On 30 October 2025, in Busan (South Korea), U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping held talks on the sidelines of the 2025 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit. Notably, Trump referred to the meeting as the “G2 Summit,” a term that quickly attracted the attention of international scholars and media.
President Trump’s use of the term “G2” has sparked many debates, including:
First, many scholars believe the term “G2” signals that a U.S.-China bipolar order is taking shape. President Trump’s reference to “G2” may reflect thinking about an emerging bipolar order in which the United States and China become the two main centres of power shaping the international order. This may be an effort to reform bilateral relations toward constructive cooperation between the world’s two leading economic and political forces. If carried through, “G2” could open the door to a new global order based on shared responsibility and joint governance (Prof. Muqtedar Khan).
Concern also existed that if a bipolar order were to take shape, allies, partners, and multilateral mechanisms could risk being sidelined or turned into objects of compromise between the United States and China.
In contrast, some argue that President Trump’s use of the term “G2” is only symbolic and not substantive. “G2” does not mean a mechanism of “co-ruling the world,” but should be seen as a flexible cooperation framework to address bilateral and global issues, thereby contributing to stabilizing U.S.-China relations amid intense competition (Zhao Minghao).
However, drawing from historical and ideological lessons, most Chinese scholars remain skeptical, viewing “G2” merely as another form of containment or even a “political trap” designed to draw China into a U.S.-led order without real power-sharing (Didi Tang). Fundamental disagreements over Taiwan, regional security structures, and technology controls remain unresolved, indicating that the concept of “G2” lacks substantive foundations (Cato Institute).
It can be seen that President Trump’s use of the concept “G2” remains highly controversial, and it is unclear whether this is an improvised statement or a calculated strategic move. Will this development increase the risk of the United States and China compromising on regional hotspots, especially the South China Sea? What comments do East-Sea Studies readers have on this issue?
Read the original article in Vietnamese here
