US-China framework deal only ‘first step’ towards ending trade war: analysts
Talks in Malaysia may have paved the way for a broader trade deal, but the ‘real test’ will be implementing the pledges, analysts say
After two days of high-level US-China trade talks in Malaysia, Washington hinted the world’s two largest economies had found common ground on key issues ranging from tariffs to Beijing’s expanded rare earth export controls. But analysts cautioned the “real test” would come when both sides had to execute a resulting deal.
Both Chinese and US trade officials described the negotiations in Kuala Lumpur over the weekend as “constructive”, with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent adding that the meetings had been “very good”.
He also indicated the two sides had ironed out details related to a prospective TikTok ownership agreement and that US farmers would be “extremely happy with this deal”, a possible reference to China resuming purchases of US soybeans.
Chinese trade representative Li Chenggang, meanwhile, said the talks had covered a wide range of topics, including export controls, tariffs, the US probe into Chinese shipbuilders and a possible “expansion of bilateral trade”.
“However, caution remains warranted, given the Trump administration’s unpredictable foreign policy behaviour in recent times,” he said. “A framework is only the first step. The real test will lie in execution between both giants.”
Stephen Olson, a former US trade negotiator and a visiting fellow at the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, said both China and the US had been calibrating their moves ahead of a possible Trump-Xi meeting, seeking to balance firmness with restraint.
“Both want to go into the meeting appearing strong, and so we’ve seen perhaps some provocative moves by both sides,” he said. “But there is also a desire not to cross any red lines that could derail the meeting between the presidents.”
After months of tit-for-tat tariff hikes and sanction measures, analysts said the US and China now had a mutual interest in reaching a deal and stabilising their trading relationship as economic pressures continued to mount.
“Both sides are looking at strategic stability, both have tools that can hurt the other, and the goal now is to keep the relationship stable,” said Cameron Johnson, a senior partner at Shanghai-based consultancy Tidal Wave Solutions.
However, that may not signal a fundamental shift in the two countries’ strategic rivalry, analysts cautioned.
“Tensions could still simmer, especially when it comes to implementing the agreement,” Lee said. “With so many contested areas in play, it wouldn’t take much for disagreements to resurface.”
Olson said a deal may ease tensions over specific issues and create a brief period of positive momentum, but that deeper structural differences would continue to shape the relationship.
“They will only extinguish small brushfires on a laundry list of specific irritants but will not meaningfully address the need to develop a new overarching modus vivendi that will allow these two fundamentally different systems to coexist,” he said.
“Assuming a smooth meeting in Korea, we’ll likely see a short-lived honeymoon, but the fundamental points of friction will inevitably begin to reassert themselves.”