If many see President Donald Trump as unpredictable, it's probably because he is. Not much longer than a month ago, he was making public pronouncements against China on issues ranging from tariffs to election meddling. That seems hard to believe now. He has just been seen to shower the warmest 'bestie' sentiments on his visiting Chinese counterpart, President Xi Jinping. Serious Trumpologists will note that, in whatever the US President says or does, he scrupulously avoids any inappropriate reference to the Chinese leader. For like Thomas Carlyle, unwittingly or otherwise, Mr. Trump believes history is made by powerful individuals, whom that English literary celebrity had called "heroes". Mr. Trump clearly considers Mr. Xi as one such, as he does himself. So he should have no philosophical qualms about uncomfortable politics standing in the way of his cooperating with the other protagonist toward achieving any common goals, in his perception, in the creation of history.

Hence the grandeur of the reception accorded the Chinese leader when he and his wife came by for the State visit to Washington in late September. The city had not witnessed such pomp and circumstance associated with such an occasion for years. Mr. Xi and Madam Peng Liyuan were greeted by Mr. Trump and First Lady Melania at the airport on their arrival with unparalleled magnificence. Not only was a splendid red carpet rolled out, it was scrupulously brushed clean by uniformed attendants on their hands and knees! The military turned out to 'present arms' at the ceremony with a spit and polish that would be the envy of the finest contingent of the Buckingham Palace Household Guards. Later, at a resplendent banquet at the White House, the menu poetically defied Rudyard Kipling, whose doubting concerns about the east meeting the west were overcome by the delicacy item of sesame crusted sea bass combined with A tour of Mr. Trump's beloved, yet unfinished ballroom which was thrown into the program. It displayed a calculated spontaneity that resonated well with the visitors as a smart diplomatic improvisation. In all, protocol wise, Mr. Trump should deserve high plaudits for his thoughtful gestures.

But both sides were well aware, however, that for the visit to be finally described as a success would take much more, Nonetheless, all these measures helped substantially. Through all programs Mr. Trump was ebullient and effusive, while Mr. Xi remained remarkably staid and non- chalent. While this perhaps signaled differences in culture, it also reflected some in politics. Mr. Xi seemed to underscore the point that the rise of China should not be seen as a burgeoning threat to the US. However, he left no stones unturned to demonstrate that China was bent on 'catching up' with the US, which he believed to be an inexorable process. It is a classical Chinese belief that competition can spawn comradeship, as in the martial arts. He has, therefore, time and again stressed the need to avoid the "Thucydides trap", indicating the Chines penchant for seeking wisdom from the Classical traditions of both the West and the East. The ancient Greek historian of that name, while explaining the causes of the Peloponnesian war, had warned that the relationship between a rising power and another already risen, can be fraught. He had observed that when Athens grew strong, there was great fear in Sparta, and war was inevitable. An American analyst, Graham Allison, in a book published in 2017 and titled "Destined for War" had also argued that the "trap" is not a deterministic absolute.

But Mr. Trump did not seem inclined to engage Mr. Xi in an intellectual symposium. He seemed to be intuitively aware of such facts. He had limited patience for academic repartees. Instead, he opted to go all out to please. There were palpable reasons. His mind was fixated on the November mid-term elections in his country. Since the wars in Ukraine and Iran are unlikely to end soon, taming the Chinese dragon, he fathomed with a modicum of reason, would win him some plus points. His notions of seeing himself as a man of peace also received comfort and succor from a fortuitous speech at the UN around that time by Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif of Pakistan, a tested friend of China, who credited the US President as having saved millions of lives by "intervening " to stop last year's India Pakistan war. The fact that Mr. Trump registered this praise most positively was evidenced by his own immediate extolling of Mr. Sharif (and the "Field Marshal", that is, Asim Munir, head of Pakistan's Armed Forces.) This also reinforced the widely held belief that reciprocity was a marked characteristic of Mr. Trump, which his global peers have already noted.

The China-US bilateral talks went more or less smoothly. The two leaders focused on building a "constructive relations of strategic stability". The idea stresses mutual respect, fairness, and understanding. At aims at avoidance of conflict through 'win-win' collaboration, a Chinese contribution to diplomatic jargon. The subjects on the table could be mainly grouped under "Three 'T's": trade, technology and, last but by no means least, Taiwan.

On trade, the two sides extended the existing truce by two months. It now runs until January 10, 2027, well beyond the US mid-term polls, to Mr. Trump's relief. Exemptions for some agricultural products, medical devices, and non-sensitive consumer goods were discussed. An overseeing Board of Trade was conceived. Mr. Trump highlighted benefits for American farmers. Mr. Xi called the new arrangements "good news", for the two economies, and for the world. The modest steps did not resolve deeper disputes over tariffs, market access or industrial policy. Yet they fitted the theme of constructive stability, both sides choosing to manage friction rather than escalate it.

Technology, especially Artificial Intelligence (AI) received close attention. Mr. Trump insisted on calling it 'Super Intelligence (SI)' a term he coined during his recent UN speech that evoked some consternation in concerned circles. Again, this was meant to show, albeit in somewhat simple terms, that the advance was a product of human ingenuity, rather than of any extraneous sources. He insisted that the US would not slow its efforts in this area. Mr. Xi stressed that AI must stay under human control at all times, and serve the good of humanity. No major limit to, or joint rules emerged. Export controls on advanced chips remained in place. However, importantly, they agreed that technology rivalry was manageable. The presence of major tech- executives at the dinner underscored the economic stakes.

Taiwan remained the most sensitive issue. Mr. Xi pressed the US to handle the question with prudence. The Chinese accounts noted that he had urged Washington to OPPOSE "Taiwan independence", a language. This was a language stronger than used earlier. While Mr. Trump stated that he understood the Chinese position, no public change in the US policy was announced. The discussion reflected the limits of strategic stability. It is noteworthy that Beijing rigidly asserts the "One China principle", that there is only one China, and the People's Republic is its sole government. On the other hand, the US' "One China policy" is a nuanced and flexible diplomatic stance, which acknowledges, or takes note of Beijing's claim without actually endorsing it. Taiwan was obviously a 'core interest' and a 'red line'. For Washington support to Taiwan remained important, despite some stalling on an arms delivery. But by keeping the issues contained within private talks, both sides preserved the broader relationships. This fitted the idea of managing differences without derailing overall stability.

The visit's global implications were significant. It brought some stability, albeit temporarily, between the two largest economies, easing pressure on supply chains, energy markets and financial system. Markets are poised to gain short term confidence from trade extension and dialogue channels. But what of the long run .Deeper rivalry over technology, security and influence will continue. This obviates apprehensions that US and China that a "Group of Two (G2)" condominium that will create a global hegemony. For now the relationship can be best understood as competitive coexistence under temporary rues, not joint rule.

In the 16th century, the French King Francis 1 had sarcastically asked to be shown that edict of God ('Adam's Will") that divided the world between Spain and Portugal! Contemporary world leaders need not ponder over a similar query, with the US and China on their minds!

Ambassador Iftekhar Chowdhury (Rtd.) PhD President, Cosmos Foundation, Dhaka. Former Foreign Advisor (Minister for Foreign Affairs) 2007-2009 Bangladesh Caretaker Government