In today's newspaper roundup, we review an article discussing what "the details reveal" about the relationship between Trump and Xi Jinping behind official courtesies, another presenting the challenges Beijing faces to "inherit" the American role in the world, and a third calling for tightening policies for granting sick leave at work.
Starting with The Guardian, where writer David Smith considers that US President Donald Trump’s reception of his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, in the White House presented an exceptional scene, in which the Chinese leader overshadowed his American host, in an image that reflects remarkable shifts in the nature of the American political scene.
The writer begins his article with a sarcastic comparison, describing one of the two men as “an authoritarian who suppresses the media and is extremely sensitive to democratic elections,” before adding that the other is the leader of the Chinese Communist Party.
He explains that Trump welcomed his guest, saying: “It is remarkable that this is the first time we have met here in the White House, and as President Xi has already seen, a lot has changed since his last visit.”
While Xi maintained his impassive expression, the writer points out that just a glance at the corridors of the White House was enough to prove the truth of this statement, as a dramatic image of a bloodied Trump, raising his fist and urging his supporters to “fight” during his failed assassination attempt, replaced the official photo of former President Barack Obama.
The writer expresses another paradox, which was that the official Chinese media was allowed to cover the visit from inside the White House, while American institutions were prevented from attending. Former American diplomat Michael McFaul is quoted as describing this contradiction as "wrong and embarrassing."
Smith believes that previous US presidents sought to make China more like America, while Trump appears to be seeking to make America more like China.
He points out that Trump and his wife, Melania, went to the trouble of personally going to Andrews Air Force Base to greet Xi upon his arrival, with an actual red carpet being rolled out for the Chinese leader.
The writer says that Trump, who rarely appears at an event and does not end up behind the microphone longer than any other speaker, was Xi who seemed to own the place, while Trump this time appeared as if he was a "junior partner."
The article considers that the Chinese leader's statement that it is possible to overcome the "Thucydides Trap" is an implicit admission that Beijing threatens to remove the United States from its position as the world's first superpower.
The writer concludes with biting sarcasm that Xi “is still the master of repression,” while Trump remains, in his words, “the apprentice.”
Writers Adrian Bloomfield and Allegra Mendelsohn say that Chinese President Xi Jinping is seeking to capitalize on what they describe as the decline of the American role on the international scene, at a time when Trump is preoccupied with the “America First” policy and, in their opinion, distancing himself from Washington’s traditional allies.
In their article in The Telegraph, they argue that the intense diplomatic activity that preceded Xi's visit to Washington was not just a coincidence, but rather a political message that the global balance of power is gradually tilting towards Beijing.
The authors explain that, in just two weeks, Xi participated in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Kyrgyzstan, a BRICS meeting in India, and an official visit to Egypt, in addition to interacting and meeting with a large number of world leaders. They consider that this busy diplomatic tour reflects China's keenness to demonstrate its global presence, in exchange for what they consider to be the United States' retreat from its international obligations.
They point out that Trump prefers direct bilateral relations between major powers, and sees the world from the perspective of competition between two great powers, while Xi looks beyond his meetings with the American president, taking advantage of the vacuums that Washington leaves on the international scene.
The writers confirm that expectations for major breakthroughs during the US-China summit were limited, despite the two sides agreeing to seek “constructive strategic stability.” They quote Scott Kennedy of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington as saying: “Both sides are trying to keep things calm,” adding: “I think this world has become Xi’s world, and we are all living in it.”
The article presents a Chinese vision that believes that history is moving in Beijing's favor, and that Trump's foreign policies have contributed to accelerating what China sees as American decline, whether through wars or through turbulent foreign policies.
The two writers compare the United States, which for decades led a wide network of democratic allies, and China, which for a long time remained a major power but was relatively isolated and limited to limited alliances.
The article points out that Chinese diplomacy previously suffered from the image of a “wolf warrior” based on harsh nationalist rhetoric, but recent developments have prompted many countries to reconsider their relations and bets, especially with the decline in confidence in American security guarantees, as he put it.
However, the article emphasizes that China's rise does not mean it is ready to completely replace the United States. Beijing, despite its commercial and institutional expansion through initiatives and organizations such as the Belt and Road and BRICS, does not have the ability, let alone the desire, to bear the burdens of traditional global leadership, whether in the areas of foreign aid or security guarantees.
The article concludes that, given its inability to surpass the United States in world leadership, China may aim to dislodge it from its position at the center of the global system.
The authors believe that the world may be entering a “critical transitional phase” in which American leadership declines, while China remains unwilling or unable to bear the full burden, which opens the door to an era of fragmentation and uncertainty in the international system, according to the article.
The Independent newspaper believes that the time has come to end the phenomenon of simply sending a text message or email to report sickness and absence from work, considering that the proposal of Sir Charlie Mayfield, former chairman of John Lewis, represents a practical step within his report aimed at addressing losses estimated at about 85 billion pounds sterling annually due to sickness and absence from work.
The article explains that one of the most prominent recommendations of the “Keeping Britain Working” report is to require employees to telephone their managers when requesting sick leave, instead of just a short message.
The writer believes that this idea, despite its simplicity, reflects a change in work culture over the past two decades, as requesting sick leave has transformed from a procedure that requires a direct discussion with the manager to a mere notification via phone or e-mail.
The article indicates that Mayfield believes that an employee may be more reluctant to be absent if he is forced to speak directly with his officials, a proposition that the writer believes carries a degree of logic. But at the same time, he stresses that the goal is not to push patients to come to work despite their health conditions, but rather to enhance responsibility and direct communication between the worker and the employer.
The author concludes by emphasizing that the Mayfield report does not provide all solutions, but it presents a basic idea that deserves attention, which is that employers must play a greater role in preserving the health of workers and preventing their exit from the labor market permanently, and that practical incentives and supportive legislation may be more effective than simply issuing new reports that remain on the shelves without application.
