Trump gave Xi a bald eagle. Xi promised America two pandas. Behind the diplomatic symbolism sits a larger shift: China’s international standing is improving as trust in the United States declines.

President Donald Trump presented a statue of a bald eagle to President Xi Jinping when they met in Washington on 24 September saying that he hoped it would find a “nice place” in Beijing. The gift of an eagle, the national symbol of the USA, was clearly full of meaning, but different people may have different interpretations of the exchange. (By the way, bald eagles are not bald. They have white ‘bald’ heads.)

This was the second meeting this year between the two superpower heads, coming at a critical juncture when the world faces a looming energy crunch, a debt crisis, continuing wars in the Ukraine, Palestine and Iran, and global concern about AI regulation. It was a strangely muted occasion, largely due to the American press boycott of the White House.

The gift of a bald eagle statue to the visiting Chinese leader is not a Trojan horse, signifying expansionist intent, but surely indicates that Trump hopes that Xi will respect Washington’s views on international affairs. This is not likely to happen. I suspect that Xi, when he unpacks the eagle statue back home in Beijing, will think, “Who is to blame for the present global chaos? Surely, he should take the lead in resolving it.”

Who could blame him for thinking this? China did not invade Iran. China continues to support the United Nations and the international rules-based order. Xi told Trump and the world, “China has . . . consistently played a constructive role in easing tensions and de-escalating the situation.” The consistent Chinese position is that they are a dependable and reliable nation. While building defence capabilities, Beijing has held them in reserve, while the US, with a more powerful military force, deployed everything but still proved incapable of winning against Iran (ranked 16th in the world by the Global Firepower Index) or of opening the Strait of Hormuz to facilitate the global oil trade.

At the same time as waging war on Iran, Trump also picked a fight with Canada, threatened to invade Greenland, scaled back joint military exercises with South Korea, and exacerbated tensions with others through irrational tariff policies. All the countries affected by these decisions were in the past allies of the United States, but their support is no longer unconditional, if it ever was. Meantime, Xi has been travelling across Asia and strengthening ties through groupings such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), raising its international standing.

Of course, the situation in Ukraine must be blamed on Russian President Vladimir Putin rather than on Trump, but Trump provided intelligence to Ukraine, allowed American weapons to be purchased for them, cut direct economic and military assistance, and opposed Ukraine joining NATO. China, by contrast, claims neutrality in this conflict and advocates for peace talks.

In Sudan, in Yemen, and across Africa and Latin America, economies are collapsing and social tensions are rife. Trump destroyed potential instruments of influence such as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which might have offered practical assistance. He abolished US government-funded broadcast organisations like Voice of America, Radio Free Asia, and Radio Free Europe, greatly diminishing American soft power. While China deployed initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), institutions like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and media outlets like the state-run international broadcaster CGTN, and Chinese bilateral international aid in 2024 reached US$3.5 billion, an increase of 16 per cent over the previous year, Trump fired scores of diplomats. The Chinese Foreign Ministry now lists 298 compared with 279 US overseas posts. Trump cut funding for international student exchanges while Xi expanded programs in China.

Trump presented an eagle statue and Xi promised two panda bears to Zoo Atlanta. Given the popularity of these cuddly animals, this will further enhance China’s international image, which is growing month by month. A recent Pew Research survey found that China is now viewed more favourably than the United States in 27 of 36 countries polled – a reversal from 2025, when most still viewed the US more favourably than China.

In a separate report, Pew said favourable views of the US had “declined significantly” in 15 of 24 countries with comparable data over the last year. The erosion of trust among some close allies has been especially dramatic, with positive ratings “at or near the lowest they’ve been” in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, South Korea, Italy and the UK. In Canada, for instance, the percentage of respondents who said they regard the United States as a reliable partner has fallen from 83 per cent in 2022 to just 35 per cent today.

In his Washington speech, Xi stressed that China and the US should “co-exist in peace” and enjoy healthy competition rather than all-in wrestling for domination. It would be a consummation devoutly to be wished, an ultimate desirable goal for human wellbeing. There is however one major hazard – Trump’s unpredictability, as noted already one decade ago by Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic.

Benjamin Franklin did not approve of the choice of the bald eagle as “the representative of our country”. He wrote in a letter to his daughter Sarah Bache in 1784,

“He is a bird of bad moral character. He does not get his living honestly. You may have seen him perched on some dead tree, where, too lazy to fish for himself, he watches the labour of the fishing hawk; and when that diligent bird has at length taken a fish, and is bearing it to his nest for the support of his mate and young ones, the bald eagle pursues him, and takes it from him. With all this injustice, he is never in good case, but like those among men who live by sharping and robbing he is generally poor and often very lousy. Besides he is a rank coward: the little king bird not bigger than a sparrow attacks him boldly and drives him out of the district.”

This sounds like a description of the present occupant of the White House.

The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.