Did French President Macron Outshine The Trump Visit To China?

BEIJING, CHINA – DECEMBER 4: France’s President Emmanuel Macron and China’s President Xi Jinping (R) shake hands after a joint press conference at the Great Hall of the People on December 3, 2025 in Beijing, China. Macron is on an official visit to China that comes on the heels of continuing tension over trade between China and the EU. Did Macron make more progress with Xi than Trump?

Getty Images

Trump’s much-anticipated visit to China was framed by some as a potential “Nixon moment,” a dramatic geopolitical reset capable of stabilizing relations between the world’s two largest economies. Instead, the trip revealed the opposite. Washington entered negotiations overconfident, assuming China needed détente more than the U.S. Beijing understood that the United States may be in a classic case of imperial overreach: simultaneously managing diplomatic and trade tensions with Europe, a complex conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and, most importantly, a regional war in the Persian Gulf, with resultant mounting economic uncertainty tied to shortages in the energy markets. Under those conditions, China, America’s peer competitor, had little strategic incentive to make meaningful concessions or make Trump’s life easy, and America had less to offer.

The result was predictable. Low-hanging fruit was picked while structural issues remained unaddressed. China agreed that Hormuz tolls were unacceptable while it pledged to buy 200 Boeing planes, fewer than expected, buy American energy, with unclear supply schemes, and gave promises of goodwill. The visit produced optics rather than any strategic transformation. China did not meaningfully retreat on industrial policy, critical minerals, technology exports, or its broader geoeconomic ambitions.

America’s Fraying Alliances

Trump’s trip unfolded amid broader deterioration in America’s relations with its allies. Washington’s increasingly confrontational posture toward Europe, including tariff threats, disputes over technology regulation, and pressure tied to energy exports during the Hormuz crisis, has produced real economic and political consequences across the Atlantic. The fallout matters because American power has historically depended not only on military strength or economic leverage, but on the cohesion of the Western alliance and European support of Washington’s foreign policy.

At the same time, disputes surrounding Greenland, energy exports, and the Strait of Hormuz reinforced a growing perception in Europe that reliance on American systems carries strategic risk. U.K. and France refused to send their navies to fight alongside the US Navy against Iran –or even to keep the global commons in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf open. In synch with its Gaullist past, France has been especially outspoken on this.

A Real Nixon Moment?

This tense atmosphere created the conditions for Macron’s December 2025 trip to Beijing, a visit far more strategically revealing than Trump’s own diplomacy with Xi Jinping. In the short term, Macron’s trip didn’t live up to its highest ambitions. Macron did not help either Washington or Kyiv: China did not alter its position on Ukraine in any meaningful way. Beijing remained unwilling to pressure its de facto ally, Russia, in support of European security priorities, despite Macron’s inducements. French efforts to rebalance trade relations with China yielded few concrete gains. The centerpiece, a major Airbus deal, was cut back as Beijing preserved leverage in parallel negotiations with Washington.

Yet focusing only on immediate deliverables misses the broader significance of the visit.

The immediate importance of Macron’s trip was not obvious. The fact that policymakers in Paris and Brussels were willing to go to Zhongnanhai in the first place, given current geopolitical conditions, is what mattered. That alone illustrates the degree of strategic separation uncertainty now shaping European thinking toward the United States. And Macron is the thought leader on the “soft divorce”.

For years, discussions about European “strategic autonomy” were dismissed in Washington as rhetorical posturing or long-term ambitions. That is no longer the case. Strategic autonomy is increasingly shaping foreign and economic policy.

France’s decision to remove American videoconferencing platforms from parts of the public sector in favor of domestic alternatives reflects a wider technological decoupling already underway across Europe. European regulators are aggressively targeting the market dominance of U.S. firms across cloud services, artificial intelligence, digital advertising, app stores, and social media infrastructure. The broader objective is increasingly clear: reduce structural dependence on American platforms before geopolitical tensions deepen. In every area Europe targets, China is happy to step in either as an alternative supplier or as a point of leverage in Euro-American negotiations.

France is also willing to cozy up to China instead of the U.S. on a key energy policy. One of the most overlooked aspects of Macron’s Beijing visit was the expansion of cooperation surrounding civilian nuclear energy and industrial investment. France and China remain two of the world’s strongest proponents of nuclear power at a time when many economies are reconsidering energy security, grid stability, and industrial decarbonization while eschewing nuclear options. Greater Franco-Chinese coordination in nuclear supply chains, financing, and industrial cooperation reflects a wider European search for alternatives that are neither fully dependent on American hydrocarbons nor entirely subordinate to Chinese manufacturing dominance.

The intellectual framework behind much of this shift comes from former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi’s report on European competitiveness. Draghi’s warning was blunt: Europe risks long-term decline if it remains technologically dependent on foreign powers while lacking the industrial scale of its own. China could help.

Strategic Shift and Global Geopolitical Competition

All of these conflicts, from tech to Iran to Beijing, reflect the same fundamental clash: Macron’s France is actively constructing an independent pole of global influence, refusing to treat the world as a binary US-China contest. Washington, under Trump, views this not as an independent initiative but as an obstruction, and is increasingly willing to use tariffs, energy threats, and diplomatic pressure to bring Paris back into line. If the relations are not repaired soon, the U.S. may start applying pressure to alter French foreign and domestic policy.

The endurance of French influence in both overseas territories and ex-colonies across Africa has been a central component of French foreign policy for decades. This core element of Gaullist doctrine has allowed France to both maintain a dynamic energy strategy and punch above its weight in international geopolitics. It has also invited backlash and condemnation.

In its former African colony of Niger, French influence secured a dominant position in the country’s uranium industry and fueled France’s enviable civilian nuclear power. However, backlash against this influence in Mali also opened the door for Russian influence to rebound in Africa. Initially spearheaded by the Wagner Group, a private military company that rebelled against Putin in 2023 it is a strategic challenge for Washington and is often a point of condemnation in Beijing. Throughout Francophone Africa, in Mali, Chad, and beyond, the backlash against receding French post-colonial influence amid attempts to unilaterally maintain its dominant position is evident. Amidst these failures in unilateralism, Paris has learned that for its natural resource exploitation and foreign policy overseas strategy to succeed, it needs at least the acquiescence from another global actor. If China becomes that new partner, the sense of betrayal in Washington will be palpable.

China, for its part, is happy to encourage French ambitions and smooth over points of contention. Multiple actors in the international system empowered to push back against Washington is to Beijing’s advantage. Nowhere is this reconciliation more evident than in the enduring contentions surrounding France’s Pacific territory of New Caledonia, also known as Kanak by its native community.

A Nickel for Some Influence

The French overseas territory of New Caledonia, which is on the UN list of non-self-governing territories, is a vital component of global energy flows and French industrial strategy. As in the case of African uranium, France has maintained a system that allows it to preserve strategic control over a resource-rich territory.
The small island, French-occupied since its colonization in 1853, possesses some of the world’s largest nickel deposits, amounting to roughly 10% of global reserves. For decades, the French have continued their involvement in the territory, where nickel is the backbone of the local economy, and where much of the indigenous Kanaks remain poorer and less educated than the European-descended settler community.

China is both the largest purchaser of New Caledonian nickel and the world’s largest refiner of nickel. Nickel is a vital front on China’s global quest to maintain an international monopoly of critical minerals refining, material inputs that are vital for nearly every major computing, green energy, military, aerospace, and next-generation industrial piece of technology imaginable.

Complaints concerning persistent and growing inequality of opportunity, education, and employment, and disagreements over its political settlement, sparked riots as recently as 2024. As the violence dragged on, at least 15 people were killed, hundreds were injured, and more than two thousand were arrested, and pro-independence leaders were transferred to prisons in mainland France.

Shortly after Macron’s December 2025 trip to Beijing, France altered the political settlement in New Caledonia. Three days after Macron’s meeting with Xi Jinping in Beijing’s Hall of the People, France announced New Caledonia would remain French within a new framework of “state within France”. On May 19^th, 2026, the French Senate endorsed changing the frozen electorate rolls, the exact same final straw that sparked the 2024 crisis and let to rioting.

The best publicly available data hasn’t shown a massive turnaround in local opinion on something so contentious as civil rights and independence in slightly over a year. What has changed is that China is no longer outwardly utilizing anti-colonial rhetoric regarding Kanak. It’s not as if China has been hesitant to leverage anti-colonialist rhetoric, regarding France. Simply, China has calculated that maintaining this French outpost is more effective for its global energy strategy than undermining French rule.

In Spring 2027, Macron’s tenure will end with him purportedly leaving French politics. This neo-Gaullist policy, as a vanguard of a nascent EU foreign and energy policy, will probably be his most enduring, but controversial, legacy. It may poison the U.S.-European relations for decades to come.

Conversely, France seems to have at least partially relied on an accommodation with China, which the EU itself cautions against. Macron’s highest aspirations to, as a modern Talleyrand, inject himself and solve global issues such as Ukraine, Africa’s Sahel, Syria, Lebanon, or Iran have fallen short, degenerated into petty feuds, or backfired. Whether Macron’s trip to China was the real “Nixon moment” that outshone Trump’s trip to meet with Xi or, more likely, proves to be another misstep will be litigated alongside the rest of his legacy