Top negotiators from the United States and China are set to meet in Geneva on Saturday, as the world’s two largest economies seek to navigate a path away from a bruising trade war that has disrupted global supply chains, slowed economic growth, and sent shockwaves through industries from electronics to agriculture.
The talks will mark the first face-to-face meeting between senior officials from the two countries since President Donald Trump imposed historically high 145% tariffs on most Chinese imports in early April. They come on the heels of Trump hailing a “full and comprehensive” trade agreement reached with the United Kingdom on Thursday that left many key sticking points unresolved.
But hopes for a breakthrough this weekend with the Chinese remain muted. Trump—who has long decried the trade deficits the U.S. has with China and other countries—tried this week to frame the dramatic slowdown in shipments from China as a positive sign. “We were losing a trillion dollars a year, now we’re not losing anything, you know? That’s the way I look at it,” he said Thursday.
Some analysts are skeptical that the meeting will result in any tangible outcomes. “The U.S. has not been particularly interested in what anybody else wants,” says Mary Lovely, an expert on U.S.-China Relations and a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “The U.S. is still dependent on China for many individual goods, so China still has a lot of power in this relationship.”
Here’s what to know about Saturday’s trade negotiations between the U.S. and China.
U.S. officials will be led by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, who have signaled that they view these initial talks as a chance to begin easing tensions. “My sense is that this will be about de-escalation, not about the big trade deal,” Bessent told Fox News on Tuesday.
Chinese negotiators, led by Vice Premier He Lifeng, are arriving with similar caution, wary of making concessions without signs of U.S. compromise. “To pressure or coerce China in whatever way simply does not work,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian wrote on X.
Still, the decision to bring senior negotiators from both sides to the table is being seen by some analysts as a positive step forward after months of economic brinkmanship. While expectations for a breakthrough remain low, the fact that both countries have agreed to talk signals a recognition of the steep costs of prolonged conflict. “If we see anything coming out about how the process might be continued, that would be a win,” Lovely says.
Trump struck a defiant tone ahead of the talks, telling reporters Thursday that his Administration’s tariff strategy had left China “with absolutely no business” and expressed confidence that the talks would be “very substantive.”
Trump has cited multiple goals in pursuing a trade war with China. On Thursday, he reiterated his interest in prying open China’s tightly controlled market to American businesses and framed the conflict as a broader fight against what he calls “unfair” Chinese trade practices: “We’d like to see China opened up so we can compete in China and give people something they’ve never had access to,” Trump said.
Removing non-tariff barriers to U.S. exports would echo the framework for a trade deal Trump reached with China during his first term that stipulated China would buy an additional $200 billion in U.S. exports over 2020 and 2021. However, China fell well short of those levels, failing to purchase the promised volume of American products. Bessent told Fox News that the Trump Administration will take China’s noncompliance into account when it negotiates a new trade deal.
Trump has been particularly incensed that the U.S. remains the single-largest recipient of Chinese exports, but accounted for less than 13% of China’s total exports. His initial trade war strategy centered on a series of escalating tariffs, peaking with the current 145% rate on most Chinese imports and prompting China to retaliate with 125% tariffs on American goods. Trump has predicted his tariffs will lead to a resurgence in domestic manufacturing, as companies relocate factories to the U.S. to avoid taxes on imports.
The Trump Administration is also pushing China to take more aggressive action against the trafficking of fentanyl and its chemical precursors, which experts say has fueled an opioid crisis in the U.S. Trump told reporters on Wednesday that China would need to “stop fentanyl from coming in” as part of the trade negotiations, blaming former President Joe Biden for not upholding an agreement that he signed with China during his first term.
Despite Trump’s insistence that the talks will be “substantive,” officials on both sides have downplayed expectations for an immediate resolution.
Analysts say a best-case outcome this weekend might involve a temporary pause in tariff increases or a mutual agreement from both sides to continue talks. But the fundamental issues dividing the two sides—including U.S. demands for market access and China’s insistence on maintaining its state-centric economic model—are unlikely to be resolved quickly.
Lovely says that China likely has the upper hand in negotiations for three reasons: The U.S. is dependent on China for many products, China has cultivated markets outside of the U.S., and President Xi Jinping is not facing an upcoming election. That could allow China to take a more patient approach in the talks. “I don’t think China is desperate to make a deal,” Lovely says. “Yes, this is going to hurt China, but China certainly did not seek a trade war with the U.S… Xi has all the political support he needs to weather this storm.”
Adding to the pressure on Trump, his tariffs have inflicted serious pain on U.S. businesses and consumers. Toymakers, electronics retailers, and agricultural exporters have all warned of rising costs, while West Coast ports are reporting a sharp decline in shipments from China.
Both sides differ on who initiated this meeting
Despite the mutual decision to hold talks in Geneva, both sides are offering starkly different accounts of how the meeting came about, underscoring the continued mistrust that has defined the standoff between the world’s two largest economies.
Chinese officials have maintained that the U.S. requested the talks, which Trump responded to by telling reporters “they ought to go back and study their files.”
“We can all play games,” he said. “Who made the first call, who didn’t make them? It doesn’t matter. It only matters what happens in that room. But I will tell you that China very much wants to make a deal.”
The dispute over who initiated the talks reflects deeper challenges: neither side wants to appear weak.
Discussion about this post