in US-China relations are not only unresolved, they won't even be discussed during this visit. Of course, as Churchill said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war. So giving Xi Jinping this face and having them meet—I am not saying this is a bad thing—but please don't think they are engaging in deeper, effective negotiations. They are not. They are going through the motions. Their meeting today lasted only 30 minutes; it was just about walnuts and reading their lines.

So this has greater symbolic significance, though I wouldn't say the substantive outcomes are zero, because before Xi Jinping's arrival, representatives from both China and the US had already reached some agreements, but their significance is not particularly great.

So Mr. Xu, how do you see it? Many people believe that President Trump going personally to Joint Base Andrews yesterday on Wednesday to welcome Xi Jinping and Peng Liyuan gave Xi Jinping plenty of face. But in fact, President Trump is more eager to dive deeply into substantive issues and vie for the best negotiating outcomes with the Chinese side. What is your perspective?

Actually, I also agree with Robert's point. In fact, both sides are just putting on a show. This show has actually been going on since May when Trump and Xi Jinping first met; Xi Jinping already knew how to hit Trump's pain points and make him yield on certain issues. Then, at the Beijing summit, he had already verified his approach. He staged a scene that left Trump happy and feeling very respected, and then fostered the impression of a G2—meaning that there are two superpowers in the world, China and the United States.

Then, when Trump left Beijing, he was able to say some of the things Xi Jinping wanted him to say, such as potentially delaying arms sales regarding the Taiwan issue, and so on. This time the setting is different, but the same trick is played in a new guise; he is actually still following the exact same script, only the home stage has been moved to Washington.

What is different in Washington? In fact, it is even more of a declaration by Xi Jinping to the world that the current leader of China, upon coming to the United States, is treated on an equal footing with the leader of the United States. This message is very important, because it means he has broken through the past so-called "the East is rising and the West is declining" or "the West is decaying and the East is rising"; instead, he is now saying that China and the U.S. can jointly govern the world.

Moreover, no matter what happens in the world—for example, the Taiwan Strait issue or the Iran issue—as long as China and the U.S. negotiate well, as long as the leaders in Beijing and Washington negotiate well, these issues can all be resolved. Therefore, he is creating this kind of atmosphere. As for Chinese politics, it is a kind of grand display, and what it wants is to put on this grand display to perfection; moreover, it is also put on for its domestic audience, especially the audience inside China, saying that today we can already go to the American imperialists, go to Washington, and we can directly face the U.S. president and say what I demand you to do.

So how does Mr. Robert see this? Just now, Mr. Xu Yuran believes that if this is a show, it is not only made for the whole world to see, but also for the domestic audience. He has this domestic need to be welcomed so grandly in the United States.

This is definitely the signal Xi Jinping wants to send, and his most crucial audience is domestic. And I want to tell the Chinese friends watching our program that all these videos you see are not viewed that way by Americans. You see this red carpet, and you might think that Xi Jinping coming to the U.S. also carries very high informational value within the United States, with many people waiting to watch. Almost no one is watching, for two reasons.

First, Americans are not that interested in what leader of any country comes to the United States to say. Second, because of Trump right now, CNN and two other media outlets are not allowed into the White House, and all the other American national media are quite united. They said that if they cannot come to get the news, they won't come either. Therefore, these national TV stations in the U.S. do not broadcast these images from the White House or Andrews Air Force Base, and Americans no longer watch these.

So this is almost entirely for the Chinese side to see. For Xi, the most important audience is probably still inside China. Not only are they the most important, but Americans simply do not watch, because there is no way to watch. The largest U.S. television stations do not broadcast these videos at all.

However, our platform, Voice of America, will still broadcast the whole thing live, because we feel that for U.S.-China relations, this is a very important event, and even for the whole world, U.S.-China relations are an important topic.

So tonight at the state banquet, we will have a lot of footage from the scene. In addition to interpreting some of the details of tonight's state banquet arrangements—including the arrival of guests, which is very important, and which we briefly introduced earlier—I know that Mr. Xu Yuran, you specialize in the tech sector; you used to be a tech legislator, and now you also focus on AI artificial intelligence issues.

This morning during the welcome ceremony, when the two heads of state spoke, both mentioned AI. Of course, the term President Trump is using now is Super Intelligence. How do you view the role this topic plays in this U.S.-China summit?

I think President Trump has a particular habit of liking to rename things. Since taking office, he has already renamed several things, including Ontario Lake and the Gulf of Mexico; they were all renamed. Now he wants to rename this to Super Intelligence. I feel that perhaps his understanding of science is still not that deep, and his understanding of technology is also like this.

I think truly, the issue that the U.S. and China are going to talk about this time—apart from the Taiwan issue being an undercurrent—the most important issue is this AI. Regarding this AI issue, I think since the Biden administration during the APEC in San Francisco, the two sides finally reached a consensus, which is that on the part of nuclear weapons, there must be a hotline between the two sides, and AI cannot be allowed to completely control the launch of nuclear weapons. I think this is the first red line that both sides will establish.

Secondly, many of these American cutting-edge labs—whether it's Anthropic, OpenAI, or chip companies like NVIDIA—have many different views on China's current approach to AI development and its market. So this time, Trump bringing Xi Jinping over and convening all these AI leaders is actually to show that while we have many differences on various aspects between the two sides, is it possible that on this so-called AI issue, we can reach some consensus.

However, I don't think there will be a grand bargain; there definitely won't be any major trade-offs made regarding this AI issue. I think at most, the two sides might establish a so-called working group, and there might be a consensus on that part. But actually, all of these are quite superficial, meaning they are quite formalistic.

Alright, let's see now if our cameras can help switch the screen to the scene of the state banquet for us to take a look. Okay, we are now looking at the scene of the White House state banquet. It's still the red carpet, but President Trump and First Lady Melania are scheduled to arrive at the scene at 6:45 to welcome General Secretary Xi Jinping and his wife, Peng Liyuan.

Actually, tonight's arrangements have many details, including the attending guests, the menu for the state banquet, and the singing performance arrangements that might follow later. These are all a series of links and details of the state banquet arranged by First Lady Melania. Now we see, are some distinguished guests arriving again? We can take a look at the live footage. Perhaps from the camera angle, we can't tell which one it is, but many senior executives of American companies are expected today.

Mr. DeBoer, do you remember? This looks like Michael Dell; we can tell from the back, it seems Michael Dell is with him. So tonight there will be many political figures, including officials, as well as important people from the business community.

In fact, remember that at the summit of heads of state in May, Mr. Xu and Dr. Dai both remember today that the US side brought a large business delegation to Beijing to attend. At that time, it was a state banquet hosted by Xi Jinping for him at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing. So this time, many reception specifications are actually reciprocal, and it is also what Xi Jinping hopes to receive high-level treatment in the United States.

We see the live footage. Initially, we speculated that Xi Jinping would also bring some CEOs of Chinese multinational companies, but now it seems there are none. No, we didn't see them when getting off the plane. In the live footage, we see the tri-service honor guard performing at the state banquet scene. Let's temporarily pause the live footage so the audience can listen to the sound.

According to many American reports, they said that today, among all the other ceremonies, the Chinese media outnumbered the American media by far, which corroborates what we just said—that the Chinese side very much hopes to see such a grand welcoming scene, including the footage of the welcome at Joint Base Andrews yesterday, which was widely circulated on Chinese social media platforms, believing that the US president went to the airport in person to welcome him.

However, if we look back at history, there have also been records in the past of US presidents personally going to the airport to welcome foreign heads of state. This is not unheard of, nor is it unprecedented. During the Cold War, it seems President Eisenhower once went to the airport to welcome Khrushchev. Then, sixty years ago, when the British Prime Minister came, Kennedy went to greet him personally. And President Washington... oh, President Obama also once welcomed Pope Francis at the airport.

This is indeed a massive mobilization on the Chinese side. Right at the hotel where Xi Jinping is staying, the Waldorf Astoria—which is the old Trump Hotel—right opposite his office, there are about ten buses here, all filled with Chinese compatriots waving the five-starred red flag. They probably came from all over the US, but it is very likely that the Chinese embassy and consulates arranged for them to come. Indeed, because these buses have numbers; they didn't come by spontaneous lottery, definitely not.

Voice of America reporters are also at the scene, outside the Waldorf Astoria, the hotel where Xi Jinping is staying. There are not only welcoming people, but also protesters, Falun Gong practitioners, and Tibetan people. There are many Tibetan people over at the US Capitol today.

Regarding the airport greeting mentioned earlier, in fact, earlier today I also interviewed Professor Yu Maochun from the Hudson Institute. He specifically cited historical examples saying that when the US president went to welcome Khrushchev, although it gave him plenty of face, in reality, both sides were still competing and did not stop because of it.

The sounds we are hearing in the background right now are the sounds of protests. Originally, every time the Chinese national leaders come, they ask the US side to properly protect and isolate them, because they do not want Chinese leaders to contact these protesters or hear these voices. But we can hear them very clearly. And from this perspective, it seems there are more Chinese reporters.

This morning, our reporters had a small episode at the White House welcome room. There were many Chinese media personnel, so when they were securing their spots, they had a minor conflict with the American media, and also had a different situation with the White House SWAT police personnel.

So this makes people very hesitant, wondering why they only came this time. It turns out it was short; they said three days, but it was actually one day, about twenty-four hours. Second, the reporters were mainly Chinese reporters. Third, their actual substantive discussion in the Oval Office was only half an hour; you cannot discuss anything, negotiate anything, or decide anything. Both sides were just putting on a show.

Moreover, everyone observed that there was no formal joint press conference by the heads of state after the meeting, nor was there any such arrangement. So now everyone is very curious about what exactly this morning's arrangement was all about. At 11:30 AM, there was a small-scale bilateral meeting between the heads of state in the Oval Office, and then at 12:00 PM, in the White House Cabinet Room—they call it the White House Cabinet Room, on the state floor—there was an expanded bilateral meeting with officials sitting on both sides of a long table talking to each other.

What exactly the two sides discussed is something everyone is very eager to know. Our White House reporter has obtained some news flashes released by Xinhua News Agency, saying that Taiwan was discussed, but the official US readout of the meeting has not been released yet. Our White House reporter Huang Yaoyi is helping us track the latest meeting summary, that is, the readout. Once it is out, we will share it with our listeners, viewers, and guests in a special program.

But there was a small episode that our reporter on the scene noticed. During the welcome ceremony today, President Trump actually invited Xi Jinping to visit his Marine One, the new helipad for Marine One, and even invited him to sit inside. Nearby, the media shouted loudly: "Mr. President, did you talk to Xi Jinping about Taiwan? And will Jimmy Lai be released? What about the issue of the founder of Hong Kong's Apple Daily and the release of political prisoners?" Of course, he did not respond. But this also shows where the media's focus lies.

We are still waiting for the distinguished guests and President Trump. The US President has never been on time; this is not a criticism of Trump, Biden was the same, Obama was too, especially Clinton, who was very famous for never being on time, as everyone knows. So this is also a little anecdote about the state dinner arrangements.

However, Robert Daly and Mr. Xu Yuren, what we want to talk about today are substantive issues. Of course, Voice of America will also help everyone keep track of the state dinner menu tonight. Later, we will present what President Trump is treating Xi Jinping and Peng Liyuan to via a graphic card; this is also something we will discuss in our program.

But the substantive issues are, of course, as rich as the dishes. It is said that this time, like in May, there are three Ts: Trade, Taiwan, and Tehran—all important topics starting with T. This time, AI, or technology, which we just mentioned, has been added. I interviewed Professor Yu Maochun of the Hudson Institute earlier, and he said that none of these four Ts will actually reach any concrete agreement.

It is definitely the first one, the issue of time. And every time there are these summits, they never have any casual chats or discussions; they all have scripts and sentences. Their dialogues are all arranged in advance because, generally speaking, if you are responsible for arranging a summit, you don't want to let any leader think about problems or surprise him, because that might embarrass him, so everything is arranged in advance.

Our viewers must not think that these people are honestly discussing things to solve problems; it is not like that at all. Moreover, these four issues—the Iran issue you mentioned, trade, Taiwan, and Tehran, the Iran issue, plus technology and artificial intelligence—are all so-called complex problems, and they are all difficult problems that are very hard to solve.

In fact, those CEOs who went with Trump in May didn't achieve anything. Originally, there were expectations of placing more orders for Boeing, or even lifting the ban on chips, but Beijing did not purchase any H200 chips. So those CEOs were a bit like they went on a trip, but they had to go because the boss called and said, "Come with me."

This time, of course, they don't have to fly so far, but I don't think there will be any results from this trip either. I think with Trump's personality, he just likes a big spectacle, he just likes to act like a boss, but he doesn't really know what to do, and sometimes he just talks nonsense.

Although President Trump said on this issue, as just mentioned, because the discussion time was relatively short, he had previously mentioned that when Xi Jinping visits this time, any issue can be discussed. And he hopes that there can be some discussion, especially on the Iran issue, which is also what everyone is very concerned about now, because the conflict in the Middle East is relatively tense.

Previously, President Trump, including his Treasury Secretary Bessent, had also imposed some specific sanctions on China, hoping that China could cut off support for Iran, whether in terms of technology, intelligence, or even money, so that he could play a more positive and active role in this Middle East conflict. What do you think of these specific measures?

I think he can say it, but in terms of actual execution and follow-through, that is a huge problem. Moreover, the Chinese side has some countermeasures, such as critical minerals, or rare earths. Today, Xi Jinping is coming over, and he says, 'Let's talk again.' Now that the time for this meeting has arrived, you can clearly see that the control is in Beijing's hands.

Regarding this summit, Trump actually needs it more than Xi Jinping does; that is the most critical point. Before he arrived, most American experts analyzing this summit believed that Xi Jinping held the dominant position—he was completely in the dominant position—so he had no need to agree to your demand that he stop exporting these items to Taiwan. Because Iran uses many Chinese parts to make missiles or drones or whatever, Xi Jinping has no reason to agree. So, it will be brought up, but I don't think there will be any concrete results.

Later, we will ask our two guests about Trump's policy toward China, some of his strategies, and his overall layout. But for now, we see the state banquet arrangements on the screen, and it seems, as Mr. Robert Daly just said, there is a bit of a delay in the timing.

However, regarding who actually holds the dominant position in this US-China summit, or who has the upper hand, the analyses from various sides are actually quite different. Especially now that we know China is facing many internal problems, including economic issues. I would like to hear if the two of you have different views on who has more leverage at the negotiating table.

I think the issue the Chinese side cares about most is the red line of Taiwan. In fact, on all issues, including views on AI, the two sides are completely at odds; they have completely different perspectives. But on the Taiwan issue, this is the only focus for Xi Jinping coming to Washington to meet Trump—to tell you face-to-face in Washington that you cannot cross this red line. This part is very clear, letting Trump know what the most serious consequences will be if he crosses this red line. He has ways to make it difficult for Trump to maneuver on this specific issue.

Do you think Xi Jinping will ask Trump to formally announce that the United States opposes Taiwan independence? I think there are two scenarios. One is to say it in a public setting, for example, if there is a moment facing the cameras, Xi Jinping might say to Trump's face, 'President Trump, I hope you will publicly state that you oppose Taiwan independence.' The second thing is to publicly say, continue to suspend or cancel arms sales to Taiwan.

There are two situations: one is that Xi Jinping says it, and Trump says nothing; that is one way. The second is that he says it, and then Trump makes a response. It is possible the response would be that Xi Jinping will tell him, 'We will meet again, so you had better not cross this red line.'

On the issue of arms sales to Taiwan, the views of various parties are actually quite different. Some believe that the Trump administration's policy toward Taiwan has not changed, and this point, including his cabinet members, has been reiterated many times, saying that it will not change because of the current situation of arms sales; arms sales are still on the table, and the Trump administration's policy toward Taiwan will not change.

Regarding the issue of arms sales to Taiwan, because this was a question loudly asked by the media at the White House welcome ceremony this morning, it shows that this is a topic everyone is very concerned about. On this topic, we interviewed Professor Yu Maochun, Director of the China Center at the Hudson Institute, earlier. Let's listen to how Professor Yu Maochun views the issue of arms sales to Taiwan.

The United States is the world's largest arms exporter, and the country that buys the most weapons in the world is Taiwan; this is a very obvious fact. If you don't understand this fundamental thing, it is difficult to understand the solidity of US-Taiwan relations.

Last December, the United States sold 11 billion dollars worth of very critical, targeted weapons to Taiwan; this was a very large transaction, and there is another 14 billion dollars that hasn't happened yet. So, this requires some specific measures.

First of all, the United States now also needs a kind of strategic balance, a balance in arms supply. Another point is that the US weapons for Taiwan are mainly based on the degree of the CCP's threat to Taiwan. So, since the 1970s, it has been like this: whether the US sells weapons to Taiwan or not is entirely determined by the degree of the CCP's threat to Taiwan; the US has its own policy considerations.

Do you see an increase in the CCP's threat to Taiwan? Of course, there is an increase, but at the same time, Taiwan is also buying a lot of US weapons. So, Taiwan needs to adjust internally because although Taiwan's defense system and the US defense system have a lot of close integration, the degree of this integration is still far from enough. In this case, it needs to be done slowly. If too much is sent over and cannot be consumed, it will instead become a burden.

Of course, this does not mean that the United States lacks the further determination to sell weapons to Taiwan. In fact, the 14 billion dollars has already been approved, largely to give Xi Jinping some face and put some pressure on him. If you continue to increase pressure on Taiwan, we will immediately sell the weapons over; this is also a check and balance on the CCP.

I don't think this necessarily means there is any change in the US political stance; it is mainly a strategic consideration, and this is also a way to exert pressure on the CCP. For Taiwan, in reality, the more pressure exerted on the CCP, the more effective the security guarantee for Taiwan will be.

Mr. Xu, what do you think of Professor Miles Yu's statement? He believes that the policy of the U.S. government has not changed, and its support for Taiwan has not changed; it is merely a tactical adjustment because negotiations are currently underway with the Chinese side. Therefore, this tactical approach can actually exert greater pressure on the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and the guarantees given to Taiwan are in fact more solid. What is your take on this?

This is a double-edged sword, especially depending on a leader's principled handling of policy. For example, regarding arms sales, you can say that I approved them, but delay notifying Congress—meaning the final step is not completed. That indicates the arms sale has still not been finalized.

For Xi Jinping, he naturally feels this is a thorn in his side, and he continuously wants to pressure Trump. Trump might also continue to delay and stall. Such delays will create internal political divisions within Taiwan. Especially for many pro-American factions within Taiwan, they start to say, "Look, Trump might abandon Taiwan. Even after we have paid and still cannot get our weapons, when on earth will we actually receive them?"

Is it after the Trump-Xi meeting, after APEC, after the G20, or will it be postponed indefinitely? You can imagine that in the 2028 presidential election in Taiwan, this will easily be manipulated into the narrative: "Actually, when Taiwan buys weapons from the United States, you simply don't get them." Spreading such skepticism about the U.S. in Taiwan causes serious harm to America's image and to the alliance between the U.S. and Taiwan.

That is why I say this move—Trump treating these arms sales as a negotiation, as a bargaining chip—can backfire if misused. However, if used well, it can keep Xi Jinping constantly on edge, making him feel unsettled. But right now, I feel Trump does not quite know how to calibrate this or how to play this move, because he does not understand these subtle strategies.

However, regarding the aforementioned U.S.-China summit, as soon as news broke that it would begin, America's allies naturally felt a certain level of tension, including the previously mentioned issue of arms sales to Taiwan. Even Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi was very eager to meet with President Trump prior to this U.S.-China summit.

Thus, even before the two leaders formally met, reports constantly circulated that Sanae Takaichi hoped to come to the United States to meet with Trump in person.

Now, let's immediately switch to the live broadcast feed. President Trump and First Lady Melania are dressed and ready, welcoming visiting Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife, Peng Liyuan, outside the White House state dining venue. Let's first catch the live footage so viewers can experience the atmosphere of the White House state dinner held for the Chinese leader. What we are seeing now should be Xi Jinping's motorcar arriving. Xi Jinping is wearing a Zhongshan suit, which is quite distinctive; Madame Peng Liyuan is dressed in a bright red formal gown. First Lady Melania's attire is also quite distinctive—she is not wearing the typical formal evening gown, and I think Melania's choice here is quite good.

Therefore, this U.S.-China summit is even more compelling to watch. Melania was not brought along to the May summit, so today both First Ladies are present. However, looking at Xi Jinping, he appears somewhat less physically robust than before, though his physical condition still seems acceptable. Many have rumored that his hair, previously dyed pitch black, has now turned gray, making him look a bit older; yet losing weight is probably for the better, as he was somewhat overweight in the past.

We now see President Trump and First Lady Melania welcoming visiting President Xi Jinping and Madame Peng Liyuan, who is wearing a bright red gown, into the White House for the state dinner. Tonight's state dinner is being held in the East Room. I wonder if we will get to see footage of the East Room banquet hall; sometimes they allow media inside to film. Of course, a toast and speeches by both sides are scheduled for around 8:00 PM Eastern Time. There should be simultaneous interpretation provided shortly for the two leaders' toast speeches.

Following up on that previous topic, because we are naturally very interested in speculation about the state dinner, which we will introduce later, this other issue is also vital. We just mentioned Taiwan arms sales, as well as whether this U.S.-China summit will cause anxiety for Taiwan or Japan. I would like to touch upon this briefly. In fact, I also interviewed Andrew Harding, a researcher at the Heritage Foundation specializing in national security and Indo-Pacific affairs. He specifically interpreted Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi taking the initiative to meet with President Trump on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly prior to the U.S.-China summit. In fact, this is also a strategy by the U.S. side, hoping to soothe allies' anxieties, which is crucial.

Therefore, the Trump administration's deployment may be relatively comprehensive: engaging with China on the one hand, while also hoping to provide dual assurances to allies like Japan and Taiwan. Let's listen to the analysis by Heritage Foundation researcher Andrew Harding.

Reassuring allies is extremely important. The entire world is watching this summit. The United States and China are the two most influential countries in the world, so all nations care about the outcome of the summit and wish to understand how future U.S.-China relations will unfold.

I am pleased to see that the President has prioritized his meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi. As you mentioned, he even made a special phone call to her while en route from Beijing back to the United States. This once again demonstrates that the President attaches great importance to the relationship between the United States and Japan, as well as the U.S.-Japan alliance.

As for what this means for Taiwan, I believe it should also indicate that the United States is well aware that Taiwan has many important interests at stake in this summit. The Trump administration team has always maintained a good relationship with Taiwan. Of course, the issue of arms sales is also an important topic. I think we may not get an immediate answer this week, and that is intentional, as the President does not want this issue to affect the summit.

But I remain confident that the President and other administration officials recognize that U.S.-Taiwan relations are of vital importance to the national security and economic interests of the United States. So, while I understand that all parties may have some concerns about this summit, I believe the President's team is sending a message to allies and partners around the world: American strength remains robust, and the President holds the cards. He will ensure that allies and partners are kept informed in a timely manner, let them know what to expect, and will not make decisions that harm the interests of allies, let alone take any actions that might embolden the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and jeopardize the free world.

I heard Andrew Harding from the Heritage Foundation say that Trump is actually very clear that the relationship between the U.S. and Taiwan is at the core of U.S. interests, and it is impossible for him to sacrifice the interests of allies to cater to the CCP; that is just his strategy. Moreover, he met with Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi first to ensure that the emotions of allies were soothed, so that Japan would not be nervous, and Taiwan's interests would also be safeguarded.

He is being a bit too optimistic. Soothing allies is not President Trump's forte; he has consistently been increasing tariffs in certain areas, namely import tariffs. In other words, if Japan or North Korea poses a danger to U.S. security, he acts accordingly. After all, this is the Heritage Foundation, which has always been a cheerleader for Trump. We will certainly provide different opinions on our platform because, regarding the U.S.-China summit, we want to hear the views of different think tanks. We have interviewed many people from different think tanks and across the spectrum to let them analyze this U.S.-China summit.

However, in reality, we know that many U.S. allies and traditional partners feel that they have been attacked by Trump, especially in terms of trade. Japan is, of course, one of the most important U.S. allies. Although Trump made a phone call to the Japanese Prime Minister at that time, as far as I know, when discussing with some Japanese diplomats or scholars, they said that Japan is still very nervous inside, and the so-called soothing is far from enough.

And they know that when Trump meets with Xi Jinping, because he wants to please him, sometimes Trump will speak without thinking. That is to say, on the plane, he said that Taiwan arms sales could be used as a bargaining chip, which violates a very important promise the United States has historically made to Taiwan, right? So, the Six Assurances were a commitment from the Reagan era, and he violated them. And this time, Xi Jinping...

However, I think President Trump has a characteristic: he is not really bound by these traditional diplomatic rules. As just mentioned, the Six Assurances were from the Reagan era, and he actually remembered saying personally that these were already outdated Six Assurances. In fact, looking back at his first term, he also directly said, why should the One-China policy be bound by the One-China policy? He called Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen directly at that time.

So he is someone who is not very bound by traditions and past policies and can clearly recognize the biggest threat to the United States at present. He believes the CCP is the number one threat, so there is a series of actions, including his various Secretaries of State, Treasury Secretary Bessent, etc., using sanctions and diplomatic pressure, and using his cabinet members to carry out the goals he hopes to achieve.

But I would like to ask Mr. Xu Yuren, the United States, especially President Trump, is good at trading and reaching agreements. How can he reach agreements without losing the strategic advantages held by the United States? I would like to ask you, if you could give some advice to the Trump administration, what do you think he should do in the summit?

I want to understand current U.S. foreign policy, first I must understand the personality and character of Trump, because he is not a traditional politician. Just as you mentioned, he is a transactional person; let's think of him as a businessman. In all international politics, he is perhaps thinking in the way of a so-called real estate developer.

This also forces all allies currently cooperating with the United States to look at things in terms of interest conversion and interest exchange. So this does not mean that he will trade Taiwan away, or that he will hand over his allies, but rather in his mind, in his eyes, how much is this entity worth, What's your value, What's in it for me? That is how he sees it.

For example, when he looks at Taiwan, he is looking at chips and arms sales. China is, of course, a larger entity; it has various agricultural products, as well as the complex relationship between the U.S. and China, etc. He can look at them separately like this.

We can continue this conversation with different perspectives on this topic later. However, we can already see on our screen that President Trump is about to deliver a speech, so I would like to ask our director to switch us to the live feed from the White House state banquet. We will switch back to the state banquet live feed later to listen to the speeches by President Trump and Xi Jinping at the banquet.

However, regarding the transactional nature mentioned just now by Mr. Xu Yuren, everyone probably understands a part of it. But many people also believe that President Trump is still a man of faith and principles, noting that in many occasions prior to the US-China summit and repeatedly in recent times, he has mentioned that communism is the greatest threat. He deeply understands the suffering, poverty, and even oppression that communism brings to humanity.

During the last summit in May, President Trump raised human rights issues directly with Xi Jinping, demanding the release of Pastor Kim Ming-il and Jimmy Lai, the Hong Kong media entrepreneur. In fact, less than two months after that May summit, on July 4, the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States—Independence Day—Pastor Kim Ming-il was released.

He has also made many efforts to prompt China to release illegally detained US citizens. He has even expended a great deal of effort. What do you think? Some people believe that President Trump is right, that he has a negotiating advantage at the negotiating table, but he also holds firm to his beliefs and values. Mr. Dai Guo, as you said, we don't really know what is going on in his mind.

Of course, whenever they release anyone, we should celebrate; this is very good news. But is this because the president is very eager to understand the competition between China and the United States, especially the competition in values? Does he have a systematic strategy? I really don't know. Many people say that although the whole world thinks Trump focuses on negotiation, many defend him by saying he has a deep strategy that others cannot see. Of course I have my subjective view, but what is truly in his mind is hard for me to say, and opinions from various sides differ.

However, on human rights issues, many topics this time—including the trade, tariffs, and even technology aspects and tech competition mentioned earlier—may not necessarily lead to concrete, achievable, and immediate commitments or consensus. But many believe that less than two months after the May summit, the release of Pastor Kim Ming-il right away is considered a major breakthrough on human rights. Mr. Xu Yuren, what do you think?

In fact, on certain issues, Trump takes a rather firm stance. This is related to his personality; he is a winner. Look at the course of his life—he can fall to the bottom and climb back up, go bankrupt and make a comeback, and now even become US president, winning two terms. So his winner's personality, the personality of someone who must be a winner, is extremely strong.

I am Taiwanese, and I would think that during Trump's tenure, he will definitely not allow Xi Jinping to launch—and this is a commitment he has also made—an attack against Taiwan, or even a military invasion of Taiwan. Xi is also very well aware that during Trump's tenure, he must get along well with the United States. Of course there is competition in many areas, but on the big picture, he must maintain strategic stability between the two sides.

And under that strategic stability, we can compete in many categories, but I at least have to put up an appearance: I give you face, and you give me face. At this stage, everyone lives in peace. Therefore, giving each other face is not a huge breakthrough. You say this is a breakthrough; I don't think it is.

Why? You say Trump demanded the release of a certain dissenting pastor, and you see concrete results on human rights issues—never before has it happened so fast, and without seeing specific transactional items, Pastor Kim Ming-il was released. He did not make any concessions in exchange. Past US presidents have also done this, not just Trump.

If it was an exchange, what the US gave in return, we have no idea. And the biggest problem is that in these matters, the 100% control over whether to release or not release these prisoners is entirely in Xi Jinping's hands. When to give, or whether to give at all, is his choice. So this so-called transaction is controlled by the Chinese side. It seems to me that Trump actually has no leverage over Xi.

Yes, that really depends on whether Xi is willing to cooperate. I think under the circumstances of maintaining strategic stability between the two countries, Xi will release some benefits to Washington. Because doing so costs Xi nothing, it is a very easy thing to do.

However, some experts also believe that in fact, as early as Trump's first term, he had a very clear understanding of the threat from China. At that time, from the initial engagement policy to later adopting a deterrence policy to deal with the China issue, he had already gained a clear understanding of the essence of the CCP and produced a qualitative change in his policy toward China.

I believe the person who most likely and most clearly understands President Trump's thinking is Professor Miles Yu, who served by his side and held an important position in the State Department during his first term. This is why, before this summit, I specifically conducted some interviews with him to have him analyze how he views Trump's China policy now that he has entered his second term, and how he compares the China strategy between President Trump's first and second terms after two summits and two meetings with Xi Jinping, and what the differences are. Let us listen to the analysis of Professor Miles Yu, Director of the China Center at the Hudson Institute.

I think there is no T that can achieve the final outcome. In the end, it might form a slightly extended, another fifth T, which is Truth, meaning a truce.

Because the key issues involve the fundamental national policies and strategies of the two countries. You just mentioned the Taiwan issue; the CCP will absolutely not yield, and the United States will not yield either. The trade issue is even less so, and other issues are the same.

Of course, since May, artificial intelligence—what Mr. Trump now calls Super Intelligence—has also become an important topic. This is mainly about the US and China needing to exercise control. Why? Because Super Intelligence, or AI, is very powerful. Its power can benefit humanity, but it can also pose a great threat of destruction to humanity.

In this case, control by both the US and China is also very important. In this regard, the US is not begging the CCP. Why? The US is innovative; the US is leading in artificial intelligence; the CCP is the number one thief of American artificial intelligence products. So, in terms of control, the US and the CCP have reached a kind of gentleman's agreement.

That agreement is likely a gentleman's agreement on paper. But everyone knows that in cyberspace, there has actually never been a day of truce for artificial intelligence. Regardless of any agreement or not, because the CCP... that is, if the CCP stops stealing advanced American technology, then the CCP would not be the CCP.

Every time I interview Professor Miles Yu, I feel that in his answers, he is very sober and very clearly recognizes the essence of the CCP. After all, he came out of this system and understands the essence of the CCP very well, and what kind of strategy should be used when dealing with it. Of course, later we will play another segment where he compares the specific practices of President Trump's China strategy. However, in the segment just now, I think there is a key point we can discuss in depth: Truth, the extension of the trade truce. This is, of course, a goal that the Chinese side very much hoped to achieve this time. And in fact, not long after President Trump got off the plane at Joint Base Andrews, Treasury Secretary Bessent announced that the trade truce between the United States and China could be extended for two months. I don't know, Mr. Robert Daly, perhaps Mr. Yuan Sen, let's talk about this trade truce issue now. This is equivalent to saying that he considers this the fifth T in addition to the four Ts, because it is Truth, a trade truce, but it is also an important topic of this US-China summit.

Before Xi Jinping came, many Americans guessed that they might extend this trade truce for half a year, 6 months. They knew the Chinese side's request was until Trump stepped down, but precisely because Trump believes the Chinese side has not fulfilled its promises, especially on the issue of rare earth exports, China is particularly slow, so they don't even want to give the Chinese side 6 months of truce time, giving him two months, just to exert pressure. I think they did this right, and they did it beautifully.

In addition, we don't know what the Chinese side said, but we know that the Chinese side brought up a so-called large-scale, comprehensive agreement, there is such a statement. We don't know its content, but the US Treasury Secretary has already said that the Chinese side has such a proposal, so within these two months, they may consider the Chinese side's proposal, but we don't know what its content is. However, I think Trump is still not at ease with China regarding the supply of rare earths.

Yes, strict surveillance, whether the Chinese side has actually given him these commitments, including rare earths, a two-month opportunity.

Yes. So, Mr. Xu, I have already said just now that the Trump administration has no leverage over the CCP, but in fact, we see the actual operations, including Bessent, he is actually a very... whether it is on the issue of sanctioning China or Iran, every time he draws his sword, it is actually quite precise. Like this so-called two-month extension of the trade truce just now, Mr. Daly analyzed it a little bit just now, you can give him two months, give him half a year, give him up to a year, he is actually constantly using these small regulations to contain what the CCP wants. How do you view the strategy laid out by the Trump administration's team, including Bessent?

Of course, I think Treasury Secretary Bessent is a veteran, and he has stood on the front line of these US-China trade negotiations. In fact, this has also brought some stability to the American business community, and Wall Street also feels that for the Trump administration team, at least in the area of trade negotiations, there is an experienced veteran negotiating. But a big question is, does China have a retaliation mechanism? I think it does, especially every time one side exerts pressure, the other side retaliates.

In the past, China would typically respond to tariff increases by asking for mercy and negotiating. But this time, I feel it is already different, especially regarding rare earths. In fact, China completely knows how to choke you, and then when you are about to reach your limit, it eases up a bit before choking you again; and when you can no longer take it, it eases up once more.

Rare earths are the most critical of all critical components. Without rare earths, you cannot make bullets, nor can you make missiles. Semiconductors go without saying, and you cannot even make many basic magnets. So the point is, the US can make a move, but I can also make a move; China can also make a move, and I can retaliate. This part is tit-for-tat—I make a move and you make a move.

However, the ultimate question remains: Does Trump have a way to propose a comprehensive approach that can reach an agreement with China? Actually, this is a very important topic that both sides have been discussing since the summit meeting last May, and it is also what I want to ask our two guests about today in this special program on the US-China summit, which is the so-called strategic stability. Can the US and China actually—to put it bluntly—manage crises, such as how to prevent a conflict from breaking out over Taiwan? They must have a mechanism, though not necessarily called a mechanism, to maintain this kind of strategic stability between the US and China.

Mr. Decker, do you think the US and China really have a way to achieve this so-called strategic stability? Substantive strategic stability, that is the term.

Actually, I feel that these formulations are part of China's diplomatic tactics, not America's. All of America's diplomacy, its bilateral relations with any country, we never give them a label. US-China relations are just US-China relations, US-Japan relations are just US-Japan relations; there is no modifying phrase. Having a modifying phrase is a Chinese model. Why does China propose such a formulation? It is to control and limit all of Trump's diplomatic space.

China's definition and understanding of stability are different from those of the United States. So now, if we say this is substantive strategic stability, any US action that China dislikes can be labeled as a threat to our stability, or as not substantive, or as destructive, meaning you have broken your promise. Therefore, I do not know how this formulation can possibly help us manage US-China relations properly.

This time when Xi Jinping came, he also said that we want peaceful coexistence, right? He said peaceful coexistence. Of course, this is necessary; why shouldn't we coexist? We are bound to do so. But I am not very reassured by the US adopting a political formulation originating from China.

In fact, Mr. Decker just mentioned something very important, which is the so-called strategic stability. The US and China have somewhat different definitions of strategic stability. Mr. Xu Yu can further help us interpret this: How do you think Washington and Beijing differ in their interpretations and definitions of this so-called strategic stability?

Right. To put strategic stability in plain terms, stability means maintaining the status quo. But this status quo is interpreted differently by the Chinese and US sides, almost resembling各自表述 (each side expressing its own interpretation). As long as we have a term that we both agree on, and at this point in time, everyone maintains a superficial stability, then I can mutually shape your behavior. Under this circumstance, it achieves a framework.

The problem, however, is that I have not explicitly stated what my definition of stability is. In other words, I can return to Beijing and continue to engage in gray-zone activities; regarding Taiwan, I can still continue to harass allies or whatever in various ways. But as long as we have already reached this strategic stability, this is what I consider to be the strategic stability that maintains stability within China.

Consequently, it will turn into Trump walking into Xi's trap. This trap is the way things stay the way they are. For both sides, they are actually sending signals like this: neither of us should change. But this non-change is judged by my standard and done in my way, not according to a shared standard.

Well, thank you to our on-site guests for sharing their different views. However, let us also listen to some different perspectives on how this US-China summit should manage crises and prevent miscalculations. We also interviewed Andrew Harding, a research fellow on national security and Indo-Pacific affairs at the Heritage Foundation, for his analysis. Let us listen to different viewpoints.

Alright, the control room will play this pre-recorded interview with the Heritage Foundation researcher shortly. But just now we were talking about strategic stability: What are the issues that the US and China are currently most concerned might lead to the biggest miscalculation or the biggest divergence at this summit? Regarding these topics we laid out—pardon me, the control room says they found the interview from earlier, so let's listen to the different viewpoints first before we continue our discussion, okay? Let's listen to what Heritage Foundation researcher Andrew Harding has to say.

Both sides may establish a mechanism that can function like a crisis management system when national security issues arise or when a problem begins to emerge. In other words, once a problem occurs, there is a communication channel between the two heads of state or leaders of both sides to exchange information in a timely manner, ensuring that each side understands that the other is working to resolve the issue. More importantly, it is to avoid misjudgment.

So ultimately, on the issue of artificial intelligence, both sides hope to establish a mechanism that can prevent the situation from escalating, and they also hope to form some kind of consensus, because establishing such communication and understanding is in the common interest of both sides. Looking more broadly, I think the most important thing is to find areas where both sides can reach a consensus. We might see some agreements on tariff reductions, but they probably won't involve strategic goods, but rather focus on some non-strategic goods, with a scale that could reach billions of dollars.

Beyond that, we shouldn't expect too many major announcements here, because both leaders want to maintain the basic stability of bilateral relations. But at the same time, both sides remain competitors; the United States and China are still in continuous competition, so the room for both sides to truly maneuver and negotiate is limited. I think we might see some progress on artificial intelligence, trade, or tariffs, but it is unlikely that there will be a major breakthrough sufficient to redefine U.S.-China relations.

Of course, we and the Chinese side, as well as the U.S. side, they insist that these exchanges are very necessary, and there are so-called red lines in various aspects. You can make a phone call, and if there is any crisis, you can contact them immediately; these are all necessary. I agree, but does this proposal, this so-called framework, have any concrete use? That is the question I am asking.

Just like what the Chinese side proposed, probably around 2013 or 2014, a new type of major power relations. At that time, it was during President Obama's term. President Obama, the U.S. saw through it and knew it was a trap. You say it's a trap, and they denied that proposal, but they still pursued a relatively stable relationship.

But we shouldn't support saying that we want a stable relationship. When the leaders of the two countries meet, they should discuss which factors and which issues are endangering our stability, why we don't trust each other, and why we need stability, because we are getting closer and closer to conflict, right? We say we want to stabilize our relationship, but later we go back to Washington, they go back to Beijing, and we still have to develop some new types of weapons, and we still have to win the so-called race in artificial intelligence, etc.

So it's dishonest, it's not real. We say it this way to buy time for this year, so that I can prepare my strategy and my weapons. I think this is also a problem of substantive strategic stability, deceiving oneself and others.

However, regarding strategic stability, I believe the U.S. side also sees the CCP very clearly, because after all, the CCP is completely different from the United States in its system, especially given the records of so many times in the past, where after many agreements were signed, it might not have been able to fulfill its commitments. So under these circumstances, there is an essential difficulty in truly achieving strategic stability with the CCP.

I think Trump's team should be able to... my view is that, in fact, apart from the President himself, those around him, such as Rubio, have a clear head, and he has been in the U.S. Senate for a long time, and his hawkish attitude toward China is also very clear.

The problem now is that under this situation where both sides are somewhat competing while talking, taking a truce, and engaging in close-quarters combat, neither side knows what the other is thinking. So when you are at a negotiating table, not to mention showing your cards, even if you might be able to play a hand well, the other side doesn't believe it, so the foundation of trust is quite low.

It is under these circumstances that I think U.S.-China relations will maintain a superficial stability, but the fluctuations beneath it will be significant. And if there is a small accident, it could potentially spiral out of control. These are what I think the secretary-level, that is, the further levels, must talk about.

Your leaders on both sides can put on a show, sit down to eat, drink, raise glasses, and take pictures, but if these working levels cannot negotiate the specific items that need to be discussed, I think if the United States is about to enter the 2028 election, it is very possible that it will reverse very quickly and turn into intense competition again.

Of course, we can join the topic of strategic stability later. We have another guest invited today, Mr. Seki Hei, who is connecting with us from Taiwan, and we can add different perspectives and exchange different opinions together.

However, our special program today is, of course, aimed at the White House state dinner tonight. Yes, what are they eating? What are they eating? Let's chat about some light topics. Besides the issues, let's pay attention to the dishes at the state dinner.

So, in fact, our White House reporter, the Voice of America's White House reporter, has collected some important information specifically about the menu for tonight's state dinner. We have also made a graphic, and we ask the director to help us put up the state dinner menu for tonight.

Of course, according to tradition, the state banquet hosted by the White House to entertain foreign heads of state is mainly based on American ingredients, which makes them relatively fresh. But this time, some Chinese elements were also integrated, skillfully combining the dietary traditions of both the US and China. Moreover, the wine for this banquet was very special, using a sparkling wine called Blanc de Noirs from Schramsberg, California.

It is said that back in 1972, when Nixon visited China and held a historic meeting with Premier Zhou Enlai in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, wasn't there a toast at that time? This is called the toast of the kiss of peace. That same wine appeared on today's state banquet menu as well.

So what is the first course? Let's take a look. The first course is pumpkin soup with wild mushrooms and crispy Italian cured bacon. Does that sound delicious?

The second course is... in my experience, because the Trump White House previously said their goal was to properly host Xi Jinping, their menu combined both Chinese and Western elements. In my experience, if Chinese chefs make Chinese-Western fusion dishes, they tend to be quite successful; but when American chefs attempt so-called Chinese-Western fusion, it is not necessarily all that successful. I don't know whether General Secretary Xi Jinping and Madame Peng Liyuan have started eating at the White House yet, but we will have to wait for them to toast each other.

Then there is the dessert, which is called vanilla cream dessert and White House honey ice cream. Because we know the White House now keeps its own beehives, they used honey produced by the bees inside the White House to make this honey ice cream, served with the vanilla cream dessert and paired with sour cherry jam.

Actually, I feel that this White House state banquet is not as high-end as outsiders might imagine. Why do I say that? If Chinese viewers see this menu, there are only three courses—the first course, the second course—and the portions are particularly small, making it seem not very lavish. If you had a state visit in China, there would probably be about forty different dishes.

Yes, a full Manchu-Han banquet, a full Manchu-Han banquet. Actually, seeing this, I am already quite relieved, because we know Trump likes to eat McDonald's. I think it's fine, at least it's not McDonald's; instead, he is hosting President Xi Jinping to a very formal dinner. And I know the White House has its own chef, so the ingredients should be considered fresh, because at least it lets Xi Jinping feel America's welcome. That way, I think at least they can enjoy eating, while discussing other matters is a separate issue.

Last night, I had dinner with a neighbor of Trump's in Florida who frequently visits Trump's place. When Trump plays the host, he is—and many Americans don't know this—especially generous and considerate. He will stand up and ask everyone: How is your steak done? Oh, it looks a bit burnt over here, let me get you a new one. He seems very kind, and I was shocked that Trump is really such a person. He is very dedicated to the matter of dining, so I estimate that in this regard, tonight's dinner will be very successful.

Yes, he is quite considerate. As far as I know, some of my friends have been to Mar-a-Lago, and when he comes out to host, he truly fulfills the duties of a host to the utmost. Speaking of Mar-a-Lago, and given that we are discussing what Trump and Xi Jinping are eating, it reminds me of an episode from a past US-China summit. If the two of you remember, please comment on it so we can transition to our next topic on Iran.

This should have happened in 2017, when Xi Jinping went to Mar-a-Lago to visit the United States. But that time he didn't enter the White House; he went to Mar-a-Lago, as Trump invited him to Florida. The two of them were also having dinner and eating dessert. Right around when we were just talking about dessert, President Trump dropped a bombshell on General Secretary Xi Jinping. I wonder if everyone remembers: right to his face, he mentioned that he had just dropped over 50 Tomahawk missiles on Syria, remember?

Mr. DeBor remembers it very clearly. So he is very good at emphasizing his strength while eating a meal with you: I dropped Tomahawk missiles on Syria, and he said it right to his face while eating dessert. I wonder if today at the state banquet site, he will drop some more bombshells on Xi Jinping to show his stance on Iran—didn't he say just a couple of days ago that he would completely destroy Iran?

Yes. How do you view this episode? I estimate he won't, not this time. I think what the Chinese side worries about most is that they know the US side, especially Trump, can be very polite during meetings, praising Xi Jinping by saying you are the smartest, greatest, my favorite friend, etc. A week or two later, new export controls are rolled out, as if they have nothing to do with their so-called friendly relationship. So the Chinese side knows that after the meeting, upon returning to China, they still have to wait a few weeks to see what new actions the US will take.

Right. Mr. Xu Yiren, do you think this US-China summit will affect the situation in the Middle East? Just like you mentioned just now, saying I attacked Syria right in front of Xi Jinping, might he say something in front of Xi Jinping about what he might do to Iran, which has a relatively friendly relationship with you?

I think it's very difficult, because last time, when Trump said I lost 50 Tomahawk missiles, the geopolitical environment at that time was completely different from the current situation in Iran and the Strait of Hormuz. Moreover, Trump was a novice back then, and the entire situation was completely different from the current state where the U.S. is bogged down and unable to extricate itself. If he wants to make such a statement on that occasion, he must be absolutely certain. But what does he hope China will do next? If he cannot demand that Xi Jinping cooperate with him, and he says this, it becomes empty talk, and he would lose credibility with all his supporters, and even with many hawks in the Republican Party—many senators and representatives who want to withdraw quickly, disengage from the Iranian battlefield, and are facing elections—they are all very worried, aren't they?

Mr. DeBo, do you think that this time President Trump will mention to Xi Jinping face-to-face the issue of sanctions against Iran or Russia, hoping to cut off China's covert support in this area, and achieve something more concrete regarding the Iran issue or the Russia-Ukraine war?

I estimate he will definitely bring up the Iran issue, and he will also ask Xi Jinping to exert pressure on them to reach a peace agreement; he will say it like that. But Xi Jinping will not give him a straightforward answer. And I estimate Trump won't press the issue either, because he doesn't hold any hope that Xi Jinping will help him achieve any breakthrough regarding Iran.

Then how do you view the pressure exerted on China in terms of the economy, including secondary sanctions? Will he say on this issue that he will carry out these sanctions? He said he does not rule out sanctioning Chinese banks.

But I estimate he wouldn't dare, and I agree. Because actually, Rubio has said it, and Bessent has said it, but it's more like a threat, and in reality, I haven't seen the follow-through. In other words, Trump currently cannot really make Xi agree to do anything, and that is a big problem. That is to say, if I cannot demand that you achieve the goal I want to achieve, then it becomes that I can say it, but I will treat it as if I have listened, but there will be no results. I think that is the situation.

But saying it is still very important, especially saying it in front of the cameras; this is very important. Because all political figures need to make a statement. This statement is to speak to his constituents, to his supporters. Xi is doing the same thing, and Trump is doing the same thing. Actually, speaking of this, we are interpreting that the U.S.-China summit has its own internal audiences, including Xi Jinping, who also needs to account to his domestic audience; but the U.S. side also hopes to use this U.S.-China summit to achieve some items on the checklist that it needs to reach at its own political level. I hope that after the White House minutes are released later, we can be more certain about what issues the two sides discussed today at noon in the Cabinet Room at the White House, and what concrete results were achieved.

Okay, we have now connected with our guest in Taiwan, Mr. Seki Hei, the CEO of the Asia-Pacific Strategic Think Tank. We welcome our other guest from Taiwan to the Voice of America's U.S.-China Summit special program. Mr. Wu Shikun, you are very welcome.

Hello host, hello everyone.

Okay, I don't know if you heard our discussion with the two guests on site before you came online. Of course, joining us from Taiwan, you can add some exchange of different viewpoints. How do you see this U.S.-China summit? President Trump, as we just discussed with the guests on site, gave Xi Jinping plenty of face, but in terms of actual issues, he also hopes to gain substance. How do you observe this U.S.-China summit? On which issues do you think a consensus will be reached, and which ones might lead to misjudgment and disagreement, or result in nothing? Mr. Seki Hei.

I think the current leaders of China and the U.S. might agree to many things on the surface, but whether they do it afterwards is another matter. Both sides' words and actions are not very consistent. We saw the U.S.-China trade war; during the first Trump administration, they actually reached negotiations many times and agreed many times on what both sides would do, but they did not fulfill those commitments afterwards.

So I think what was achieved this time doesn't really have much substance. But I don't think this is too important. What is very important is that the most important bilateral relationship that the whole world is concerned about—the relationship between the United States and China—has now received a very significant easing, meaning both sides have worked very hard not to let the conflict escalate further, and to ease the conflict, but they have not solved the contradictions, and both sides have given each other plenty of face. I think this point is actually very, very important.

Okay, thank you very much, Mr. Seki Hei. We can now see the scene of the White House state dinner on the screen, and President Trump is delivering his remarks. Let's listen to the audio from the scene.

It is a great honor, thank you all. President Xi, Madame Peng, members of the Chinese delegation, Melania and I are delighted to welcome you to the White House once again. You are truly remarkable people. When I visited Beijing earlier this year, I was deeply impressed by the hospitality of the Chinese people. Tonight, as you return to Washington for the first time in a decade, we hope to extend the same courtesy to you.

Long ago, European explorers first discovered the American continent while searching for new trade routes to the East, to China. This quest shaped the modern world and this beautiful country, and ultimately gave rise to the enduring friendship between the peoples of the United States and China. This is the friendship we celebrate tonight. East and West have since met in America.

158 years ago, the first official Chinese diplomatic mission visited the United States. In Boston, they met with American thinkers like Emerson and Thoreau; in New York, they dined with governors, mayors, and titans of Wall Street; and in Washington, they came to the White House to attend the first-ever state dinner between China and the United States. Tonight, we revisit the spirit of that first encounter on American soil. Today's top leaders from the business, cultural, and political spheres are gathered here.

On one hand, China carries thousands of years of history and tradition, from Sun Tzu to Sun Yat-sen; while Americans have inherited the traditions of faith from Jerusalem and Rome, the democracy of ancient Athens, the military prowess of Sparta, and the freedom declared in Philadelphia 250 years ago. As leaders of our two nations, President Xi and I both understand that while we represent different systems, the bonds between our peoples remain strong. Our relationship is better than it has ever been.

Ever since the first merchant ships departed from New York Harbor and arrived at the banks of the Pearl River, the peoples of the United States and China have been trading goods and exchanging knowledge, customs, and ideas. This is the foundation of our commercial ties and mutual respect. We should work together to continue cultivating this relationship to bring prosperity and security to future generations.

I would like to go off-script for a moment, I must go off-script. PRESIDENTS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET THIS BUILT FOR 150 YEARS AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT TONIGHT IF WE HAD IT WE WOULD HAVE HAD WAY MORE THAN 1000 PEOPLE WITH STANDING ROOM ONLY AND THIS ROOM HAS ABOUT 145 THAT'S ABOUT IT SO THEY'VE BEEN LOOKING FOR THIS FOR OVER 150 YEARS ALL PRESIDENTS AND THEY WILL SHORTLY HAVE IT SO IN HONOR OF YOU YOU'LL BE THE FIRST PEOPLE TO STEP FOOT ON THAT.

President Xi, Madame Peng, behind us is a curtain, and behind that curtain is the entrance to our brand-new banquet hall. It can be said that for the past 150 years, many presidents have hoped to build this banquet hall, but none succeeded. Once completed, this banquet hall will be able to accommodate over 1,000 guests. It is a pity that our current meeting room can only hold 140 people, but once finished, that banquet hall will be able to hold many, many more. So, once we finish our meal and the performance concludes, I would like to invite President Xi and Madame Peng to walk behind our curtain to see the site we have cleared, to see the splendor within, in the spirit of this friendship.

I am honored to present a gift to President Xi. This gift comes from an outstanding American artist, arguably one of the best artists today, and it was designed with the personal participation of Melania and myself. The bald eagle, also known as the American eagle, is the national symbol of the United States, embodying the spirit of American freedom. We hope it will be placed in a place of honor in Beijing.

President Xi, Madame Peng, Melania and I thank you both for visiting the United States on the occasion of our nation's 250th anniversary. I now propose a toast to President Xi and Madame Peng, and to the deep friendship between China and the United States that spans thousands of miles and hundreds of years. May our two peoples have a better, more harmonious, and peaceful future. Let us toast to you.

Thank you. And now I'd like to ask President Xi to come up and say a few words. Thank you all very much. Thank you.

Now, I would like to invite President Xi to come up and deliver his remarks.

Thank you, everyone. Respected President Trump and Mrs. Melania Trump, ladies and gentlemen, friends, thank you President Trump and Mrs. Trump for the warm reception and thoughtful arrangements extended to me and my wife. Mr. President and Mrs. Trump have made many special arrangements for this visit, showing meticulous care and attention everywhere, making us feel right at home. Here, I would like to extend my sincere greetings to all people from all walks of life in the United States who care about and support the development of China-U.S. relations.

At this very moment, the Chinese people are joyfully celebrating the Mid-Autumn Festival. In Chinese tradition, the Mid-Autumn Festival is a joyous festival of reunion. Here, I wish everyone a happy Mid-Autumn Festival and family happiness.

Honorable President Donald J. Trump and Mrs. Melania Trump. Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends. Thank you Mr. President and Mrs. Trump for extending to my wife and me your gracious hospitality and thoughtful arrangements. You and Mrs. Trump have made many special arrangements. I would also like to extend my sincere greetings to Americans from all sectors of society who care about China-U.S. relations and support the further growth of our bilateral ties. As I speak, my compatriots in China are celebrating the Mid-Autumn Festival, a cherished occasion for a family reunion in Chinese tradition. I wish you all a very happy Mid-Autumn Festival and my best wishes to you and your families.At that time, President Trump warmly invited me to visit the United States, and now I have arrived as promised. In less than half a year, the heads of state of China and the United States have realized mutual visits, creating history in bilateral exchanges. Today, I had a candid and in-depth exchange with President Trump, reached many new consensuses, enriched the connotation of the constructive and strategic stable relations between China and the United States, and provided new strategic guidance for China-U.S. relations.In May this year, President Trump paid a successful visit to China at my invitation. We agreed to build a constructive China-U.S. relationship of strategic stability. During the visit, President Trump warmly invited me to visit the United States, and I have come as promised. In less than half a year, the Chinese and American presidents have exchanged state visits, making history in our bilateral engagement. Today, President Trump and I had sincere and in-depth exchanges and reached common understanding on many issues. This has added new substance to the constructive China-U.S. relationship of Strategic Stability, and provided new strategic guidance for China-U.S. relations.

Not long ago, the United States grandly celebrated the 250th anniversary of its independence, and on behalf of the Chinese government and the Chinese people, I extended my congratulations. The history of more than 200 years has witnessed the friendly exchanges between the peoples of China and the United States. Over 200 years ago, soon after its independence, the United States turned its eyes to China. Our two countries started trading with each other, exchanging goods to meet each other's needs and draw on our complementary strengths. In fact, President George Washington had personally acquired a large collection of Chinese porcelain.

Over 80 years ago, the Chinese and American people stood shoulder to shoulder in a fight against Japanese militarist aggressors. Together we opened the famous Hump air route over the Himalayas during the war of resistance.

Older generations of politicians, such as President Richard Nixon, used the political wisdom of a small ball moving a big ball to start the great process of normalizing China-U.S. relations. The redwood trees that President Nixon presented as a special state gift back then were planted in Zhejiang province, where I used to work.

This story has touched many Chinese people and is an example of friendly exchanges between the peoples of China and the United States. Over 20 years ago, an American named Ronald Sarkovsky gave financial support to Yin Yujin, a Chinese desert control worker, for her tree-planting effort. Just recently, Ronald, now an elderly man, returned to China. He saw with his own eyes that the desert back then had turned into a lush forest. This story touches the hearts of many Chinese people and stands as a shining example of the friendly exchanges between our two peoples.

Exchanges have helped promote heart-to-heart communication between our people and cemented public support for Sino-U.S. friendship and cooperation.

Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, reviewing the past gives us new perspectives. Today we have come to another historic juncture for China-U.S. relations. President Trump has pledged to make America great again and led the American people in making significant strides. China is committed to achieving great national rejuvenation, and Chinese modernization has kept breaking new ground. These two goals are both ambitious and can surely be mutually reinforcing. China and the United States must act as responsible major countries, meet the expectations of our peoples, keep pace with the trend of our times, and explore a new approach for major countries to get along with each other.

History never stands still, and the friendship between peoples is a promising endeavor. Let us join hands to nurture the beautiful flowers of China-U.S. friendship and write a new chapter of China-U.S. friendship together. Like a river that never stops flowing, history never stands still. The friendship between the two peoples is a worthy cause that holds great promise. Let us join hands and move forward side by side. Together, let us nurture the beautiful flowers of Sino-U.S. friendship. Together, let us write a new chapter in our friendly relations.

Now, I would like to propose a toast to the health of President and Mrs. Trump, to the prosperity and progress of China and United States. Cheers!

As for what Xi Jinping said, compared to Trump—because today we saw the most adorable and charming version of Trump—he spoke very well. Xi Jinping, by contrast, appeared rather stiff and lacked that charm. He was steady and had a quite pleasant voice, but he lacked any real impact, didn't he? He mentioned history frequently, often bringing up the cooperation and joint fighting between China and the United States during World War II. I feel he brings that up a bit too often; it has become a cliché. Moreover, he always feels the need to mention the Japanese, the Japanese, the militarists, as if trying to remind the U.S. that Japan was once its enemy. Back then, it was the U.S. and China fighting against Japan, but now the entire situation has reversed.

They love talking about these things, and China's remarks were not bad. I think both heads of state spoke quite well and appropriately, and they both discussed history in order to avoid addressing current issues that cannot be resolved. But what I liked most was when Trump reminded him: You always say you have thousands of years of history, but the United States as a civilization also has thousands of years; we can trace our cultural DNA back to ancient Greece or the Middle East. Don't think you are the only country with a history. I'm not sure who wrote this, but it was well written. President Trump spoke very well, and he specifically mentioned the different systems between the U.S. and China. Today's speech is actually quite worth reading again.

Well, Mr. Xu Liren, of course there are many points to discuss, but given that our show's time may be limited today, there are two points I find very interesting and would like you to discuss, as they are particularly fitting. The first is, as you just noticed, who was sitting at the main table of the state banquet? It was Jensen Huang.

Yes, actually at the main table there were just a few tech CEOs who are particularly close to Trump. Jensen Huang was sitting there, with his wife sitting next to him, and right next to Jensen Huang's wife was Tim Cook, the former CEO of Apple. Beyond that, on the left, there were also some figures from the business community. So you can see that Trump also wanted to show that he can indeed work with these tech and business circles to bring some economic prosperity and benefits to China.

Voice of America is currently verifying the specific guest list. However, according to the list released by the White House so far, one thing is very certain: there were no Chinese entrepreneurs present at today's White House state banquet. Let me ask you quickly about another point: he mentioned Sun Yat-sen, the founding father of the Republic of China and the premier of the Kuomintang. What do you make of President Trump mentioning Sun Yat-sen on such an occasion, right in front of Xi Jinping? Do you think there is any special meaning behind it?

I think for Trump, he may not have fully realized the relationship between Mr. Sun Yat-sen and the Kuomintang; he tended to talk about Mr. Sun Yat-sen more as the founding father of the Republic of China or as a figure who was the founder of China as a whole. And we all know that the American entrepreneurial spirit, this pioneering spirit—he especially likes to talk about the Founding Fathers, and he often talks about America's own Founding Fathers. He used this way of speaking to illustrate that we actually all started from scratch and built things up. Although there are currently some differences between the two countries, in the process of past achievements, we both had to resist past powers, and now we have become prosperous nations. I don't think there were any hidden meanings in his words; absolutely none. He mainly meant going from Sun to Sun Yat-sen—he wanted those two Suns, that's what he was aiming for. The White House speechwriters are also quite impressive.

Right, now let's also invite Mr. Shiban Mingfu, who is joining us tonight via video link from Taiwan for our special program on the US-China summit. Mr. Shiban, what are your thoughts on the remarks made by President Trump and General Secretary Xi Jinping during the White House state dinner just now?

First of all, in the past, when relations between Japan and China were very poor, whenever their leaders met, they would inevitably talk about history—such as the Tang and Song dynasties—and then about culture. Because actual politics, diplomacy, economics, and military affairs were at a total stalemate with no way out, they would use discussions of history to make a breakthrough. Today, we saw both President Trump and Xi Jinping continuously talking about history and culture, so I feel that the two sides likely hoped to reach a consensus in these areas. First, history cannot be changed, so a consensus is naturally achievable. Therefore, by strengthening cultural exchanges or enhancing youth exchanges, they hoped to find a breakthrough in US-China relations and achieve a consensus in this regard, serving as an accomplishment of Xi's visit to the US. I believe both sides had a prior understanding on this, and their speeches were drafted accordingly. Conversely, specific issues that people care about more were not mentioned at all. If our program still has time, we can also ask our three guests about these agenda items.

However, Mr. Shiban, since you joined our program a bit later, let me ask you one more question. Earlier during the state dinner toasts, President Trump also presented Xi with a bald eagle, symbolizing the American spirit, freedom, and soaring aloft. In fact, earlier that morning at the White House welcoming ceremony, Xi Jinping announced that a pair of giant pandas, Pingping and Fushuang, would be gifted to the United States, which seems to restart the panda diplomacy of the past. How do you view the US and China exchanging giant pandas and bald eagles, which symbolize their respective national spirits?

I think the term "pandas"—China has indeed been carrying out panda diplomacy for decades. Panda diplomacy has essentially become a symbol of Chinese diplomacy. However, in the US and many parts of the world now, there is a "panda-hugger" faction, meaning the political significance of pandas is actually enormous. Sending pandas now—whether it will be welcomed in international and American society just like in the past, or if there will be some vigilance—is another question. As for the bald eagle, President Trump has consistently emphasized that the bald eagle symbolizes freedom, and it seems he hopes it will be placed in China. I think this also carries a very strong message: while engaging with China, America's values of freedom and democracy must be upheld. I believe this also reflects what President Trump and his team want to say to China.

Right, of course, in today's special program on the US-China summit, aside from looking at the state dinner menu, evaluating the guests, mentioning the mutual gifts, and observing other ceremonial aspects, we must look at the substantive issues discussed at the US-China summit. In addition to the three guests present on set today, we also interviewed the Director of the Center on China and American Policy at the Hudson Institute. He specifically compared the differences between Trump's first and second terms in his China policy. Let's quickly listen to what Professor Miles Yu has to say, and then ask our three guests to comment.

I think America's policy toward China, from the first Trump administration through the Biden administration to the present, has shown a fairly distinct continuity, rather than undergoing massive changes. Of course, the first administration was very important. During Trump's first term, we changed the entire strategic positioning of the US toward China, designating the CCP as America's primary threat. This was a hugely significant change. America's policies, public sentiment, economy, politics, and military all made major, world-historical changes from this redefined perspective. That was extremely important. Later on, the Biden administration did not change these basic judgments of ours at all, so they simply followed our route.

Secondly, its basic positioning remains entirely unchanged: the CCP is still America's primary threat, and this threat is deepening day by day. This is not just something the US government needs to convince the American people of; the American people see it very clearly, and Congress even more so, without the slightest change. Thus, America's China policy has become more mature and targeted. Although rhetoric involving direct confrontation with the CCP has visibly decreased—with President Trump telling Xi Jinping that we are good friends and that we must achieve a kind of strategic stability—in reality, everything the second US administration does is related to the CCP, because the CCP is truly and undeniably America's primary threat.

For example, strengthening homeland security—both domestic security and security in the Western Hemisphere—is aimed at China, to kick the influence of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) out of places like Panama and the Caribbean. Second, in President Trump's second term, another policy priority is to strengthen deterrence, which is clearly and obviously aimed at China. Third, it is to strengthen so-called burden sharing, which concerns alliance relationships. U.S. allies, especially those in Europe, need to increase their own defense spending to reduce the burden on the U.S., allowing the U.S. more energy and financial resources to deal with the CCP. The final point is to revitalize the U.S. economy and rebuild the U.S. industrial base. Every one of these priority projects in Trump's second term is related to China. So, while he is not directly confronting China, there are now technical controls in many areas. The U.S. is an innovative country that possesses many leading technologies in the world, and it wants to prevent the CCP from using U.S.-invented technology to target the U.S.

Alright, since our time for today's U.S.-China summit program ends at 8:30, I would like to ask the three guests still on set to give us a brief two-minute summary of what we discussed today, whether it be the reception protocol, the substantive issues, or the remarks by the two leaders we just saw at the state dinner. Let's start with Mr. Robert Daly, shall we? About two minutes.

I think the hospitality Trump showed Xi Jinping this time was very successful. From Xi Jinping's perspective, as you said. But let's not forget that a week ago, Trump said we should not slow down the development of artificial intelligence, because whoever wins the so-called AI race will win everything. Yes, whoever wins AI wins the world. Right, so we are not quite sure what that means. But regarding what Yu Maochun just said about the continuity of China policy, there are also quite a few problems. We absolutely need the support of our allies. He didn't mention Trump's attacks and insults toward all U.S. allies and partners in various aspects, which I think is a very big problem. And don't forget—this is the last point I want to make—he said how prosperous the U.S. economy is. Today, the yield on the U.S. 10-year Treasury note also hit a historic high. So if everything Trump does is for the sake of competing with China, he may have a successful side, but there is also a significantly failed side, especially regarding alliance relationships.

Alright, Mr. Xu Ren, two minutes.

I see it the same way. Both sides said at the state dinner that they reached many agreements, but what exactly was agreed upon? I think after this show is over, it's about seeing whether concrete agreements are actually reached. For example, on artificial intelligence, risk management, and the Taiwan issue, whether the readouts from both sides differ. Usually, the Chinese side will have one, and the U.S. side will have one, and we will look at what was mentioned and what was not. This is where each side begins to employ different tactics. After the big show is over, in other areas, we will start to compete and contend again.

Alright, thank you, Xu. Mr. Seki Hei, you joined our program a bit late, so I hope you can speak a little more—three minutes—to give us a summary of your observations on the entire U.S.-China summit today, whether it was the airport pickup at Andrews Air Force Base yesterday, the hospitality protocol today, the speeches at the state dinner just now, and what predictions we can make about the specific issues discussed once the White House meeting records are released.

I feel that the impression I have so far is that U.S. President Trump is trading face for substance. He is willing to give because he knows Xi Jinping cares very much about face. In terms of face, I personally go to the airport to greet you, I give you a red carpet, I give you a grand welcome banquet; I make you feel that you have a lot of face, which you can talk about when you return home. But in reality, regarding the specific issues the U.S. side needs—we have actually been concerned about U.S. demands on China over these years. We often refer to it as "mashed potatoes": rare earths, soybeans, and fentanyl. These are all things the U.S. wants.

Now we see that, first of all, the rare earth issue has at least been deferred, and trade sanctions have been pushed back; at least this issue is temporarily resolved. As for soybeans, I think if we look at the procurement list in the future, it won't be a huge burden for China, but for the U.S., especially with elections coming up, it should be a relatively positive direction for the agricultural regions that support Trump. As for the fentanyl issue, it has plagued U.S.-China relations for many years and is a very important issue. But recently, it has seen a significant—I can't say resolution, but a significant easing. So, President Trump has obtained quite a bit of substance.

So, regarding China's face, for instance, the issues China cares about, one is the Taiwan issue. China hopes that the U.S. can make some concessions on the Taiwan issue, but China tends to speak in absolute terms, while the U.S. will let you finish speaking but basically won't give you a direct answer. Another point is the blockade and sanctions imposed by the U.S. on China in terms of the economy and high technology; China hopes to open these up, but so far, we haven't seen any specific direction in this regard.

Of course, as for the specific content of their talks, much has not yet been reported, and the statements have not been fully released. However, there are a few points we will observe in the future: one is U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, which China cares about very, very much; it is currently in a suspended state. So, in the coming period, whether arms sales to Taiwan will be approved or rejected is very important. Another point is whether the restrictions on technology toward China, such as chips and the export of chips to China, will be eased; as well as whether there will be specific actions regarding China's procurement of U.S. soybeans, agricultural products, and aircraft; and whether China will take concrete actions on the Iran issue. Only after we observe these points can we look back and formally evaluate whether this U.S.-China summit actually yielded any results.