United States Institute of Peace

The change in U.S. administrations comes at a moment of dynamic geopolitical shifts, with Washington particularly concerned over the so-called “axis of authoritarianism” involving China, Russia, North Korea and Iran. Beijing’s evolving ties with these nations present serious challenges to U.S. interests in an already complex, and in some ways deteriorating, geostrategic environment.

The Last Biden-Xi Tête-à-Tête

The meeting in Lima marked the U.S. and Chinese leaders’ third in person, following their last encounter in San Francisco a year ago. Those talks yielded an agreement to resume high-level military-to-military communications, which were suspended in August 2022 after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan. For many observers, this signaled a cautious effort to thaw frosty bilateral ties.

Despite the Biden administration being in its lame-duck period, there were some notable outcomes from the November 2024 meeting in Lima. Biden and Xi agreed that decisions to use nuclear weapons should remain under human control, not artificial intelligence, the first time China has made such a statement.

Reflecting on the past four years, Xi noted that while the bilateral relations have experienced “ups and downs,” they have remained “stable on the whole” due to ongoing dialogue and cooperation. He highlighted that “more than 20 communication mechanisms have been restarted or established,” including in diplomacy, security and law enforcement.

Xi also emphasized four non-negotiable “red lines” for China: the Taiwan question, democracy and human rights, China’s path and system, and its right to development. The order likely suggests their relative importance to Beijing or is intended to signal their significance to the incoming Trump administration.

For Washington’s part, Biden emphasized U.S. interests in freedom of navigation and stability in the South China and East China Seas and in the peaceful resolution of differences in the Taiwan Strait, noting that it was an issue in which there are global stakes. He highlighted the value of high-level bilateral discussions, remarking during the meeting that his conversations with Xi “have always been candid and always been frank,” and observing that open channels of communication "prevent miscalculations, and they ensure the competition between our two countries will not veer into conflict.”

According to the U.S. readout of the talks, both sides also affirmed the value of the U.S.-China Defense Policy Coordination Talks, U.S.-China Military Maritime Consultative Agreement meetings, and engagements between theater commanders.

New Tensions in U.S.-China Relations

The emphasis on sustaining leader-level talks, diplomacy and military communications came amid acknowledgment that U.S.-China relations remain fraught with new sources of tension. North Korea’s stepped-up involvement in Russia’s war on Ukraine is high among those sources. For months, Pyongyang had been providing Moscow with munitions that were critical to Russia’s war effort. This summer, the two sides inked a mutual defense pact, which was soon followed by the deployment of North Korean troops to the battlefield.

Biden condemned the North Korean troop presence in Russia, calling it a “dangerous escalation” with “serious consequences” for European and Indo-Pacific security. In response to the North Korean troop deployment, the U.S. has authorized Ukraine to use long-range missiles to strike military targets deep inside Russia. Meanwhile, South Korea, a U.S. ally, has indicated it is prepared to take action tailored to the level of military cooperation between Russia and North Korea, even potentially changing its current policy and providing lethal aid to Ukraine.

That Beijing has refrained from stating that it will seek to restrain Pyongyang from increasing its role in the conflict has fueled concerns in the West that cooperation is expanding among China, Russia and North Korea. Iran’s role in Russia’s war on Ukraine — providing drones used in Russian attacks against Ukraine and reportedly selling other munitions to Russia, including ballistic missiles — has fueled speculation that this “axis” could extend to Iran.  

Although so far the Biden administration has downplayed the idea that the four countries are acting in concert, assessing the relationships among these four countries as “largely transactional” for now, according to Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s recent Foreign Affairs essay. However, the administration sees the four states as aligned on changing the “foundational principles of the international system” and views China as playing a central role in this informal bloc, as it has the largest economy and military capabilities among them.

In response to U.S. sanctions, China has led what the Wall Street Journal called an “axis of evasion,” tightening trade ties with these countries, and Venezuela, to blunt the impact of U.S. sanctions and export controls. While China engages with Russia, North Korea and Iran to counterbalance U.S. influence, Beijing — which has attacked the United States as the source of what it calls “bloc confrontation” — does not want to be perceived as forming its own anti-Western bloc with these revisionist states. Still, there is no doubt that the four states are rowing in the same direction when it comes to pushing against U.S. global leadership.

Geopolitical Trendlines Moving in the Wrong Direction

During President Biden’s time in office, he utilized multilateral summits such as the APEC and G20 to meet Xi on the sidelines, maintaining consistent high-level engagement between the U.S. and China. Fostering mutual confidence between the two leaders and leveraging multilateral summits as a platform for direct dialogue has been vital to managing the many differences between Beijing and Washington. Moving forward, maintaining reliable communication channels through these avenues would help manage tensions and prevent misunderstandings, or worse, on both sides. 

Even still, maintaining open communication lines might not be enough to prevent deterioration in the bilateral relationship, particularly if Washington sees China — in concert with Russia, Iran and North Korea — as attempting to undermine U.S. interests or global leadership.

China has several efforts and initiatives underway that are geared toward that effect. Its Global Security Initiative aims to supplant the U.S.-led international security order with a framework that promotes Beijing’s long-standing international normative preferences. Beijing leads groupings like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which it promotes as alternatives to Western-led institutions and positions as platforms for Global South countries to cooperate outside the U.S.-led international system. BRICS has gained significant momentum in recent years, with important middle and emerging powers joining or expressing interest in doing so. China may publicly eschew global bloc politics, but in these cases, it seems to be pushing a “rest against the West” strategy.

What this all means for the United States and U.S.-China relations is hard to predict. The Trump administration may already have its policy posture toward Beijing firmly formulated. But the best laid plans can quickly be overcome by miscalculations, misunderstandings or unpredictable events, like Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or Hamas’ October 7 attack. Amid the many crises and conflicts ongoing around the globe, both sides would do well to maintain communication channels to manage differences. Given the state of the bilateral relationship and Washington’s worries over an emerging “axis of authoritarianism,” it may be the best we can hope for.