Trump-Xi summit: China’s help in Iran may require US concessions 14%

By Ali Harb0%

5/13/2026, 5:27:09 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.5% saturation with 320 hits. Analysis detected 712 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,490 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 30.6% and a BS Rank of 14% (18,854 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 86.10% of the article peer group.

When President Donald Trump meets with his counterpart, Xi Jinping, a new item will be added to the long list of issues of mutual interest and potential disagreement between the United States and China: the war in Iran. 
US officials have suggested that China should play a greater role in pushing Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, but analysts say Beijing will require concessions from the US, likely over Taiwan, if it were to aid in resolving the crisis. 
And Iran is unlikely to be at the top of the agenda in the Trump-Xi meeting. 
“The Iran issue is not really the central issue for either party in this summit,” said Christopher Heurlin, an associate professor of government and Asian studies at Bowdoin College. 
Heurlin said that, although the meeting was delayed earlier this year due to the war, Taiwan will remain China’s top issue, while Trump will likely push Beijing to buy more US soya beans. 
China is a major importer of Iranian and Middle East oil, so its economy could come under strain from the disruption caused by Tehran’s Hormuz blockade and the US naval siege on Iran. 
Still, Heurlin said Beijing has been reluctant to get involved in the crisis. 
“In terms of Iran, the Chinese have sort of been positioning themselves as someone who might possibly be helpful in this regard,” he said. 
“They hosted the Iranian foreign minister recently, but it seems like they’ve been holding off on putting any pressure on Iran to end the conflict, just waiting for this visit.” 
Trump ‘chastened’ 
While Beijing has amassed oil reserves that have helped it weather global energy shortfalls, such resources are finite, so China has an interest in opening the strait. 
At the same time, if Washington  Beijing’s chief strategic competitor  is weakened globally from the Iran conflict, which is increasingly looking like an unwinnable war for many observers. 
The Economist magazine summed up that dynamic on its front cover last month, featuring a photo of Xi looking at Trump with a quote attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte: “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” 
Inderjeet Parmar, professor of international politics at City St George’s, University of London, said Trump heads to China “chastened” by the shortcomings of the Iran war. 
“So Trump is going there in a bit of a situation,” Parmar told Al Jazeera. 
“He needs Chinese support for opening the Strait of Hormuz. 
China needs the Strait of Hormuz to open for its own reasons  of oil and energy from Iran and so on. 
At the same time, they can use this as leverage regarding Taiwan.” 
Trump said before departing for China on Tuesday that he does not need Xi’s help on Iran, saying that the conflict is “very much under control”. 
However, with petrol prices in the US skyrocketing and fuelling inflation, diplomacy stalled, and Trump’s popularity plummeting, the war appears to be hampering the Republican president’s domestic and global standing. 
Last week, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent called on China to intervene in the crisis. 
“The attacks from Iran have closed the strait. 
We are reopening it. 
So I would urge the Chinese to join us in supporting this international operation,” Bessent said. 
He also underscored that China is the top importer of Iranian oil, accusing Beijing of “funding the largest state sponsor of terrorism”, referring to Tehran. 
“Let’s see them step up with some diplomacy and get the Iranians to open the strait,” he said. 
China’s plan 
William Yang, senior analyst for Northeast Asia at the International Crisis Group, said China and the US both want Hormuz to open, but “their preferred approach to achieve this goal don’t align.” 
While China has been calling for restraint from all sides, Trump has been threatening Iran with enormous military attacks almost daily. 
Iran has refused to hold direct talks with the US before Washington lifts its naval blockade. 
A US military initiative to reopen Hormuz by force, while maintaining the siege on Iranian ports, earlier this month was short-lived, ending in less than 48 hours without significantly increasing traffic in the strait. 
“Washington understands that it may need Beijing’s help to nudge Iran back to the negotiating table, but it is also aware of the implications of directly seeking support from Beijing to end the blockade, as it would likely mean giving China the upper hand in the bilateral relations,” Yang told Al Jazeera. 
“As a result, Trump has been trying to push Iran to accept the conditions that the US had put forward through coercion, threatening to resume bombing if Tehran doesn’t agree to its terms.” 
In April, Xi proposed a “four-point plan to safeguard and promote Middle East peace and stability”: 
Commitment to peaceful coexistence 
Respect for national sovereignty 
Commitment to international law 
Backing a “balanced approach to development and security” 
While vague, the proposal reflected a preference for multilateralism and diplomacy in contrast with Trump’s reliance on military power to advance his goals in the region. 
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi hosted his Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, last week. 
“China believes that a comprehensive ceasefire is of utmost urgency, that resuming hostilities is even less acceptable, and that adhering to negotiations is particularly important,” Beijing’s Foreign Ministry said after the meeting. 
“China supports Iran in safeguarding its national sovereignty and security, and appreciates Iran’s willingness to seek a political solution through diplomatic channels.” 
At the same time, China called for restoring “normal and safe passage” through Hormuz, which appears to be at odds with Iran’s claim of sovereignty over the strategic waterway, which emerged after the war. 
US-China ties 
China buys oil from Iran despite US sanctions, and Washington has voiced concern about Beijing’s sale of products that could be repurposed for military use by Tehran. 
However, before the war, the Iran file was an afterthought in the competition between the US and China. 
Over the past two decades, Washington has come to see Beijing as its top global challenger as the Chinese economy and regional and global influence have grown. 
During his first term, Trump formally recognised China as a strategic competitor of the US. 
“Although the United States seeks to continue to cooperate with China, China is using economic inducements and penalties, influence operations, and implied military threats to persuade other states to heed its political and security agenda,” the 2017 US National Security Strategy read. 
“China’s infrastructure investments and trade strategies reinforce its geopolitical aspirations.” 
Former President Joe Biden picked up where Trump left off with his administration declaring Beijing a “pacing challenge” for Washington. 
The US has pushed to deepen its alliances in the Asia Pacific region to counter China’s rise. 
As the competition intensified, the relationship between the two countries soured in recent years over several points of tension: trade practices, sanctions, Beijing’s claims to the South China Sea, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the status of Taiwan. 
Ties particularly worsened in 2022 when then-US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan. 
Months later, there was another crisis  Washington accused Beijing of sending a “spy balloon” into US airspace. 
China insisted that the aircraft was a weather balloon that drifted over the US. 
But since returning to the White House in January 2025, Trump and his administration have put less emphasis on the great power competition. 
Trump’s most recent National Security Strategy said the US aims to shift its focus to the Western Hemisphere, rather than the rivalry in the Asia Pacific region. 
Still, tariffs and trade remain a major irritant in the relationship. 
Iran and Taiwan could also exacerbate tensions. 
What might China want? 
While Iran considers itself a regional power and stresses its independence from allies and foes alike, China does have levers of leverage that it can crank up against Tehran  namely, trade ties. 
But if Xi were to help Trump in his push to reopen Hormuz, the assistance would not come for free, analysts say. 
A major priority for Beijing is Taiwan, the self-governing island that China claims as its own. 
While the US nominally has a “one China policy”, it has armed and forged trade ties with Taiwan, while stopping short of officially recognising the island as a state. 
Trump is yet to sign off on the latest arms package to Taiwan  worth $14bn  which has been approved by Congress. 
Parmar, the professor, said China may demand opposition to Taiwanese independence in exchange for putting pressure on Iran to reopen Hormuz. 
Heurlin also said China is mostly interested in talking about Taiwan. 
“They see the Trump administration as potentially vulnerable or perhaps more persuadable on their position on Taiwan, and specifically, it sounds like the Chinese are going to be trying to convince Trump not to go forward with this weapon sale agreement that’s been essentially sitting on his desk,” Heurlin told Al Jazeera. 
Brian Osgood contributed to the reporting. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.0%Ali Harb: 4.7%Al Jazeera: 2.7%Confirmation Bias2.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.7%Al Jazeera: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.7%Al Jazeera: 2.8%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.4%Al Jazeera: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.2%Al Jazeera: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 1.7%Ali Harb: 3.0%Al Jazeera: 2.1%Overconfidence Bias1.7%This article: 8.1%Ali Harb: 8.2%Al Jazeera: 8.5%Framing Effect8.1%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.4%Al Jazeera: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.3%Al Jazeera: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.0%Al Jazeera: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.5%Ali Harb: 1.9%Al Jazeera: 2.7%Pessimism Bias0.5%This article: 21.5%Ali Harb: 11.5%Al Jazeera: 10.3%Negativity Bias21.5%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.1%Al Jazeera: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.3%Al Jazeera: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.4%Al Jazeera: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 2.6%Al Jazeera: 1.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.8%Al Jazeera: 0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.7%Al Jazeera: 1.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.3%Al Jazeera: 1.8%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.3%Al Jazeera: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.1%Al Jazeera: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.0%Al Jazeera: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 2.6%Ali Harb: 3.2%Al Jazeera: 4.0%Appeal to Authority2.6%This article: 1.7%Ali Harb: 2.4%Al Jazeera: 1.9%False Dilemma1.7%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.1%Al Jazeera: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.1%Al Jazeera: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 1.7%Ali Harb: 4.1%Al Jazeera: 3.6%Hasty Generalization1.7%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.1%Al Jazeera: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.8%Al Jazeera: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 1.7%Ali Harb: 6.3%Al Jazeera: 5.1%Appeal to Emotion1.7%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 2.1%Al Jazeera: 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 4.2%Al Jazeera: 3.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.2%Al Jazeera: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.3%Al Jazeera: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.4%Al Jazeera: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.5%Al Jazeera: 1.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.8%Al Jazeera: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.2%Al Jazeera: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.4%Al Jazeera: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.0%Al Jazeera: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.3%Al Jazeera: 2.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.6%Ali Harb: 1.4%Al Jazeera: 1.6%Quote-first Misdirection2.6%This article: 3.8%Ali Harb: 3.4%Al Jazeera: 4.2%Biased Writer Voice3.8%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 1.4%Al Jazeera: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 2.0%Al Jazeera: 1.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.1%Al Jazeera: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ali Harb: 0.3%Al Jazeera: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1490 words analyzed.

Speakers

7speakers41%attributed speech872writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageChristopher Heurlin • 29 words • 0.0% coverageChristopher Heurlin • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageChristopher Heurlin • 13 words • 0.0% coverageChristopher Heurlin • 24 words • 0.0% coverageChristopher Heurlin • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageInderjeet Parmar • 26 words • 0.0% coverageInderjeet Parmar • 15 words • 0.0% coverageInderjeet Parmar • 10 words • 0.0% coverageInderjeet Parmar • 22 words • 0.0% coverageInderjeet Parmar • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageScott Bessent • 8 words • 0.0% coverageScott Bessent • 4 words • 0.0% coverageScott Bessent • 16 words • 0.0% coverageScott Bessent • 25 words • 0.0% coverageScott Bessent • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWilliam Yang • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWilliam Yang • 52 words • 0.0% coverageWilliam Yang • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageBeijing's Foreign Ministry • 32 words • 0.0% coverageBeijing's Foreign Ministry • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverage2017 US National Security Strategy • 42 words • 0.0% coverage2017 US National Security Strategy • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageInderjeet Parmar • 21 words • 0.0% coverageChristopher Heurlin • 11 words • 0.0% coverageChristopher Heurlin • 52 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald Trump

100%flagged-word coverage
26 attributed words4.2% of attributed speech37% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Biased Writer Voice-6.4 ptsWriter: 6.4%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-4.4 ptsWriter: 4.4%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.