An Agreement in the Shadow of Rivalry: Redefining U.S.–China Interaction

Seyed Jalal Sadatian, in an interview with the website of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations, said: “The possible U.S.–China agreement is less an end to the trade war than a strategic adjustment between two major powers seeking to manage intra-systemic competition.” The university lecturer explained: “After years of tariff wars and market instability, both sides have realized that the continuation of tensions poses a threat to global economic growth.”

Referring to China’s postponement of restrictions on the export of rare earth elements and the U.S. decision to refrain from imposing heavy tariffs on Chinese goods, he noted: “These decisions reflect a return to economic rationality. Both countries have concluded that in a world with deeply intertwined supply chains, a policy of maximum pressure produces counterproductive results.”

Sadatian added: “The United States, on the one hand, seeks to prevent excessive dependence—both its own and that of other countries—on China’s economy and production capacity; on the other hand, it does not want the economic crisis caused by the trade war to undermine the global position of the dollar or destabilize stock markets. Meanwhile, China, fully aware of the sensitivity of America’s internal structural dynamics, is trying to maintain calm in its economic environment by offering limited concessions, so that it can focus more on other arenas of competition, such as advanced technologies and artificial intelligence.”

Economic and Psychological Impact of the Agreement on Global Markets

Sadatian continued: “The likelihood of the two countries moving closer to an agreement has quickly affected financial markets, leading to a decrease in gold prices and a rise in stock indices in Asia and the United States.” He emphasized: “This reaction reflects the market’s hope for stability, though that stability is fragile and temporary.”

According to him, “Gold has always been an indicator of the level of geopolitical uncertainty in the world, and whenever the prospects for cooperation among major powers become clearer, demand for it decreases. However, this decline should not be interpreted as the end of the crisis, as competition in technology and energy continues unabated. The current agreement resembles a temporary ceasefire rather than a lasting peace.”

He explained: “A significant part of the potential agreement concerns digital technologies and data ownership—an issue that, in his view, will shape the future of the global economy.” Sadatian added: “In fact, the cases of TikTok and rare earth minerals represent two faces of a single struggle—a struggle for control over the infrastructure of the twenty-first-century economy.”

The New Economic Order and the Shift in the Global Balance of Power

Sadatian further stated: “A possible agreement between Washington and Beijing, on a larger scale, signals the beginning of a new phase in great-power competition.” The university lecturer believes that “the international system is transitioning from an era of unipolar globalization to a dependent multi-centered structure—a condition in which countries are simultaneously engaged in both rivalry and cooperation.”

The analyst emphasized: “This agreement could shape a new model of interaction among major powers—one in which economic cooperation becomes a tool for managing political competition. Unlike the Cold War era, when economic and political boundaries overlapped, today even rival powers are compelled to engage economically.”

He pointed out that “such a model could, in the future, spread to other major actors, including the European Union and India, forming a kind of economic multipolarity in which interdependence prevents the escalation of geopolitical tensions.” Sadatian said: “If this path continues, we will witness the emergence of a new order built not on unilateral American dominance, but on the regulated competition of major powers—an order that brings both opportunities and challenges for the world. Under these circumstances, the countries capable of quickly adapting to new trade and technological rules will be the future winners.”

Sadatian stressed: “The U.S.–China agreement is not merely an economic file; it symbolizes the transition to a new era in international politics—an era in which competition within cooperation replaces direct confrontation, and the management of interdependence becomes the most important instrument of power.”

He also stated that “the recent meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in South Korea indicated both countries’ willingness to reduce tensions. However, the realities on the ground suggest that this economic truce is based more on tactical calculations than on genuine trust.”

The university professor concluded: “Despite efforts to manage the crisis, the two countries remain entangled in a complex web of political, technological, and geopolitical disputes that prevent the formation of a lasting agreement.”

The analyst added, “Washington seeks to reshape the political order in East Asia through economic means. Even if an economic agreement between the United States and China is reached, it will be less an end to the conflict than the beginning of a tense coexistence within the structure of global power.”