2025 APEC Summit - Is Multilateralism Failing?

The 2025 APEC Summit in South Korea was less about trade policy and more about power projection. What we saw here was, intentionally or not, Xi Jinping’s stage—and one that highlighted both China’s growing diplomatic confidence and the weakening coherence of traditional multilateralism.

When Donald Trump departed the summit early, the optics were clear. Washington’s appetite for collective diplomacy remains limited under his second term, and his absence allowed Xi to step into the leadership vacuum. Trump has always preferred bilateral diplomacy over multilateralism. This is why we weren't surprised his ASEAN appearance was short and mostly focussed on private one-on-one backdoor deals. Xi, however, presented China as a responsible stakeholder in global stability, advocating for predictable trade and multilateral governance. Whether the world buys into that narrative is another question, but Beijing’s performance at APEC made one point unmistakable: China is no longer reacting to U.S. behaviour—it is setting the tempo of regional diplomacy. China has largely operated within the framework of international law and diplomacy, using institutions like the UN and WTO to advance its interests while projecting itself as a defender of sovereignty and multilateralism. In comparison, Russia often acts outside this system—relying on force, coercion, and realpolitik rather than institutional legitimacy.

The Return of Regional Theatre

For South Korea, hosting the summit was both an honour and a diplomatic balancing act. Seoul finds itself in a tightening vice between its security dependence on Washington and its economic interdependence with Beijing. Xi’s bilateral meetings with South Korean leaders carried more significance than the summit itself. They signalled an attempt to “re-warm” relations that have been tense since Seoul’s deployment of the U.S. THAAD missile defence system in 2017, which China saw as a direct threat. The two sides discussed trade, semiconductors, and regional security, with Xi subtly pressing South Korea to act as a moderating voice between China and the United States. Seoul, however, remains cautious—aware that too much closeness to Beijing could strain its alliance with Washington, but too much distance could damage its exports.

Bonus: When Xi presented Xiaomi phones as gifts, he jokingly made a comment about checking to make sure there were no ‘backdoors’ installed.

This is where China’s recent diplomatic sprint becomes important. In the months leading up to APEC, Xi had already hosted or visited key partners from Africa to Europe, positioning himself as a statesman in contrast to Trump’s unpredictable approach. For Beijing, diplomacy is not just about mending ties; it’s about shaping narratives, projecting China as an indispensable pillar of global governance at a time when U.S. credibility appears increasingly conditional.

The Limits of Multilateralism

The larger institution of APEC, once seen as the engine of Pacific-Rim economic integration, has visibly weakened. This year’s communique avoided sensitive language on trade liberalisation, decarbonisation, or digital regulation—reflecting the inability of members to align amid deepening U.S.–China rivalry. The summit’s diluted outcomes reveal a pattern now familiar in multilateral forums: symbolism over substance. Leaders shake hands, but consensus remains elusive. In this environment, China’s disciplined messaging, focused on “cooperation, connectivity, and community of shared future”, has greater relative impact, even if its practical delivery is limited.

For middle powers such as Japan, Canada, and Australia, APEC’s decline is both a challenge and an opportunity. Japan’s new Prime Minister, Sanae Takaichi, used the summit to mark her diplomatic debut, walking a careful line between cooperation and competition with China. Canada, meanwhile, began thawing relations with Beijing after years of tension, hinting at a pragmatic shift as trade and technology concerns overshadow past disputes. These developments reflect a quiet recalibration among secondary powers: a recognition that engagement with China remains necessary, even as strategic caution prevails.

Xi’s Moment, Trump’s Message

From a strategic standpoint, both sides are performing for their domestic audiences as much as for the region. Trump wants to project control over China without another costly confrontation; Xi wants to signal to his citizens that China remains respected and central to the global order. The APEC summit offered each leader that stage—yet their definitions of success diverged. For the U.S., the measure is short-term deals. For China, it is perception.

Our Takeaway

The 2025 APEC summit will not be remembered for major agreements or economic breakthroughs. It will be remembered for what it symbolised: the hollowing out of multilateral consensus and the growing fragmentation of the Asia-Pacific order. Xi’s diplomatic tour, reinforced by Seoul’s cautious hospitality and Trump’s calculated detachment, showcased a world in transition where multilateralism does not hold the weight it did once before.

APEC once embodied the optimism of post-Cold War globalisation. Today, it mirrors the uncertainty of a multipolar world. In that uncertainty, China sees opportunity. Whether the rest of the region accepts its hand (or braces for its reach) will define the next chapter of the Pacific century. Sources: News/Journal sources available upon request, not shown to maintain visual integrity of page.