（Adjunct Distinguished Professor of Diplomacy and Director, Center for WTO Studies College of International Affairs National Chengchi University To-hai Liou）
Immediately following the highly anticipated Trump-Xi Beijing Summit, Russian President Putin also paid a state visit to China. This was clearly no coincidence, but rather underscored the fact that the current global landscape has evolved into a tripolar balance of power among three superpowers. The term “superpower” refers to a nation so powerful that small and medium-sized countries cannot compete with it, either individually or even in alliance. Currently, only the United States, China, and Russia can be considered superpowers, as they occupy the top three spots in the global power rankings and dominate the world in key sectors, holding absolute advantages. The United States, ranked first, is the world’s largest economy, dominating in capital, cutting-edge technology, and financial services (according to the IMF, the U.S. led with US$30.77 trillion in 2025, accounting for approximately 26% of the global total, while China followed by surpassing US$20 trillion, accounting for about 18% of the global total). China, in second place, is the world’s leading manufacturing power (in 2025, China’s manufacturing value-added is projected to account for approximately 25% to 27% of GDP, more than double the U.S.’s 11%), and, when measured by purchasing power parity (PPP), China is the world’s largest economy (US$44.3 trillion, with the U.S. ranking second at US$32.4 trillion) and market, as well as the largest source of top-tier AI talent globally, with 68% of such talent now choosing to develop their careers within China. Currently, approximately 35% of AI researchers working at U.S. institutions graduated from Chinese universities. Russia, ranked third, though its economy cannot be compared to that of the U.S. or China, is the country with the largest stockpile of nuclear warheads globally, currently holding approximately 5,459 warheads. Russia’s nominal GDP ranges between $2 trillion and $2.5 trillion, ranking it roughly 8th to 11th among nations worldwide. However, its GDP measured by purchasing power parity (PPP) ranks fourth globally. It is no wonder that Russia announced a three-day nuclear exercise during the Trump-Xi summit. The exercise covered the transport of nuclear munitions, missile assembly, and simulated nuclear strikes. The drills showcased the Yars intercontinental ballistic missiles and the Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles.
In fact, Russia can be said to play the role of a strategic balancer between the two superpowers, the United States and China. Russia is an essential strategic partner for China’s Belt and Road Initiative and for the future, when the Arctic ice melts, the region will become the shortest shipping route between Asia and Europe. At the same time, Russia is a vital partner for U.S. President Trump in his efforts to prevent a Sino-Russia alliance against the U.S. and to drive a wedge between the two nations through the joint efforts to bring an end to the Russia-Ukraine War and forthcoming cooperation in Alaska energy and the Arctic shipping routes after the US gets Greenland. In addition, Russia is currently China’s largest supplier of crude oil, and one of China’s top four suppliers of natural gas. On the other hand, Russia is the United States’ largest external supplier of enriched uranium.
Nevertheless, scholars of international relations generally agree that a tripolar system is highly unstable, as it is prone to situations where two countries join forces to eliminate a third, or where one country becomes the object of competition between the other two—the so-called “pivotal role.” Currently, both the United States and Russia are grappling with the burdens of war and are eager to extricate themselves from these conflicts—the former from its conflict with Iran, though only a temporary ceasefire is in place, and the latter from its war with Ukraine, which has lasted over four years. This places China in a favorable position among the three, positioning it as a pivotal player that both the U.S. and Russia are vying to court. China-Russia relations have been further strengthened through the recent Xi-Putin summit right after Trump-Xi summit, expanding from traditional energy cooperation to comprehensive collaboration in trade, economy, science and technology, and infrastructure. The two leaders also addressed the issue of opposing Taiwan independence and condemned all provocative acts that deny the achievements of the victory in World War II or seek to “rehabilitate” fascism and militarism—a clear jab at Japan and a rebuke of U.S. unipolar hegemony. There is no doubt that the United States is at a disadvantage among the three big powers. It is necessary to take actions such as bringing an end to the Russia-Ukraine war through active US-Russia collaboration, and leveraging the acquisition of Greenland to strengthen U.S.-Russian cooperation in the Arctic and Alaska, thereby driving a wedge between China and Russia. Of course, improving relations with Beijing could also be used to exert pressure on Russia, with the aim of quickly positioning the United States as the object of pursuit for both China and Russia.
The most notable thing about the results of this Trump-Xi summit is that the two countries agreed to establish a constructive, strategically stable relationship based on fairness and mutual benefit, which will serve as the overarching framework for managing U.S.-China relations as a whole. However, Xi Jinping emphasized that Taiwan is the “core of China’s core interests.” He warned that if the United States insists on intervening, military conflict between the two countries would be difficult to avoid. In other words, China insists that before a strategically stable relationship between the United States and China can be established, the “Taiwan issue”—which Beijing views as the greatest obstacle to bilateral relations—must be resolved once and for all. Although Trump has not responded to this officially, his stance on Taiwan has undergone a subtle shift. He has repeatedly stated that the United States is 9,500 miles (approximately 15,000 kilometers) away from Taiwan, while China is only about 67 miles (approximately 108 kilometers) away. This clearly expresses his unwillingness to pay a high price for a conflict thousands of miles away and serves as a prelude to adjusting U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and defense policies. Furthermore, in an interview, Trump stated that the “Taiwan card” is highly effective, so it cannot be ruled out that Trump might be willing to make political concessions—such as halting arms sales to Taiwan, opposing Taiwanese independence, or even promoting peaceful dialogue across the Taiwan Strait—in exchange for massive economic benefits worth trillions of dollars. Not to mention that Trump is known for prioritizing big deals, given that he is an extremely rare U.S. president who defines national interests in terms of economic gains. U.S. Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao has stated at a Senate hearing that the US will suspend arms sales to Taiwan. The reason given is to prioritize ensuring an adequate supply of ammunition for U.S. forces involved in Operation Epic Fury and the ongoing conflict with Iran. However, the Chinese side did not explicitly state whether it would grant the United States any economic benefits, indicating a lack of trust in Trump; it will only provide economic feedback after the U.S. clearly formulates a Taiwan policy that satisfies China.
