Trump-Xi Summit Approaches With Alarming Lack of Preparation

Six weeks. That's all the time remaining before a likely summit between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping that could reshape the world's most consequential bilateral relationship. Yet according to analysts and former government officials familiar with summit planning, the preparation is woefully inadequate, bilateral contacts remain anemic, and expected outcomes are being scaled back dramatically.

The Art of the Unprepared Deal

The shortfall reflects Trump's distinctive approach to diplomacy: a reluctance to delegate authority, disdain for traditional processes, and laser focus on quick wins. Instead of relying on months of careful groundwork by seasoned diplomats, Trump banks on personal magnetism and his "gut instinct" as organizing principles for high-stakes international negotiations.

This stands in stark contrast to conventional summit diplomacy, where teams of experts spend months hammering out preliminary agreements, identifying areas of potential compromise, and choreographing every detail of the encounter. The current approach leaves enormous room for misunderstanding and missed opportunities.

Xi Jinping, meanwhile, represents a political system that prizes predictability and thorough preparation. Chinese leadership traditionally approaches summits with detailed position papers, clear objectives, and carefully calibrated expectations. The mismatch in preparation styles creates an inherent tension before the leaders even sit down.

High Stakes, Low Preparation

The timing couldn't be more critical. US-China relations are strained across multiple fronts: trade imbalances, technology competition, territorial disputes in the South China Sea, and fundamental disagreements about global governance. Each issue requires nuanced understanding and careful diplomatic handling.

For American businesses, the stakes are enormous. Companies like Apple, Boeing, and General Motors have billions invested in China, while Chinese firms face increasing scrutiny in US markets. The tech sector, in particular, finds itself caught between competing national security imperatives and commercial interests.

European allies watch nervously from the sidelines. They want to see US-China tensions ease but worry about being excluded from any bilateral deals that might reshape global trade rules. The European Union has its own complex relationship with China, balancing economic opportunities against concerns about market access and human rights.

The Delegation Dilemma

Trump's reluctance to delegate creates a unique dynamic in international relations. Traditional diplomacy relies on layers of expertise – trade negotiators, regional specialists, cultural advisors, and protocol experts who ensure nothing falls through the cracks. When a single individual attempts to manage all aspects of a complex relationship, critical details inevitably get overlooked.

This approach may reflect Trump's business background, where CEOs can make unilateral decisions. But international relations involve sovereign nations with their own domestic constituencies, legal systems, and political constraints. What works in a corporate boardroom may prove counterproductive in diplomatic settings.

Managing Expectations

The preparation gap has forced both sides to recalibrate their expectations. American officials, once optimistic about comprehensive agreements, now speak more cautiously about "progress on key issues." Chinese counterparts, always more circumspect, have become even more guarded in their public statements.

This expectation management creates its own risks. If both sides enter the summit with dramatically lowered hopes, they may miss opportunities for genuine breakthroughs. Conversely, if either side oversells limited progress, it could set up future disappointments that further damage the relationship.