China sees opportunity in a world turned upside down by Trump
Editor's Note: Sign up for CNN's Meanwhile in China newsletter which explores what you need to know about the country's rise and how it impacts the world.
President Donald Trump's upending of US foreign policy has alarmed allies and nations in need. His administration has frozen foreign aid, threatened to take control of other countries' sovereign territory, exited key international bodies and alienated Europe with an embrace of Russia.
But the head-spinning set of moves, that together signal a retreat from leadership of a liberal order to 'America First,' is playing right into the messaging of the US' biggest rival.
In this time of 'transformation and turbulence,' China has a vision for a 'safer world,' its top diplomat Wang Yi told G20 counterparts last week as he reiterated Beijing's pitch for 'a new path to security' without alliances, 'zero-sum' competition and 'bloc confrontation.'
That vision – coded language for reshaping a world order China sees as unfairly dominated by the West – has been a cornerstone of Chinese leader Xi Jinping's push to step up as an alternative global leader to the US.
And the drive has the potential to take on new relevance, observers say, as Beijing eyes the opportunities to advance its influence in the wake of Trump's US foreign policy upset.
Trump's shake-up was obvious even in the room of foreign ministers from the world's largest economies where Wang, China's most seasoned diplomat, spoke in South Africa last week.
The absence of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio meant no high-ranking US diplomat was there to present an American counterpoint to a gathering of countries that make up 80% of the global population and three-quarters of international trade.
On the surface, this shift has the potential to accelerate China's ascent as a global power, potentially granting the world's second-largest economy space to win more allies, boost its global leadership and shift global norms and rules – such as those on human rights or security – in its favor.
But countries from Europe to Asia are well aware of the wide gap between Beijing's benign rhetoric and its behavior as it flouts a major international ruling to harass Philippine vessels in the South China Sea or intimidates Taiwan – the self-ruling democracy Bejing claims.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has signaled it wants to shift attention from other global conflicts to focus on its rivalry with China. And Beijing will face that and potential fresh US tariffs on its goods as it tries to revive a weak economy – limiting how much it can pour into expanding global influence.
But even still, there are signs that China may see potential for those headwinds to just be some turbulence in a rise made easier by Trump's policies.
'Trump 2.0 era will undoubtedly weaken the US' leadership in international affairs,' an analysis published this month on the website of Shanghai-based think tank Fudan Development Institute said.
'As other countries, particularly the European Union and China, actively respond, the power vacuum left by the US withdrawal may be filled by them … With the US no longer able to dominate global issues as it once did, a new global governance structure may emerge,' it said.
As Trump dismantles the US foreign aid sector – freezing funding to global education, health and development programs – some English-language arms of Chinese state media released scathing critiques of such assistance.
Foreign aid is 'viewed by the US as a tool to maintain its hegemonic position and engage in geopolitical maneuvering,' nationalist tabloid the Global Times said in an article on USAID, an agency Beijing has long seen as a thorn in its side, accusing of sparking democratic 'color revolutions' and indoctrinating US proxies across the world. USAID, which was founded during the Cold War, has long played a key role in advancing American soft power and democratic ideals.
Beijing, however, wasn't looking at Washington's aid freeze as an opportunity because – unlike the US – China treats 'other nations with sincerity, fairness, and selflessness,' an editorial by the state-run outlet claimed.
There has been some indication China will take targeted steps to ramp up its support in regions it sees as strategically important in the wake of the US freeze – a move that would align with what experts have seen as a soft-power struggle between the two countries in recent decades.
In Cambodia, for example, Beijing released $4.4 million for demining operations, as US-backed landmine removal programs were halted in eight provinces, the Associated Press reported, citing the Cambodian Mine Action Center.
Overall, however, experts say there's little chance that Beijing would be able or willing to step up to fill the US aid void.
China is a huge player in global development, funneling more than a trillion dollars into overseas projects between 2000 and 2021. But unlike the US, data show the vast majority of Beijing's development spending is not direct aid, but loans and other financing.
And economic belt-tightening has seen Beijing move away from big-ticket commitments, like building railroads and power plants under Xi's signature Belt and Road overseas infrastructure drive, paring back to more modest projects in recent years.
'Trump is giving China some opportunity – but China might not be able to pick up this US gift,' said Shanghai-based foreign affairs analyst Shen Dingli. 'Due to our gloomy economy and the (downsized) version of Belt and Road … we have less money to buy loyalty.'
Even still, China may look to capitalize on countries' uncertainty about the US to expand its trade and security ties, as well as access to critical minerals, observers say. And countries may take uncertainty in US relations – from the aid freeze to Trump's tariff threats – into calculations for dealing with the world's two largest economies.
'Beijing can send the message to the rest of the world … that the US is fundamentally going to be unreliable,' said Manoj Kewalramani, who heads Indo-Pacific studies at the Takshashila Institution research center in the Indian city of Bengaluru. 'Why would you want to pick a fight with Beijing now?'
There are already signs of concern from some parts about Beijing's potential gains from a Trump-era pullback of US assistance.
In an open letter to Trump posted on social platform X, Nepalese lawmaker Rajendra Bajgain last week warned that a 'vacuum created by reduced American involvement will inevitably be filled by other powers that do not share the values of democracy and free enterprise.'
Two major US-funded infrastructure projects as well as other initiatives in Nepal have been put on hold following the US aid freeze, Reuters reported.
In a response to a request for comment from CNN, China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the US 'adjustments' were America's internal affairs, and that Beijing has 'consistently' provided assistance 'to the best of its ability.'
China's aid 'aligns with the needs of recipient countries for socio-economic development and the improvement of people's livelihoods,' it said.
But even as some of Trump's moves so far have created potential openings for Beijing, there's also the hanging question of how his administration may ultimately calibrate its aid and foreign policy – and its rivalry with China.
When asked this month if the foreign aid shake-up was giving China and Russia an opportunity to expand their influence, national security adviser Mike Waltz told NBC's 'Meet the Press' that 'all too often these missions and these programs, number one, are not in line with strategic US interests like pushing back on China.'
And speaking to European counterparts earlier this month, US defense chief Pete Hegseth warned that the US could no longer be 'primarily focused on the security of Europe.' Instead, the US is 'prioritizing deterring war with China in the Pacific,' he said.
There have also been signs of Trump's brash diplomacy working against Beijing's benefit.
Panama, the first country in Latin America to sign onto China's Belt and Road Initiative, announced it would pull out of the scheme after Trump repeatedly threatened to 'take back' the Panama Canal, falsely claiming Panama had ceded its operations to China.
And in Europe, even as Trump officials lambasted European and NATO counterparts earlier this month and warmed to Russia, US allies there appeared galvanized, rather than dissuaded, to bolster NATO with more spending. That pivot will also mean Beijing is watching closely whether Washington is able to peel away its close ally Moscow, as the White House has signaled it may hope to do.
Even still, Beijing will likely see the time as right to put more focus on repairing strained relations with Europe – a potential opening that could widen if Trump slaps tariffs on European goods.
Trump has also so far not shaken US alliances in Asia, as Beijing may have hoped. And it's not clear that 'America First' will leave a security void in Asia or weaken the US alliance system there.
The US president held seemingly successful meetings with Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and Indian counterpart Narendra Modi this month, and signaled support for the Pacific-focused AUKUS alliance of Canberra, London and Washington.
And uncertainty or future demands from Trump could also strengthen arsenals and partnerships in the region. On Monday, US allies the Philippines and Japan agreed to further deepen their defense collaborations.
Beijing, so far, has been seen as continuing to probe the limits of its own military muscle-flexing in the region, in recent days conducting what New Zealand said were unprecedented live-fire drills in the Tasman Sea.
On Wednesday, Taiwan accused China of setting up a zone for 'live-fire training' without advance notice a day after the island's coast guard detained a Chinese-crewed cargo ship suspected of cutting an undersea cable in the Taiwan Strait.
But Beijing will be carefully watching how Trump's policies and his allies' response to them weigh on its core ambitions to defend its territorial claims in the South China Sea – and take control of the self-ruling democracy of Taiwan.
'As long as the war in Europe would be put to an end, China's freedom of action in our part of the world might be more seriously checked and balanced,' said Shen in Shanghai.
'China must be watching, calculating how it should adjust its new approach to this fast-moving situation,' he said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNN
27 minutes ago
- CNN
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in ‘matter of months'
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium 'in a matter of months,' contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades. Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported on by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months. While the final military and intelligence assessment has yet to come, Trump has repeatedly claimed to have 'completely and totally obliterated' Tehran's nuclear program. The 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran began earlier this month when Israel launched an unprecedented attack it said aimed at preventing Tehran developing a nuclear bomb. Iran has insisted its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. The US then struck three key Iranian nuclear sites before a ceasefire began. The extent of the damage to Tehran's nuclear program has been hotly debated ever since. US military officials have in recent days provided some new information about the planning of the strikes, but offered no new evidence of their effectiveness against Iran's nuclear program. Following classified briefings this week, Republican lawmakers acknowledged the US strikes may not have eliminated all of Iran's nuclear materials – but argued that this was never part of the military's mission. Asked about the different assessments, Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told CBS's 'Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan': 'This hourglass approach in weapons of mass destruction is not a good idea.' 'The capacities they have are there. They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that. But as I said, frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there,' he told Brennan, according to a transcript released ahead of the broadcast. 'It is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage,' Grossi went on to say. 'Iran has the capacities there; industrial and technological capacities. So if they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again.' Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes. 'We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending.' CNN has asked the White House for comment on Grossi's claims. Grossi stressed the need for the IAEA to be granted access to Iran, to assess nuclear activities. He said Iran had been disclosing information to the agency up until recent Israeli and US strikes, but that 'there were some things that they were not clarifying to us.' 'In this sensitive area of the number of centrifuges and the amount of material, we had perfect view,' he said. 'What I was concerned about is that there were other things that were not clear. For example, we had found traces of uranium in some places in Iran, which were not the normal declared facilities. And we were asking for years, why did we find these traces of enriched uranium in place x, y or z? And we were simply not getting credible answers.' The initial Pentagon assessment said Tehran may have moved some of the enriched uranium out of the sites before they were attacked but Trump has insisted nothing was moved. 'It's logical to presume that when they announce that they are going to be taking protective measures, this could be part of it (moving the material). But, as I said, we don't know where this material could be, or if part of it could have been, you know, under the attack during those 12 days,' Grossi told Brennan. Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program. Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons. CNN's Mohammed Tawfeeq contributed reporting.


CNN
30 minutes ago
- CNN
UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran could again begin enriching uranium in ‘matter of months'
The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog says US strikes on Iran fell short of causing total damage to its nuclear program and that Tehran could restart enriching uranium 'in a matter of months,' contradicting President Donald Trump's claims the US set Tehran's ambitions back by decades. Rafael Grossi's comments appear to support an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, first reported on by CNN, which suggests the United States' strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites last week did not destroy the core components of its nuclear program, and likely only set it back by months. While the final military and intelligence assessment has yet to come, Trump has repeatedly claimed to have 'completely and totally obliterated' Tehran's nuclear program. The 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran began earlier this month when Israel launched an unprecedented attack it said aimed at preventing Tehran developing a nuclear bomb. Iran has insisted its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. The US then struck three key Iranian nuclear sites before a ceasefire began. The extent of the damage to Tehran's nuclear program has been hotly debated ever since. US military officials have in recent days provided some new information about the planning of the strikes, but offered no new evidence of their effectiveness against Iran's nuclear program. Following classified briefings this week, Republican lawmakers acknowledged the US strikes may not have eliminated all of Iran's nuclear materials – but argued that this was never part of the military's mission. Asked about the different assessments, Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told CBS's 'Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan': 'This hourglass approach in weapons of mass destruction is not a good idea.' 'The capacities they have are there. They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that. But as I said, frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there,' he told Brennan, according to a transcript released ahead of the broadcast. 'It is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage,' Grossi went on to say. 'Iran has the capacities there; industrial and technological capacities. So if they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again.' Grossi also told CBS News that the IAEA has resisted pressure to say whether Iran has nuclear weapons or was close to having weapons before the strikes. 'We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction (of nuclear weapons), but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending.' CNN has asked the White House for comment on Grossi's claims. Grossi stressed the need for the IAEA to be granted access to Iran, to assess nuclear activities. He said Iran had been disclosing information to the agency up until recent Israeli and US strikes, but that 'there were some things that they were not clarifying to us.' 'In this sensitive area of the number of centrifuges and the amount of material, we had perfect view,' he said. 'What I was concerned about is that there were other things that were not clear. For example, we had found traces of uranium in some places in Iran, which were not the normal declared facilities. And we were asking for years, why did we find these traces of enriched uranium in place x, y or z? And we were simply not getting credible answers.' The initial Pentagon assessment said Tehran may have moved some of the enriched uranium out of the sites before they were attacked but Trump has insisted nothing was moved. 'It's logical to presume that when they announce that they are going to be taking protective measures, this could be part of it (moving the material). But, as I said, we don't know where this material could be, or if part of it could have been, you know, under the attack during those 12 days,' Grossi told Brennan. Meanwhile, Tehran has made moves towards withdrawing from international oversight over its nuclear program. Iran's parliament passed a bill halting cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog, while the Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, also said that the country could also rethink its membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibits signatories from developing nuclear weapons. CNN's Mohammed Tawfeeq contributed reporting.


Hamilton Spectator
31 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Interest in ‘elbows up' merchandise waning ahead of Canada Day, businesses say
When Rachael Coe decided to launch an 'elbows up' merchandise line at her store in Yarmouth, N.S., in March, she said it was an immediate bestseller. Within a week, Coe said her Timeless Memories shop had already made 400 sales. By the end of the first month, she had sold 2,500 products ranging from T-shirts to hoodies to car decals. Demand for items bearing Canada's rallying cry against U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs and annexation threats was so high that Coe launched a website to keep up with the surge. 'It was a response from all over Canada,' she said. 'We reached every single province then we started covering worldwide. Our 'elbows up' merch went everywhere.' Many Canadian businesses hopped on the patriotic trend that also saw Ontario Premier Doug Ford wearing a 'Canada is not for sale' ball cap ahead of a January meeting with Canada's premiers and prime minister. But Coe's sales started slowing down by May. And despite a slight boost ahead of Canada Day, she said the 'elbows up' line is now selling at similar rates to the classic red-and-white merchandise she sells every year around this time. Although business owners say they are selling more Canada-themed products this year leading up to July 1, many have also noted a decline in 'elbows up' merchandise sales. The rallying cry, initially embraced as a grassroots movement at the height of cross-border trade tensions and Trump's musings about making Canada the 51st state, has shifted to a more generic expression of Canadian pride amid continued tensions, retailers and experts say. Others note that the phrase 'elbows up' has increasingly been used in a partisan context, contributing to the marketing shift. Stephanie Tomlin, Toronto-based owner of the online business Shop Love Collective, said she saw an explosion in 'elbows up' merchandise sales in March, selling as many as 10 or 15 products per day. Similarly, her sales began to stagnate in May. Leading up to Canada Day, she said she's selling 'quite a bit more' merchandise compared with previous years, but that's due to interest in Canada-themed products across the board. 'I think the climate in Canada is a little bit more settled after the election and that … we feel like we will never be the 51st state,' Tomlin said, adding that Canadian patriotism is becoming less combative as annexation talks have died down. Howard Ramos, a professor of sociology at Western University, said 'elbows up' became 'more partisan than it used to be' when Prime Minister Mark Carney embraced the phrase in his election campaign ads in late March. 'It's just added to how the expression is dying down as a pan-Canadian claim,' he said. 'Now you see on social media, especially from Conservative handles, the use of 'elbows up' in a sarcastic way to criticize Mark Carney or Liberal policies.' Negative online comments about the 'elbows up' movement have discouraged Coe from promoting her products on Facebook. But when she's interacting with customers in her Yarmouth shop, she said the phrase isn't as divisive. 'It's not a political term, and it simply means that you're defending your country, and everyone should be defending our country, just like you would defend (against) a goal in hockey,' Coe said. Danielle McDonagh, owner of Vernon, B.C.-based Rowantree Clothing, said she stopped promoting her 'elbows up' merchandise on a large scale when she noticed the phrase being interpreted as an 'anti-Conservative' and 'boomer' movement. For McDonagh, increased concern about the political climate in the United States has also chipped away at the lightheartedness of the 'elbows up' movement. 'I think some of the levity is gone for me,' she said. While sales of her 'elbows up' products have dropped by about 90 per cent since hitting 1,000 in the first month, she said she continues to promote the merchandise in small batches at local markets in Vernon. Business owners say their customers continue to prioritize supporting the Canadian economy, as they are routinely answering questions about where their products are manufactured. And the push to buy Canadian isn't just coming from this side of the border. Coe said many American tourists arriving by ferry from Maine visit her shop in search of Canadian merchandise. '(Tourists) want to support us just as much as Canadians want to support us,' Coe said. McDonagh said her business sees similar interest from Americans. 'I'm shipping a lot of Canada-centric merchandise to the States, which I just love,' McDonagh said. 'People chat with me on my site and say … we're supporting you.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 25, 2025.