Analysis of: Pomp, pageantry but precious little to show for Trump’s Beijing excursion
The Guardian | May 16, 2026
TL;DR
Trump's Beijing summit produced spectacle over substance while exposing how great power diplomacy serves capital—Boeing deals, soybean purchases, and oil access—not workers. The real story is two capitalist states managing their rivalry to ensure uninterrupted profit extraction amid a U.S.-led war in Iran.
Analytical Focus:Class Analysis Contradictions Interconnections
The Trump-Xi summit in Beijing offers a revealing spectacle of inter-imperialist relations in the current phase of global capitalism. Beneath the pageantry—state banquets, manicured gardens, and a military band playing YMCA—we find the core logic of great power diplomacy: managing the contradictions between rival capitalist powers to ensure continued capital accumulation for their respective ruling classes. The presence of Elon Musk, Tim Cook, and Jensen Huang at the summit wasn't incidental decoration; these tech billionaires represent the actual constituency served by such diplomatic theater. The summit's concrete 'achievements' reveal whose interests drive foreign policy: a potential Boeing aircraft deal worth billions, promises of agricultural commodity purchases benefiting agribusiness, and negotiations over oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz. Conspicuously absent were any meaningful advances on worker rights, environmental protection, or AI safety guardrails. Human rights concerns were reduced to brief mentions of individual detainees—a hollow gesture when the structural conditions producing mass incarceration, labor exploitation, and political repression in both countries remain unaddressed. Most telling is the summit's backdrop: an ongoing U.S.-Israel military campaign against Iran that has closed the Strait of Hormuz, spiking oil prices toward $109 per barrel. While both states claim to want the straits reopened, neither questions the imperialist logic that produced the conflict. Working people in all three countries—American soldiers deployed abroad, Iranian civilians under bombardment, and Chinese workers facing economic disruption—bear the costs of this rivalry between capitalist powers competing for regional hegemony and resource control. The summit's failure to resolve Taiwan tensions similarly reflects how both states view the island primarily through strategic and economic lenses—its semiconductor industry and geographic position—rather than as home to millions of workers whose lives hang in the balance of great power competition.
Class Dynamics
Actors: U.S. state executive (Trump administration), Chinese state executive (Xi administration), Tech billionaire class (Musk, Cook, Huang), Military-industrial complex (Boeing, weapons manufacturers), Agribusiness capital (soybean exporters), Finance capital (oil markets), U.S. working class (farmers, military personnel), Taiwanese working class, Iranian working class, Chinese working class
Beneficiaries: Boeing shareholders and executives, U.S. agribusiness corporations, Tech billionaires seeking Chinese market access, Oil industry speculators, Defense contractors, Political elites in both countries seeking domestic legitimacy
Harmed Parties: U.S. consumers facing high gas prices, Iranian civilians under military attack, Taiwanese citizens facing uncertain security, U.S. military personnel deployed in conflict, Workers in both countries excluded from decision-making, Political prisoners like Jimmy Lai used as bargaining chips
The summit exemplifies how the capitalist state functions as an executive committee managing the common affairs of the bourgeoisie. Both Trump and Xi acted as representatives of their respective national capitals, negotiating commodity flows, market access, and spheres of influence. The presence of billionaires at state dinners literalizes this relationship. Meanwhile, working-class interests in both countries—job security, peace, democratic participation—were entirely absent from negotiations. The power asymmetry is also geographic: decisions affecting Taiwanese and Iranian workers were made without their participation, reflecting the imperialist character of great power relations.
Material Conditions
Economic Factors: Oil price spike to $109/barrel due to Strait of Hormuz closure, U.S.-China trade tensions affecting agricultural exports, Taiwan semiconductor industry's strategic importance, Boeing's need for Chinese aircraft orders, Chinese diversification toward Brazilian soybeans, Global recession fears from supply chain disruption
The summit reveals the material base of inter-imperialist rivalry: competition for markets (Boeing aircraft sales, agricultural commodities), control over strategic production (semiconductors, AI technology), and access to resources (oil flows through Hormuz). China's leverage stems from its position as both a massive consumer market and the 'workshop of the world,' while U.S. leverage comes from military dominance and control over financial systems. Both states seek to manage these relations to benefit their respective capitalist classes while preventing direct military confrontation that would disrupt global accumulation.
Resources at Stake: Oil transit through Strait of Hormuz (20% of global supply), Semiconductor production capacity in Taiwan, Agricultural commodity markets, Commercial aircraft market share, AI and technology development, Nuclear weapons arsenals
Historical Context
Precedents: Nixon's 1972 China visit establishing U.S.-China détente, Reagan-Gorbachev summits managing Cold War tensions, Pre-WWI great power diplomacy failing to prevent inter-imperialist conflict, Thucydides Trap historical pattern of rising vs. established powers
The summit reflects a recurring pattern in capitalist history: periods of intensified inter-imperialist rivalry punctuated by attempts at managed competition. Xi's invocation of the 'Thucydides Trap' acknowledges this historical tendency. We are witnessing a transition from U.S. unipolar hegemony toward a more contested multipolar arrangement, characteristic of periods when the established mode of capital accumulation faces structural challenges. The parallel to pre-1914 Europe—great powers seeking to manage tensions while competition intensifies—is instructive, though not deterministic. The current phase of financialized capitalism adds new dimensions: both powers are deeply integrated into global supply chains, making direct conflict economically devastating in ways unprecedented in earlier eras.
Contradictions
Primary: The fundamental contradiction is between the need for global capital accumulation (requiring stable trade, supply chains, and resource flows) and inter-imperialist competition for hegemony (which drives military buildup, trade wars, and proxy conflicts). Both states need cooperation to maintain the conditions for profit extraction while simultaneously competing for dominance.
Secondary: Between Trump's protectionist 'America First' rhetoric and capital's need for Chinese markets, Between China's export-dependent economy and its aspirations for regional military dominance, Between the promise of democratic participation and the reality of elite-to-elite negotiations, Between the urgency of AI safety and the competitive pressure to avoid regulation, Between declining U.S. approval ratings from gas prices and the continuation of the Iran conflict
These contradictions are structural to the current capitalist world-system and cannot be fully resolved within it. Short-term, both states will likely continue managed competition—cooperating on some issues while intensifying rivalry on others. The Taiwan question represents a potential rupture point where contradictions could escalate beyond management. The Iran conflict demonstrates how imperialist adventures designed to assert hegemony can backfire through economic blowback. Long-term resolution would require either a new stable hegemonic arrangement, a fundamental restructuring of the global economy beyond capitalist competition, or potentially a catastrophic conflict.
Global Interconnections
This summit cannot be understood apart from the broader crisis of U.S. hegemony and the restructuring of global capitalism. The U.S.-led war on Iran, Taiwan tensions, and trade conflicts are interconnected expressions of a single dynamic: the decline of unipolar American dominance and China's emergence as a peer competitor. The Strait of Hormuz closure directly connects Middle East military policy to Chinese energy security to American consumer prices—demonstrating how imperialist interventions generate cascading effects across the world-system. The tech billionaires' presence highlights how digital capitalism has created new terrains of competition. AI development, semiconductor manufacturing, and platform monopolies are the commanding heights of twenty-first-century accumulation. Both states recognize this, which explains why no AI guardrails emerged despite the presence of industry leaders. Capital's drive for competitive advantage overrides even existential risk considerations. The summit thus reveals the global character of contemporary class relations: decisions made in Beijing's Great Hall affect workers from Iowa soybean farms to Taiwanese chip foundries to Iranian oil fields, yet none of these workers had any representation at the negotiating table.
Conclusion
The Trump-Xi summit illustrates a central truth of Marxist analysis: the state serves class interests, and inter-state relations are fundamentally shaped by the dynamics of capital accumulation. For working people, the lesson is that neither American nor Chinese ruling classes represent their interests. The competition between these powers over markets, resources, and strategic position will continue to generate instability, conflict, and crisis—the costs of which fall on workers globally. The path forward requires building international solidarity across national boundaries, recognizing that Chinese and American workers share common interests against their respective ruling classes. The contradictions on display in Beijing—between the spectacle of cooperation and the reality of intensifying rivalry—will continue to sharpen, creating both dangers and opportunities for working-class organization.
Suggested Reading
- Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism by V.I. Lenin (1917) Lenin's analysis of inter-imperialist rivalry and the tendency of capitalist powers toward conflict over markets and spheres of influence directly illuminates the U.S.-China dynamic on display at this summit.
- The New Imperialism by David Harvey (2003) Harvey's concept of 'accumulation by dispossession' and his analysis of how contemporary imperialism operates through financial and military mechanisms helps explain the interconnected crises of Iran, Taiwan, and trade.
- The State and Revolution by V.I. Lenin (1917) Lenin's examination of the state as an instrument of class rule clarifies why summit diplomacy serves capital rather than workers, and why both the U.S. and Chinese states act as executive committees for their respective bourgeoisies.