{
  "Pre-Summit Tensions and Escalation": "## Pre-Summit Tensions and Escalation\n\n### Tit-for-Tat Retaliations in the Weeks Leading to APEC\n\nThe period immediately preceding the APEC summit in South Korea was characterized by a significant and rapid escalation of trade hostilities between the United States and China, bringing the relationship to what some analysts described as the \"brink of an abyss\" ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)). This phase of the trade war was marked by a series of retaliatory measures that threatened to derail the planned meeting between President Donald Trump and President Xi Jinping. The escalating friction created a volatile atmosphere, shaking global markets and raising concerns about a new, more damaging phase of economic conflict ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)).\n\nA key catalyst for the heightened tension was the Trump administration's threat to impose tariffs of up to 100% on Chinese goods if the summit did not yield a satisfactory agreement. President Trump explicitly warned that the meeting itself might not happen, accusing China of engaging in \"economic warfare\" and blaming Beijing for the sudden deterioration in relations ([BBC News Tiếng Việt, 2025](https://www.bbc.com/vietnamese/articles/c20e93jr8n7o)). This rhetoric represented a sharp departure from the more optimistic tone following a phone call between the two leaders in September, where Trump had praised the \"progress\" in negotiations on issues ranging from trade to fentanyl trafficking ([BBC News Tiếng Việt, 2025](https://www.bbc.com/vietnamese/articles/c20e93jr8n7o)).\n\nIn response to the American pressure, China deployed its most significant economic leverage: control over the global supply of rare earth elements. Beijing announced new regulations that expanded the number of rare earth elements subject to export controls and tightened restrictions on related manufacturing technology and its use abroad. This move was widely seen as a direct and \"proportional\" response to the Trump administration's actions, particularly the expansion of its export control list to include more Chinese technology entities at the end of September 2025 ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)). The action demonstrated China's readiness to inflict pain on advanced manufacturing sectors in the U.S. and globally, which are heavily dependent on these critical minerals. Chinese analysts framed this as a necessary countermeasure, arguing that Beijing was merely responding to a series of restrictive actions initiated by Washington ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)).\n\nThe timeline below illustrates the rapid escalation in late September and October 2025:\n\n| Date (Approx.) | Action by United States | Action by China |\n| :--- | :--- | :--- |\n| **Late Sept. 2025** | Expanded the number of Chinese tech entities on its export control list, increasing pressure on China's technology sector ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)). | President Xi warned President Trump in a phone call against imposing \"unilateral trade restrictions\" that could undermine negotiations ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)). |\n| **Oct. 9, 2025** | N/A | China's Ministry of Commerce announced it would retaliate against recent U.S. export controls, signaling a hardening stance ([VnExpress, 2025](https://vnexpress.net/chien-luoc-ung-pho-vua-cuong-vua-nhu-cua-trung-quoc-voi-ong-trump-4955584.html)). |\n| **Mid-Oct. 2025** | President Trump publicly threatened 100% tariffs and suggested the APEC meeting with President Xi might be canceled ([BBC News Tiếng Việt, 2025](https://www.bbc.com/vietnamese/articles/c20e93jr8n7o)). | China tightened controls on rare earth exports, a move targeting a key U.S. supply chain vulnerability ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)). |\n\nThis cycle of action and reaction created immense uncertainty, with both sides seemingly digging in their heels. The brinkmanship raised the stakes for the APEC summit, transforming it from a potential venue for a trade deal into a critical juncture to prevent a full-blown economic confrontation ([Diễn Đàn Doanh Nghiệp, 2025](https://diendandoanhnghiep.vn/trien-vong-thoa-thuan-thuong-mai-my-trung-se-ra-sa-10163747.html)).\n\n### Diplomatic Maneuvering and Last-Minute De-escalation Efforts\n\nAmidst the escalating rhetoric and retaliatory trade measures, both Washington and Beijing engaged in frantic, last-minute diplomatic efforts to salvage the planned summit and pull the relationship back from the brink. These maneuvers were characterized by a mixture of public posturing and behind-the-scenes negotiations, reflecting the high stakes involved. The primary goal was to create enough common ground to ensure the meeting between the two leaders would be productive, or at the very least, prevent a public and damaging failure ([BBC News Tiếng Việt, 2025](https://www.bbc.com/vietnamese/articles/c20e93jr8n7o)).\n\nA crucial component of this effort was a planned meeting in Malaysia between U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, scheduled just days before the APEC summit. This high-level dialogue was intended as a final, intensive push to de-escalate tensions and lay the groundwork for the leaders' discussion. The choice of a neutral venue like Malaysia, following earlier rounds of difficult talks in European cities such as Geneva and Stockholm, highlighted the need for a less politically charged environment to find a path forward ([BBC News Tiếng Việt, 2025](https://www.bbc.com/vietnamese/articles/c20e93jr8n7o)).\n\nHowever, the path to the summit remained fraught with uncertainty, largely due to inconsistent signals from Washington. U.S. officials made public statements suggesting the Trump-Xi meeting was in jeopardy, only for the White House to reverse course and confirm its commitment shortly thereafter. For instance, on the morning of October 23, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt formally announced that President Trump would indeed participate in the bilateral meeting, putting an end to speculation that the U.S. might pull out ([BBC News Tiếng Việt, 2025](https://www.bbc.com/vietnamese/articles/c20e93jr8n7o)). This pattern of contradictory messaging was interpreted by some analysts as a negotiation tactic, but it also reflected a genuine lack of internal consensus within the U.S. administration and contributed to global market anxiety ([Diễn Đàn Doanh Nghiệp, 2025](https://diendandoanhnghiep.vn/trien-vong-thoa-thuan-thuong-mai-my-trung-se-ra-sa-10163747.html)).\n\nA significant de-escalation move came from the U.S. side when Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent revealed that the administration would temporarily postpone the threatened 100% tariffs on Chinese goods until after the leaders' meeting. This decision was a critical concession that provided the necessary political space for the summit to proceed. It signaled to Beijing that Washington was willing to pause its campaign of maximum pressure in the interest of dialogue ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)). In a reciprocal gesture of goodwill, China made a commitment on October 27 to purchase a large quantity of U.S. soybeans, a move aimed at warming trade relations and creating a more favorable atmosphere for the upcoming talks ([VietnamPlus, 2025](https://www.vietnamplus.vn/cuoc-gap-thuong-dinh-my-trung-ben-le-apec-2025-diem-dung-chien-thuat-post1073899.vnp)). These gestures, while not resolving the core disputes, were essential in lowering the temperature and ensuring that both leaders could meet without the immediate threat of further economic warfare looming over the discussions.\n\n### The Strategic Calculus of Both Nations Amidst Rising Friction\n\nThe intense pre-summit friction was not merely a series of random escalations but was rooted in the distinct strategic calculations of both the United States and China. Each side employed carefully considered tactics designed to maximize its leverage and achieve its objectives, reflecting a deep understanding of the other's political dynamics and leadership style.\n\nChina's strategy was described by observers as \"vừa cương vừa nhu,\" a Vietnamese phrase meaning a combination of \"hard and soft\" approaches. This dual-track strategy involved simultaneously appealing to President Trump's self-image as a master dealmaker while demonstrating China's unwavering resolve and capacity to retaliate forcefully. On the one hand, Chinese policymakers believed that Trump was fundamentally a transactional leader, not an ideologue, and that his desire for a \"win\" could be used to neutralize more hawkish elements within his administration ([VnExpress, 2025](https://vnexpress.net/chien-luoc-ung-pho-vua-cuong-vua-nhu-cua-trung-quoc-voi-ong-trump-4955584.html)). On the other hand, Beijing understood that President Trump respected strength and unpredictability. Therefore, China's decision to respond decisively to U.S. export controls with its own restrictions on rare earths was a calculated move to show it would not back down. This approach was designed to project power and earn Trump's respect, which Chinese strategists believed was more effective than making unilateral concessions ([VnExpress, 2025](https://vnexpress.net/chien-luoc-ung-pho-vua-cuong-vua-nhu-cua-trung-quoc-voi-ong-trump-4955584.html)). As one scholar at Renmin University noted, China had become \"fully prepared—understanding the 'art of the deal' and where America's weaknesses lie\" ([Báo Quốc Tế, 2025](https://baoquocte.vn/cang-thang-thuong-mai-my-trung-quoc-sat-bo-vuc-bac-kinh-da-hieu-nghe-thuat-dam-phan-quyet-dinh-o-phia-tong-thong-trump-331034.html)).\n\nThe United States, under President Trump, operated on a strategy of maximum pressure. The core of this approach was to create a crisis—threatening massive tariffs and even the cancellation of the summit—to force concessions from Beijing. This tactic was consistent with Trump's long-standing negotiation style of making extreme opening demands to shift the negotiating parameters in his favor. The White House's official position was that these aggressive measures were necessary to restore American industries and fulfill the President's \"America First\" commitment ([VnExpress, 2025](https://vnexpress.net/chien-luoc-ung-pho-vua-cuong-vua-nhu-cua-trung-quoc-voi-ong-trump-4955584.html)). However, this strategy also carried significant risks. The constant threats and inconsistent messaging created instability and risked pushing China into a corner, potentially leading to a complete breakdown in talks. The decision to ultimately postpone the 100% tariff threat demonstrated a recognition that this pressure had to be paired"
}