Trump and Xi Will Discuss AI, but Chip Controls Limit Safety Deal Prospects
The Sept. 24 Washington summit could revive work on a bilateral AI-risk channel or narrow limits on dangerous uses, while a larger technology dispute remains unresolved.
Loading page…
The Sept. 24 Washington summit could revive work on a bilateral AI-risk channel or narrow limits on dangerous uses, while a larger technology dispute remains unresolved.
Listen to this story
Washington and Beijing are approaching the Sept. 24 Trump–Xi summit with AI diplomacy constrained by their chip rivalry. The most plausible outcome is operational rather than strategic: reviving the dormant government-to-government risk channel and agreeing on terms for dangerous uses, such as AI entering nuclear command systems or removing human control from weapons.
The AI-risk channel agreed in May has reportedly seen little implementation before the summit.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will meet Vice Premier He Lifeng on AI and other issues ahead of Sept. 24.
McElwee identifies shared definitions of dangerous AI behavior as a potentially achievable first step.
President Donald Trump will host Chinese leader Xi Jinping in Washington on Sept. 24 with AI governance on the agenda. The meeting follows an earlier agreement to create an AI-risk channel that, according to foreign-policy expert Lily McElwee, has seen little implementation—putting practical follow-through ahead of any sweeping safety pact.
The White House said in May that Trump would welcome Xi to Washington in the fall after the leaders agreed to build what it called a constructive relationship based on strategic stability, fairness and reciprocity. Trade and other issues are also expected at the summit, but AI has become a distinct test of whether the two governments can coordinate while competing for technological advantage.
McElwee, president and CEO of the Phoenix Committee on Foreign Relations, expects “very limited progress” on AI safety. She sees a broad, Cold War-style arms-control agreement as unlikely because of deep mistrust and the difficulty of verifying compliance.
China’s chief concern is U.S. export controls on advanced chips, McElwee said, and she expects those controls to remain unchanged at the summit. That leaves a hard boundary around the diplomacy: the countries may be able to discuss preventing particular AI uses, but not resolve the computing-access dispute that shapes their wider rivalry.
A functioning channel would therefore be a modest outcome, not a settlement of the competition. Its immediate value would be a place for both governments to raise AI risks and early safeguards; whether the earlier commitment becomes operational is the more concrete question heading into Washington.
Loading discussion...
Join the conversation
Explain what a hotline could realistically accomplish.
Be the first to share a perspective or an experience.
Reader comments
Newest comments first. Replies stay oldest first.