As the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit convenes in Tianjin, the convergenceof Vladimir Putin, Narendra Modi, Xi Jinping and, significantly, North Korea’s Kim Jong Un signals a turning point in the geopolitics of Eurasia.
The SCO summit coincides with commemoration of the 80th anniversary of the world anti-fascist victory, a commemoration steeped in historical memory and national legitimacy. For Beijing, the symbolism is deliberate: It recalls China’s sacrifices during World War II while projecting an alternative vision of global order at a moment of sharpening confrontation with the West.
The absence of any Western leaders or representatives from such Western-aligned Asian countries as Japan and South Korea underscores the event’s positioning. Beijing seeks to cast Tianjin as a forum of the Global South, a rallying point for multipolarity and “solidarity against hegemonism.”
The inclusion of Kim Jong Un dramatizes this narrative: while Washington keeps maximum pressure on Pyongyang, Beijing welcomes him as a peer leader, reinforcing the SCO’s image as a counterweight to Western-led institutions.
In this context, the absence of the United States is striking. And it’s not merely coincidental that Donald Trump, during his recent meeting with the South Korean president, floated the idea of visiting China. The remark hinted at both possibility and hesitation.
Should Trump follow through, the trip would unfold in a geopolitical climate that has changed vastly since his 2017 Beijing visit. Then, he was treated to a “state visit-plus” spectacle at the Forbidden City. Now, the backdrop is trade wars, technology decoupling and contested narratives about history – including recent pushback by Tokyo against Beijing’s framing of the anti-fascist victory.
Trump’s calculus
For Trump and his team, any consideration of a Beijing trip requires navigating three interlocking challenges: domestic politics, alliance dynamics and legitimacy.
At home, Trump cannot appear overly conciliatory toward Beijing without inviting criticism from Democrats and Republican China hawks alike. Abroad, allies from Tokyo to Brussels will scrutinize whether Washington re-engages bilaterally with Beijing, potentially undercutting their coordinated stance. And in Beijing, symbolism matters: A US president’s presence amid a highly choreographed commemoration could be read as tacit validation of China’s narrative.
Should Trump decide to engage, the agenda would be likely to center on three themes: economic stability, risk management and global governance. Beijing seeks assurances against further tariff escalation and wants to reopen dialogue on trade and investment at a time when growth is slowing. Washington would press for guardrails in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea, where encounters have multiplied. And both sides might cautiously explore cooperation on such global issues as artificial intelligence regulation, energy security and crisis management – though without illusions that there could be easy breakthroughs.
For Xi, the optics are as important as the substance. A Trump decision to visit would signal that Beijing is not isolated, despite Western sanctions and strategic competition. Depending on timing, it could also allow China to present the SCO summit along with the anti-fascist victory anniversary commemoration as a stage on which the Global South affirms multipolarity, contrasting sharply with Western-led gatherings such as NATO summits and G7 meetings.
With Kim Jong Un, Putin, and Modi by his side, Xi could project that China sits at the center of an alternative coalition – even if the unity masks deep differences.
Another test of US intentions will be the Xiangshan Forum. China’s flagship gathering focused on defense and security and security diplomacy gathering offers a stage for testing whether the United States might cautiously re-engage in dialogue on arms control, cybersecurity and AI governance.
In past years, US defense officials have attended despite tensions, using the forum as a channel for crisis communication. The Trump administration’s decision to send a delegation this year or not will indicate whether Washington sees value in maintaining security dialogue outside US-led frameworks – or prefers to isolate Beijing diplomatically.
The big picture
The SCO summit in Tianjin underscores a larger reality: The world is fragmenting into parallel structures of competing blocs, each animated by history and identity as much as hard interests. While Beijing champions solidarity of the Global South, Washington and its allies emphasize a “rules-based order.”
The symbolism of the anti-fascist victory resonates with Russia and China as a rebuke to what they see as Western historical amnesia. It is invoked as a reminder of historical resistance to domination.
For India, participation reflects the country’s balancing act between Eurasian multilateralism and US partnerships.
Trump’s dilemma is clear: He must decide whether to watch these tectonic shifts from the sidelines or to step back into Beijing’s orbit with a carefully calibrated visit that could reshape his second-term foreign policy legacy.
In Tianjin, Xi, Putin, Modi and Kim will project unity against hegemonism, even if differences persist beneath the surface. In Washington, the real debate is less about unity than about strategy: Whether Trump can afford to watch the multipolar order take shape without having a seat at the table.
Should Trump meet Xi now, and if so, on what terms? As history shows, anniversaries are never just about the past. They are stages on which the future is contested.
The fact that the supposed most powerful leader in the world is pressured to decide whether or not to visit his main adversary calls into question whether he is indeed still the most powerful leader. And even if he is…that power is fading very very quickly.
Trump’s haemorroids must have been on fire at the sight of Xi parade. Trump’s parade was a failure, while China’s was attended by almost the entire global south.
😬😬😬 If 🍦🌮🇺🇲 goes to 🇨🇳, he loses and if 🍦🌮🇺🇲 don’t go, he loses. 🤣🤣🤣