• AI, trade, technology, and geopolitics in a changing global order

The meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump on Thursday (24) should not be understood simply as another summit between two powerful leaders. 

It takes place at a critical moment in which the relationship between the world’s two largest economies is being reshaped by trade, Artificial Intelligence (AI), technological competition, critical minerals, supply chains, and wider geopolitical tensions. 

The deeper question is therefore not simply what agreement the two leaders may reach, but whether China and the United States are learning to manage strategic competition without allowing that competition to become a source of global instability.

From trade war to technological competition

The China-US relationship has moved considerably beyond the traditional concerns of tariffs, trade deficits, and market access. 

Today, semiconductors, AI, data, computing capacity, critical minerals, digital infrastructure, supply chains, and technological standards are increasingly connected to national economic and strategic power. The two countries are therefore competing not merely over markets, but over the technological architecture of the 21st century.

AI is particularly significant because it crosses almost every traditional boundary. AI is simultaneously an economic, communication, educational, military, and information technology. Competition over AI is consequently not simply a competition between technology companies. It is also a competition over who will influence the standards, infrastructure, and governance frameworks of the emerging AI-driven global society.

This creates an important paradox. China and the US may compete intensely over advanced technologies while simultaneously discovering that some technological risks cannot be managed independently. Serious AI incidents, cyber risks, and disruptions to critical information systems can have consequences beyond national borders. Technological competition may therefore increasingly have to coexist with technological communication.

The summit is not the end of rivalry

It would be premature to interpret the Xi-Trump summit as the beginning of complete cooperation. Significant disagreements remain over trade, advanced technology, critical minerals, Taiwan, and security. The current diplomatic process is better understood as an effort to stabilise a difficult relationship rather than as a comprehensive settlement of the strategic differences between Beijing and Washington.

This is where the idea of managed competition becomes important. Managed competition does not mean that China and the US stop competing. Rather, it means establishing communication, negotiation, and crisis management mechanisms so that competition does not automatically escalate into confrontation. The international community does not necessarily need the two powers to agree on everything. What it needs is for their disagreements to remain within mechanisms of diplomacy, communication, and peaceful negotiation.

Consequently, one of the most important outcomes of the summit may not be a dramatic agreement. It may be whether Washington and Beijing can maintain predictable channels through which disagreements can be communicated before they develop into serious crises.

AI and the new geopolitics

From the perspective of international communication, AI is changing the nature of geopolitical competition itself. In the 20th century, international power was commonly associated with military capability, industrial production, and economic strength. In the 21st century, another dimension has become increasingly important: the capacity to produce, process, and circulate intelligence through digital systems.

AI increasingly influences how information is produced, translated, searched, recommended, personalised, and consumed. It is already affecting journalism, education, business communication, and international public discourse. Whoever possesses advanced AI capability may therefore gain influence not only over technological markets but also over the information environments through which societies understand the world.

The China-US AI competition should consequently not be understood only as a race to produce the most advanced AI system. It is also a competition over computing capacity, data, research ecosystems, technological standards, infrastructure, talent, and governance. At the same time, excessive technological separation could produce a fragmented digital world in which different technological ecosystems develop incompatible standards.

For developing countries, this could become particularly important. Countries may increasingly have to navigate between different technological infrastructures, AI systems, and regulatory environments while protecting their own interests and digital sovereignty.

What does this mean for Asia?

Asia is not merely an observer of the China-US relationship. It is one of the principal regions in which the consequences of their competition will be experienced. Asian economies are deeply connected to Chinese manufacturing, American technology, international finance, and global supply chains. Many countries therefore have strong reasons to avoid a situation in which geopolitical competition forces them into rigid economic or technological blocs.

This does not necessarily mean that Asian countries will remain equally close to both powers in every area. Rather, many may seek sufficient strategic space to cooperate with different partners according to their national priorities. A country may cooperate with China in infrastructure and manufacturing, with the US in technology and higher education, with India in regional connectivity, and with other partners in trade, research, and development.

The emerging international system may therefore become less about choosing one centre of power and more about managing relationships across several centres of power.

SL between opportunity and complexity

For Sri Lanka, this changing environment deserves particular attention. Sri Lanka occupies an important position in the Indian Ocean and maintains relationships with China, the US, India, and other international partners. Its future economic and technological development will inevitably be influenced by the restructuring of international relations.

A more predictable China-US relationship could reduce uncertainty in global trade and supply chains and create opportunities for countries such as Sri Lanka in education, investment, technology, digital transformation, AI, infrastructure, and international cooperation. At the same time, growing technological competition could make national decisions more complicated. Sri Lanka will increasingly need to consider which digital infrastructures it adopts, how it develops AI capacity, how it protects data, and how it prepares its workforce for a rapidly changing technological environment.

This makes education and knowledge diplomacy increasingly important. Sri Lanka should not see itself merely as a recipient of technology from larger powers. It should develop its own research capacity, technological literacy, and international academic networks so that it can participate meaningfully in the emerging Asian knowledge economy.

Universities have an important role in this process. International partnerships in AI, digital communication, media technologies, international communication, and interdisciplinary research can build national capacity while connecting Sri Lankan scholars and students with wider Asian and global knowledge networks.

Communication itself is becoming geopolitical

There is another dimension that deserves greater attention: the China-US relationship is also a contest of narratives. How China understands the United States, how the United States understands China, and how the rest of the world interprets both countries are increasingly influenced by international media, social media, digital platforms, and AI-generated information.

International communication is therefore no longer simply about governments transmitting diplomatic messages to one another. It is also about the construction of global perceptions. In an environment of strategic competition, misinformation, algorithmic amplification, and AI-generated content can intensify misunderstanding. A relatively small diplomatic disagreement can be rapidly amplified across digital platforms and interpreted through highly polarised information environments.

This makes communication channels between major powers more important, not less. Academic exchanges, scientific cooperation, journalism, cultural diplomacy, student mobility, and professional networks can provide spaces where societies communicate beyond official geopolitical narratives. In this sense, communication can become an important infrastructure of peace.

From decoupling to selective interdependence

Another important question is whether the world is moving towards complete economic separation between China and the US. Such complete decoupling would be difficult because the two economies remain deeply connected through trade, manufacturing, investment, technology, and global markets.

A more plausible development may be selective decoupling or strategic diversification, particularly in sensitive technologies and critical supply chains. Governments and companies may seek alternative sources for strategically important products while continuing to trade extensively with both countries.

This could produce a new form of globalisation: not the highly integrated globalisation of previous decades, but a more politically conscious and security-sensitive globalisation. Critical minerals, semiconductors, telecommunications, and AI are likely to remain central to this restructuring.

Where will China-US relations go?

It is difficult to identify a single destination for China-US relations. However, the structure of the relationship suggests that the two countries are likely to remain competitors in technology, trade, strategic influence, and security while simultaneously recognising the necessity of communication.

The future may therefore be characterised by long-term managed strategic competition. China and the US may compete, negotiate, cooperate selectively, and occasionally confront one another while maintaining communication channels designed to prevent escalation.

The quality of those communication channels may become as important as economic or military capabilities. The future relationship will not be determined only by presidents, tariffs, or strategic weapons. It will also be shaped by international narratives, digital platforms, AI-generated information, and the ability of societies to maintain meaningful communication across political differences.

A new Asian century of multiple centres?

The larger historical question is whether the 21st century will be defined by one dominant power replacing another. Perhaps a more useful way to understand the emerging world is through multiple centres of power, technology, and knowledge.

China, the US, India, the European Union, Japan, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and other regional actors will possess different forms of economic, technological, cultural, and geopolitical influence. Asia should not simply become the geographical arena in which major powers compete. Asian countries can also become active producers of knowledge, technology, communication systems, and international norms.

Sri Lanka, despite its relatively small economic size, can participate in this process through education, research, AI capacity building, media innovation, higher education diplomacy, and international academic collaboration. The future of China-US relations therefore matters to Sri Lanka, not because the latter must choose between Beijing and Washington, but because the structure of that relationship will influence the international environment in which Sri Lanka develops its own economic, technological, and diplomatic choices.

The real significance of the Xi-Trump summit may therefore be neither that China and the US have entered a new friendship nor that a new cold war is inevitable. It may be something more complex: the world is learning to live with competition between two major powers that cannot afford to stop communicating with each other.

The challenge is to transform that necessity into institutions, norms, and communication mechanisms capable of preventing competition from becoming confrontation. In the emerging AI century, perhaps the most important strategic question will not simply be who gains greater technological power, but whether technological competition can remain compatible with peaceful coexistence.

For Asia and for Sri Lanka, that may ultimately be the most important question of all.

(The writer is a Senior Lecturer and Head of the Department of Mass Communication of the University of Kelaniya. He has a PhD in Digital Critical Media Studies from Newcastle University, UK) 

(The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the official position of this publication)