Trump Denies Offering to Sell Arms to China’s Xi | China in Focus

Welcome to China In Focus, I'm Tiffany Meyer. Our top story, the U.S. and China have agreed to lower tariffs on 60 billion dollars worth of goods. Plus, did President Trump ask Chinese leader Xi Jinping if he wants to buy U.S. arms? The President and U.S. Ambassador to China saying different things on this matter. The Trump-Xi summit was a wash, according to retired Colonel Grant Newsham. He evaluated the meeting and addressed the claim that President Trump discussed selling But I don't think that he's seriously considering selling weaponry to the Chinese. Japan's Prime Minister said President Trump gave her a detailed briefing on his latest talks with China's Xi Jinping, highlighting close coordination between the two allies over China. Tensions rise in the South China Sea as the Philippines reports a new Chinese Coast Guard presence inside its exclusive economic zone. Heavy on the ceremony, light on the outcome. The U.S. and China have agreed to lower tariffs on 60 billion dollars worth of non-sensitive goods. They also agreed to set up a bilateral communication channel on A.I. These are two of the most tangible outcomes that came out of Xi's state visit, though the lower tariffs only cover 14 percent of annual U.S. goods trade with China. So what goods are eligible for lower tariff rates? For U.S. exports, agricultural products, fish and seafood, logs and wood products, cosmetic and medical devices. Consumer products from China also qualify, such as small appliances, toys, holiday decorations and children's car seats. Worth noting, soya beans are absent from the tariff relief. That's despite Beijing having pledged to buy 25 million tons of American soya beans this year. The Chinese regime is halfway through meeting its commitment. Feng Shuchun, a China expert, told Bloomberg that the move would give Beijing leverage, especially ahead of midterm elections. Feng said Beijing is well aware that soybean purchases will have a direct impact on agricultural states in the U.S., which are Trump's voter base. Also making headlines, President Trump asked Chinese leader Xi Jinping if he would like to buy some U.S. arms. That's according to U.S. Ambassador to China David Perdue. He was asked on Fox News Sunday if the delay to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan would be expedited. President Trump's already approved 11 billion. There are continuing conversations about other sales. He and President Xi talk about that every time they get together. But President Trump continues to say, hey, we sell arms to other people around the world. He actually asked President Xi would he like to buy some at one point. But our support for that has not changed. Administration officials had U.S. law ban selling arms to China, and there's no plan to sell weapons to the Chinese regime. Here's President Trump's response on the issue. Tan Teng-yuen, a China affairs analyst, said if it indeed happened, Trump's offer has diplomatic calculations, as the CCP would not buy U.S. weapons over concerns they could contain backdoors. Diplomatically, Trump has prevented Beijing from constantly protesting U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. He made it very clear that it's not like the U.S. is only selling arms to Taiwan. I'm offering it to China at the same time, but China doesn't want it. So you're not qualified to say that the U.S. selling arms to Taiwan is targeting China. On Iran, both sides agreed that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon and that no country can be allowed to impose tolls on international waterways, a reference to the Strait of Hormuz. As for rare earths, the U.S. and China will continue to work on supply chain shortages. Nathan Hsu is a senior reporter for the Epoch Times. He said the goal of this meeting was to manage the risk of the U.S. and China going to war rather than making a breakthrough at the negotiation table. Trump and Xi are set to meet two more times this year. To discuss the summit between President Trump and Chinese Communist Party leader Xi Jinping last week, I spoke with Grant Newsham, a retired U.S. Marine colonel and former U.S. diplomat, for insight. Well, there's a lot of buzz right now with the latest being this Wall Street Journal report that U.S. officials from the Trump administration are saying the U.S. has no plans to sell weapons to China. This is after Ambassador David Perdue said on Fox that the president at one point offered to make a deal to transfer American arms to Xi Jinping. There was no information about when that might have happened. But what are your thoughts on this? Because this comes amid a lot of other headlines about the 15 or 14 billion dollar arms sale to Taiwan that is still in the works. So how are you reading that? And, of course, the Trump-Xi summit. Well, I don't really pay much attention to that particular comment. If it was said, and I have no reason to think it wasn't, I think Ambassador Perdue isn't going to make it up, but to me it just sounds like the president talking. He's a chatty guy and he says a lot of things, and this just sounds like some statement he made to keep the conversation going, maybe to see what Xi Jinping's reaction was. But I don't think that he's seriously considering selling weaponry to the Chinese. The Reagan administration did it. The Carter administration did it. Nobody in between has done it very much, although all of them have let dual-use technology go to the Chinese. But an actual arms sale, that's just too hard to imagine. I think it was just him, Mr. President, just talking. And by now we ought to be used to these kinds of statements. And people who don't like the president, of course, jump all over it as though that was the only thing that he said during the two and a half days that Xi Jinping was in Washington. I'm going to dig into the dual-use in a little bit. But in terms of negotiations, some are saying, could this have been a way of President Trump testing Xi Jinping to see how honest he'd be with him if he did respond that he wants some of the weapons? Of course, they flew the B-2 and other jets overhead when they did meet. What are your thoughts on the messaging and the optics of all of this? Well, you know, the statement could be just the president's way of seeing what the reaction was. He says a lot of things. That just seems just to see what the reaction is. And it's usually a pretty good one. I don't think Xi Jinping was really taken aback by it. The visit and all of the pageantry surrounding it, it was professional and it was well thought out. I don't think it changed anyone's minds. There's all sorts of debate in the commentariat, of course, as to who came out ahead. Did President Trump sort of kowtow or show too much deference to a murderer and a dictator? Or did Xi Jinping leave sort of chastened a bit by the Americans not giving him anything that he wanted? Apparently, Taiwan, if it was discussed, neither side's talking about it, which means the Chinese didn't give up anything and the Americans didn't either, despite what everyone thought. This is one for the commentariat to fuss over and decide who comes out ahead. Maybe marginally, Xi Jinping improved his status domestically by being able to show that he can go to Washington and be taken seriously. That is helpful in these kind of nonconsensual regimes, where the guy rules basically really by power. Did the Americans lose much by having Chairman Xi come? Oh, probably not. At the end of the day, the whole thing was perhaps a wash. In terms of deliverables out of the summit, there were the two pandas that came, a lot headlines about that. And of course, the tariffs being lessened on 30 billions of goods on either side. It's a lot of headlines about that. But to your point, there wasn't much else that came out of it. Of course, it does seem there's two more meetings this year set to take place where they will be meeting on the sidelines of APAC and G20. So it wasn't like the only meeting this year. There are other opportunities, if you want to use that word for more deliverables. But there's been a lot of focus on China's not keeping its work on past records, especially on, say, agricultural goods, all of that. There's a lot of headlines about soya beans. Given the Chinese Communist Party's record here, especially going all the way back to the World Trade Organization 2001, when it joined that and has that record of not keeping up its word, how should the U.S. be dealing with this? Because as Secretary of State Marco Rubio said, the U.S. is very big and the president almost has an obligation to meet with the leader of a big country like that. But you also have that record. So how should this administration be navigating that? Well, it shouldn't expect that it's going to be able to cut any deal with the Chinese communists that they're going to live up to. I think one would be hard-pressed to name one that they have actually kept their word on, and that goes back far beyond the Trump administration. Remember Xi Jinping telling President Obama, I'm not going to militarize these islands that I'm building illegally in the South China Sea. Well, he didn't keep that promise. Even the more recent ones where the Chinese agreed to take the taps off the rare earth exports to the United States, they haven't done that. And that was in exchange for us keeping tariffs down as well. Agricultural procurement and purchases from the U.S., they promise things and they don't live up to it. It's really just serial sort of promise breakers is one way to put it. And I don't think anyone in this administration, at least I hope I don't, thinks that the Chinese will change their objectives and actually try to cut a deal with us that creates a so-called decent peace, as some people in the Trump administration say it. And we do have to keep our wits about us, build up our defenses, and try to break these economic dependencies that we've gotten on the Chinese, pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, so much manufacturing that we just hand it over. That has got to be corrected. And I think the administration understands that because it's late in the day and they have to hurry. The U.S. and Japan are reaffirming their partnership in the Indo-Pacific. President Trump briefing Japan's Prime Minister, Senai Takeuchi, on Saturday about his latest talks with Chinese regime leader, Xi Jinping. In a post on X, Takeuchi said President Trump called her and gave her a detailed briefing on the U.S.-China summit. The two leaders also discussed issues involving China, including economic and security challenges. This marks the second top-level interaction between the two leaders in a single week, following their meeting on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in New York. Takeuchi said the latest call underscored the strength of the U.S.-Japan alliance. She said the two countries are now among each other's most trusted allies and will work together for peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific and around the world. Taiwan is sending a direct message to the United States. It follows a high-stakes summit between President Trump and Chinese regime leader, Xi Jinping. Officials in Taipei say U.S. military support and safeguarding Taiwan's high-tech semiconductor industry directly serves American interests. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping wrapped up a three-day summit in Washington on Friday. Taiwan was among the most sensitive issues on the table. During the talks, Xi urged Washington to oppose Taiwan independence. On Saturday, Trump was asked about Taiwan issues. We didn't spend a lot of time talking about Taiwan. He understands very much how I feel. Beijing claims Taiwan as part of China. Taiwan's democratic government rejects Beijing's sovereignty claim. I think that so far our government had carried out a lot of scenario planning in advance and had access to fairly comprehensive information. Looking at the outcome, many of the very bad things we had thought might happen did not happen after all. So I think that looking at the overall outcome, there has been no change in the United States' policy towards Taiwan. Taiwanese officials are now making their case for continued U.S. support. The deputy foreign minister, Francois Wu, says continued U.S. arms sales serve America's national interest. Maintaining arms sales so that Taiwan has sufficient capability to defend itself, maintaining peace in Taiwan, maintaining democracy and freedom, and allowing Taiwan's semiconductor industry to continue contributing to the world. These are important U.S. interests. The Trump administration has already approved an $11 billion arms package for Taiwan. A second package worth about $14 billion remains pending. Trump has not announced a decision on that package following his meeting with Xi. The White House says the summit was aimed at building a more stable U.S.-China relationship. But Taiwan remains a key point of tension between Washington and Beijing. And Taipei is now watching for Washington's next move. Tensions are rising again in the South China Sea. The Philippines says it has detected a Chinese coast guard vessel inside its exclusive economic zone. After China held military and coast guard drills near disputed Scarborough Shoal over the weekend. On Sunday, Philippine authorities spotted a China coast guard ship. The location falls within the Philippine exclusive economic zone. The Philippine coast guard says it monitored the vessel along with three Chinese naval ships. The development follows weekend military drills near Scarborough Shoal. China's military conducted joint naval and air exercises while the China's coast guard held drills involving boarding, interception and forced towing. Last week, Manila said Chinese coast guard and naval vessels blocked a Philippine resupply mission to the second Thomas Shoal. Philippine officials called the actions reckless and illegal. The United States strongly condemned the blocking tactics. China said its actions defend Chinese sovereignty and maritime rights. Beijing also rejects the 2016 South China Sea arbitration ruling issued by a tribunal in The Hague under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Coming up, the U.S. and China are opening a new channel on AI risks. But President Trump says he does not want to give up America's lead. China is a big market and at the same time a major competitor, especially for the U.S. tech sector. How are U.S. big tech companies balancing all of this? We spoke with Evan Schwartztrauber, principal at CorePoint Strategies. That and more after the break here on China In Focus. Tiffany Meyer, the United States and China are opening a new channel to discuss the risks of AI. But President Trump says America will not slow down or share its lead. I would rather not integrate because we're leading by a lot. When you're leading, you don't open it up to each other. We're leading by at least a year and maybe a year and a half. Speaking to reporters outside the White House Saturday, President Trump said America will not put the brakes on AI development. The comments come just after his summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. The two nations reached a limited agreement on AI. They will establish a communication channel for AI-related incidents. They also agreed to continue talks on the risks and benefits of the technology with a next round planned for November. Because AI is simultaneously one of the really core drivers of U.S.-China competition. And I think obviously there is absolutely a ceiling on how far and how fast cooperation can go. I think another thing the two sides really agree on is that the biggest risk is the other one, using AI to secure some sort of decisive advantage over them. The United States continues to restrict China's access to some advanced AI chips. Beijing, meanwhile, is pushing to expand its own AI capabilities. Then on Sunday, Trump again emphasized that slowing U.S. AI development could allow China to catch up. For many large U.S. tech companies, China remains a big market. China is also a major competitor in the AI race. And as President Trump has said, whoever wins AI, wins. Last week, during Chinese regime leader Xi Jinping's visit, the White House invited an exceptionally long list of America's biggest tech CEOs to the Chamshi State Dinner, including Microsoft CEO Sacha Nadella, NVIDIA's Jensen Huang, Apple's Tim Cook, Elon Musk and others. How is the administration weighing America's commercial and technology interests in its relationship with China? For more insight, I spoke on Friday on Tiffany Meyer Tonight with Evan Schwartztrauber, principal at CorePoint Strategies. He's a former policy advisor to the Federal Communications Commission and a leading advocate against China's close ties with U.S. tech firms. It's somewhat fitting that CEO of Microsoft, Satya Nadella, was at the dinner because Microsoft has had a deep relationship with China going back decades. Now, it's perfectly fine, I think, for the administration to have these CEOs at the dinner. I think the administration wants to have a productive dialogue with China. But one thing this administration has been clear about, and it's pretty much non-negotiable, is that the United States needs to lead the world in AI, right? We need to beat China in this race to superintelligence, as he calls it. And what we have reason to question is whether these companies that he invited to this dinner, whether they're really on America's side when it comes to that race. Microsoft has been trying to give this impression in the media by closing some offices in China that they're decoupling. But just this summer and spring, we saw evidence that they are deepening ties with China on AI, right? Specifically, the issue where Trump really needs American companies to be picking a side, launching an incubator program to help Chinese companies expand overseas, co-authoring AI robotics papers with blacklisted universities, right? Striking a partnership with the city in China that piloted the social credit score that many human rights organizations have decried. So I think the takeaway is not so much that they attended the dinner. It's what are these companies doing to help the United States win? When that's one of the things that President Trump has been so clear on is that we have to win the race. We can have good relationships with China. That's fine if the president wants to try to figure that out. But we have to win in AI. And these companies are helping our adversary while maybe trying to give the impression that they're not. And speaking of Microsoft, is Microsoft's experience broadly representative of the American tech sector's relationship with China? Or does Microsoft have a relatively unique position? Yeah, I would say the companies all, you know, arguably would love to make money from the Chinese market if they could, right? I mean, it is a huge market. I think Microsoft does have a uniquely long relationship with China and certainly a unique one when it comes to software and AI talent. Last summer, we saw reports from ProPublica, shocking reports, that Microsoft was relying on Chinese engineers to maintain Department of Defense cloud systems. And they were, in theory, overseen by these digital escorts. But those escorts, according to the reports, did not have the expertise to really evaluate the work of the Chinese engineers. So it's kind of shocking that that was going on, that partnership has ended. But yeah, when you look at Apple, right, they rely on China deeply for their supply chain. Of course, NVIDIA chips have been smuggled into China, advanced AI chips that the White House believes are behind some of the advancements that China has made in AI. So certainly the companies all differ in their exposure. And I would say, you know, those three really come to mind as particularly exposed. And unpack for us, what's really at stake here? At what point does maintaining access to Chinese talent, cloud infrastructure, AI technology, or Chinese companies stop being simply a business decision and become a national security concern? I feel like we're already there, right? We see reports going back years, you know, to the prior administration of CEOs being briefed on what a Taiwan contingency, right, would mean for their business. And, you know, according to quotes in these reports, right, they're shocked, they're horrified, it keeps them up at night. But we don't really see that fear translate into action. And I think, unfortunately, these companies, right, their number one loyalty is to their shareholders. And I think a lot of them still believe that you can be neutral in the 21st century great power competition, right, that being headquartered in Washington state doesn't mean you have to take Washington DC side, right, in a global conflict. I don't think this is tenable. You know, if you think about what it would mean if China were to attack Taiwan, and all of a sudden our semiconductor supply is at risk, you have 10,000 Microsoft employees in China, what happens to them? What happens to Apple's supply chain? I think it's way past time that these companies start de-risking. We just haven't seen significant efforts other than these press reports, which I think are, frankly, designed to give the impression that there's significant decoupling that really isn't happening. But you still hear these CEOs like Jensen Wang and others on stage, and Microsoft's CEO, Satya Nadella, his president, Brad Smith, they speak as if it's the early 2000s, right? They speak as if China just joined the WTO and we're all going to hold hands and sing Kumbaya. There is a huge lag in the way that some of these businesses act compared to where the national security situation is and where the Defense Department is. So I'm really hoping that that changes, and maybe the exposure of some of the ways that these companies are helping China advance AI will elicit more of a strong reaction from Congress and the administration to get them to change their behavior. That's all for today's China In Focus. Tiffany Meyer, if you have any feedback on the show or have something you'd like to see us cover, send us an email at chinainfocusatntd.com. We'd love to hear from you. We're on the clock for Deloitte's coverage. Visit us at ntd.com or download our NTD app. Thanks for watching. See you tomorrow.