Russia has proposed holding a possible meeting between Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and Xi Jinping in China in November. As of 25 October, there is no agreement on the summit, no public consent from China and no agreed agenda, whilst a Guardian columnist has warned of the potential geopolitical consequences of such a format.<\/p>\n
Briefly about the main points<\/strong><\/p>\n News of the proposal to hold a trilateral meeting emerged on 19\u201321 October. The Washington Post, Axios and the Associated Press reported that Putin<\/strong> suggested Trump<\/strong> to meet with Xi Jinping<\/strong> in China next month.<\/p>\n Shenzhen is cited as a likely venue, where the APEC summit is due to take place in mid-November. According to Axios, Trump has expressed openness to such a format and has cited denuclearisation as a desirable topic for discussion.<\/p>\n It is the proposal itself that has been confirmed, not the holding of the summit. According to *The Washington Post*, a Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov<\/strong> He described this idea as hypothetical and stated that there were no concrete proposals, agreements or an agreed agenda.<\/p>\n The Chinese authorities have not publicly stated that they are prepared to host the meeting. Nor is there any confirmed information regarding the list of topics: Russia\u2019s war against Ukraine could be among them, but this has not been officially confirmed.<\/p>\n On 24 October, The Guardian published a column in its Opinion section Steve Bloomfield<\/strong>, the former international editor of *The Observer*. The author suggested that the summit, should it take place, could intensify the trend towards the division of the world into spheres of influence controlled by the US, Russia and China.<\/p>\n Bloomfield links a possible weakening of US support for Europe to risks for Ukraine and other European states. Changes to US security guarantees in East Asia, in his view, could create additional risks for Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and Australia.<\/p>\n This is the columnist\u2019s assessment, not a coordinated plan by the three states or a forecast backed by decisions taken by Washington, Moscow and Beijing.<\/p>\n\n
What we know about the initiative<\/h2>\n
Why the meeting cannot be regarded as a scheduled one<\/h2>\n
What exactly did *The Guardian* write?<\/h2>\n
What context does the US strategy provide?<\/h2>\n