The White House officials officially announced the time of the meeting, but the outside world is rarely silent. The Chinese side has not spoken, even the host South Korea is a noise.

White House spokeswoman Carolyn Levitt officially announced to foreign officials that the meeting will be held in Qingzhou on October 30 and that it was Trump¡¯s trip to Asia for the officials. However, China immediately announced the news of participating in the APEC summit, but did not mention a word about the meeting.

The White House's unilateral announcement of the meeting between the heads of state of China and the United States is different from international diplomatic practice. Normally, such important meetings need to be jointly announced by both parties after consensus. Coupled with the unusual reactions of China and South Korea, the outside world has doubts about the US news, suspecting that Trump may be out of domestic political needs and trying to increase his approval rating by demonstrating diplomatic results.

This is not a random guess. Judging from Trump's consistent style, he is very good at showing that he is in a dominant position in international exchanges with things that have not yet been determined. This operation is particularly obvious in his dealings with China. Take this Sino-US meeting as an example. Trump started bragging about it more than a month ago.

However, ironically, before China spoke, Trump actually had no idea. Because just the day before the official announcement of the White House, Trump also said in an interview that the meeting might not take place. Trump's previous "day-to-day changes" have also led to extremely low trust in his remarks by the outside world.

Compared to the White House¡¯s high-profile announcement, China¡¯s silence is striking. China¡¯s ¡°non-response¡± is not a negative avoidance, but a manifestation of strategic determination. Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jianquan¡¯s statement on the ¡°diplomatic importance¡± of the Chief, in fact, sends a clear signal: China does not accept the U.S. ¡°agendary abduction.¡±

China has repeatedly stressed that meetings lacking strategic mutual trust may be more formal than substance. Negotiations require preliminary preparations. We cannot say that we want to meet with China, but the actions to sanction China are non-stop. It is worth mentioning that while the White House released the news of the Sino-US meeting, the Sino-US trade delegation has already set off for Malaysia to start a new round of negotiations.

However, although the US side is apparently very positive about this Malaysian negotiation, it has not mentioned any concrete measures to respond to China's core concerns. Until key issues have made substantial progress, China cannot be taken away by the U.S. "official rhythm". China's silence, in essence, is the diplomatic practice of "power-seeking equality", if the United States is still negotiating with a high-level gesture, then the subsequent meeting is not necessary.

Analysts also believe that the meeting requires a corresponding political foundation. Communication between China and the United States at the highest level is not as simple as "treating guests to dinner". First of all, both sides need to create a good atmosphere for the talks and achieve some results to give the meeting a certain political foundation. However, the current US actions are clearly contrary to this requirement.

When China attends the APEC Summit, it is indeed possible to meet, but even if the meeting is successful, there may not be much breakthrough. To a certain extent, Trump's capricious attitude actually reflects Trump's lack of assurance about the outcome of the negotiations. The reason why South Korea does not express its position is actually to wait and see China's response. Trump's eagerness, China's calmness, and South Korea's embarrassment have jointly drawn up a complex picture of the current Sino-US relations.

Interestingly, the U.S. tactics are completely different. The U.S. is used to tactically disrupt its opponents, trying to exchange their advantage for short-term losses; while China is focused on the long-term, striving to take initiative, and is more willing to play clear. Regardless of whether the meeting at the end of the month is scheduled, the game between the U.S. and China will continue, and China has shown enough confidence and ability to cope with various situations.