The U.S.-Iran war is reshaping both the timing of President Donald Trump’s planned visit to China and the broader agenda of China-U.S. relations, with global issues increasingly set to take precedence over traditional bilateral concerns, said a group of experts convened by the Macau Institute for Regional and Strategic Studies, an academic think tank and research hub in Macau.
The seminar, titled The U.S.-Iran War and Trump’s Visit to China, took place on March 20, moderated by the Institute’s Director Dr. Wang Jianwei. Scholars from China and the United States discussed the impact of the U.S.-Iran conflict on Washington’s global strategy and on China-U.S. relations.
Participants generally agreed that the postponement of Trump’s visit was not due to a single factor, but rather the result of overlapping considerations on both sides amid a complex international environment. At the same time, they noted that the outbreak of war could fundamentally reshape the agenda of future China-U.S. dialogue.
Dr. Wang Jianwei raised three key questions at the outset: What is the intrinsic connection between the U.S.-Iran war and Trump’s planned visit to China? What are the real reasons behind the postponement? And how might this decision affect the future trajectory of China-U.S. relations? Scholars engaged in in-depth discussions around these issues.
Postponement: A “Mutual Choice” Driven by Multiple Considerations
Regarding the reasons for the delay, several scholars noted that while the official explanation cited the need for Trump to remain in the United States to manage the war, deeper political and diplomatic calculations were at play.
Huang Renwei, a professor at Fudan University, pointed out that China had not fully endorsed the originally proposed timing of the visit in late March. Against the backdrop of U.S. military action against Iran and the resulting controversies over international law, hosting the U.S. leader at that moment would have placed China in a moral dilemma—either publicly criticizing Washington or remaining silent. Trump’s subsequent decision to postpone the trip effectively created diplomatic space for both sides to adjust.
From the U.S. perspective, domestic political risks were also significant. Some participants, citing views from Washington policy circles, noted that a “wartime president” visiting a strategic competitor could carry political liabilities, particularly if U.S. casualties occurred during the trip. Rising oil prices, growing anti-war sentiment, and the approaching midterm elections further increased pressure on the White House to reconsider the schedule.
Xia Liping, a professor at Tongji University, said the Trump administration needed to manage the pace of the war within domestic political constraints, limiting the feasibility of overseas travel in the near term. Taiyi Sun, an associate professor at Christopher Newport University in Virginia, similarly emphasized that domestic priorities drive decision-making in the Trump administration and that the political risks of such a visit during wartime contributed to the postponement.
Economic and trade considerations also played a role. Energy cooperation—originally seen as a key topic for the visit—has been complicated by the war. “One of Trump’s key objectives in visiting China is to sell energy,” Sun noted. “But as the war with Iran escalates, uncertainty in U.S. energy supply makes this issue more complicated.”
Zhiqun Zhu, a professor of international relations and political science at Bucknell University in Pennsylvania, observed that Trump had explicitly named China when discussing the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, underscoring the importance he attaches to Beijing—potentially viewing it as a peer competitor alongside, or even above, U.S. allies. With midterm elections approaching and domestic pressures mounting, Zhu said Trump has a strong incentive to improve relations with China and secure progress on economic and trade issues to bolster his standing at home.
Strategic Linkages: The Middle East and the Indo-Pacific Are Not Separate
On the relationship between the U.S.-Iran conflict and U.S. strategy toward China, participants widely agreed that Washington’s strategic deployments in the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific are closely interconnected.
Zhu noted that the United States frequently reallocates military resources between the two regions—for example, shifting forces from the Middle East to the Indo-Pacific during periods of tension in Asia, and vice versa when crises escalate in the Middle East. This, he said, means U.S. decision-making on Iran necessarily takes into account broader strategic considerations, including China.
He further argued that before launching military action against Iran, Washington likely assessed potential reactions from both China and Russia. Its decision to proceed suggests confidence in its ability to withstand diplomatic or even military pressure from the two countries.
Geng Xin, a commentator with Shenzhen TV, added that the Trump administration currently holds a relatively optimistic view of China-U.S. relations, seeing them as broadly manageable. This perception, he said, may have strengthened its confidence in taking action in the Middle East. He also noted that Washington believes its allies have adopted a more moderate stance toward China, reinforcing this strategic outlook.
Shifting Agenda: Global Issues May Eclipse Bilateral Ones
Several experts emphasized that a prolonged U.S.-Iran war could significantly alter the priorities of future China-U.S. engagement.
Huang Renwei noted that if the visit had taken place as originally scheduled in late March, discussions would likely have focused on bilateral issues such as trade and Taiwan. However, with the outbreak of war, global issues—including the postwar international economy, energy security, the U.S. dollar system, and the Middle East order—are likely to take center stage, reducing the relative importance of traditional bilateral topics.
Li Kaisheng, vice president of the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, echoed this view, stating that the war could fundamentally reshape the negotiation agenda. If the visit eventually takes place, global issues such as postwar economic reconstruction and energy security may replace traditional bilateral concerns as the core focus, while the balance of bargaining power between China and the United States will evolve alongside the trajectory of the conflict.
Some participants also noted that the course of the war itself will affect negotiation dynamics. A prolonged conflict could intensify volatility in global energy markets. However, due to its diversified energy structure and rapid development of renewable energy, China may be relatively less affected.
Uncertain Outlook: Risks and Opportunities Coexist
Looking ahead to China-U.S. relations in 2026, participants broadly agreed that uncertainty is rising.
Continued delays in high-level meetings could weaken stabilizing mechanisms in bilateral ties. Some observers noted that leader-level engagement has served as a “guardrail,” and its absence may lead to earlier escalation of sensitive issues, including U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and restrictions in the technology sector.
Jin Canrong, a professor at Renmin University of China, argued that U.S. policy toward China in 2026 has undergone a fundamental shift. Rather than direct confrontation, Washington is adopting a more sophisticated and multi-pronged approach, reflecting the difficulty of prevailing in head-on competition. He characterized the core of Trump’s China strategy as “stabilizing China, drawing in Russia, and pressuring Europe,” while competing with China for resources, controlling key maritime routes, building supply chains that exclude China, and restricting China’s access to intermediary markets. In his view, bilateral relations remain tense and strategic competition will persist.
At the same time, some scholars expressed cautious optimism. Zhu, the professor at Bucknell University, noted that any willingness by a U.S. president to visit China is a positive signal. In a period of heightened global tensions, such engagement can help prevent strategic miscalculations and signal a shared intent to maintain communication.
Overall, participants agreed that the U.S.-Iran conflict has not only disrupted the timing of Trump’s planned visit to China but may also reshape the broader framework of China-U.S. engagement. As geopolitical uncertainties intensify, the scope and priorities of bilateral dialogue are likely to evolve, underscoring the continued importance of high-level communication in managing strategic competition.
(China Review New Agency and Zhi News contributed to this report)