Xi Jinping Calls for Unity Against ‘Unilateral Bullying’ at Asia-Pacific Summit

Chinese Leader’s Message Raises Questions Amid Regional Tensions

In a powerful address that captivated delegates at this year’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, Chinese President Xi Jinping delivered an impassioned call for regional solidarity against what he termed “unilateral bullying.” Standing before the gathered leaders of Pacific Rim nations, Xi’s message resonated through the conference hall with unmistakable clarity: countries must stand together against coercive tactics that undermine the international order. Yet for many observers and diplomatic analysts, the Chinese leader’s rhetoric prompted immediate questions about consistency between Beijing’s words and actions, particularly as China has faced growing criticism for its own assertive policies across the region.

“We must firmly reject the practices of decoupling, supply disruption, unilateral sanctions and maximum pressure,” Xi declared, his voice measured yet authoritative as he addressed representatives from the 21 APEC economies. “No country should dictate the development paths of others or use economic interdependence as leverage to force political concessions.” The statement, delivered amid the backdrop of ornate summit decorations and the attentive gaze of world leaders, appeared aimed primarily at Western powers—particularly the United States—which Beijing has long accused of attempting to contain China’s rise through various economic and diplomatic measures. Xi emphasized the need for “mutual respect” and “win-win cooperation,” phrases that have become hallmarks of Chinese diplomatic language, while advocating for a more inclusive global governance system that better reflects the interests of emerging economies and developing nations.

The contradiction between Xi’s rhetorical stance and China’s regional behavior was not lost on diplomatic observers present at the summit. In recent years, China has engaged in precisely the type of economic coercion Xi warned against—implementing trade restrictions against Australia following Canberra’s call for an investigation into COVID-19’s origins, blocking various imports from Lithuania after the Baltic nation deepened ties with Taiwan, and engaging in territorial disputes with multiple neighbors in the South China Sea. Professor Elizabeth Chen, an international relations expert from Singapore National University who attended the summit as an observer, noted the dissonance: “There’s a striking gap between China’s diplomatic messaging and its actual policy implementation. When President Xi speaks about rejecting bullying tactics, many nations in the room have experienced what they perceive as economic or territorial pressure from Beijing.” This disconnect underscores the complex reality facing Asia-Pacific nations caught between China’s economic gravity and concerns about its growing assertiveness.

Regional Dynamics and Strategic Competition

The summit unfolded against a backdrop of intensifying strategic competition between the United States and China, with both powers vying for influence across the economically dynamic but politically diverse Asia-Pacific region. American representatives, while not directly responding to Xi’s remarks, emphasized their commitment to a “free and open Indo-Pacific” and the importance of upholding international law—coded language widely understood as pushback against Chinese territorial claims and economic practices. Several mid-sized powers at the gathering, including Australia, Japan, and South Korea, found themselves navigating a precarious balance: maintaining crucial economic relationships with China while strengthening security partnerships with the United States. “We’re witnessing a fundamental reshaping of the regional order,” explained Dr. Jonathan Kang, director of the Pacific Security Institute. “Countries across the Asia-Pacific are being forced to make increasingly difficult choices between economic imperatives and security concerns, often finding these interests in tension with one another.”

The Chinese leader’s speech also addressed economic integration, presenting Beijing’s vision for regional development through initiatives like the Belt and Road and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Xi highlighted China’s commitment to opening its market further and emphasized the benefits of cooperation over competition. “Development is not a zero-sum game where one’s gain is another’s loss,” he stated, gesturing emphatically. “China’s development provides opportunities for the world rather than challenges.” However, several economic analysts noted that China’s domestic policies have increasingly emphasized self-sufficiency and indigenous innovation—an approach some see as contradicting Xi’s calls for greater interdependence. “There’s a fundamental tension in China’s economic messaging,” observed Maria Rodriguez, chief economist at Pacific Rim Economic Consultancy. “Beijing simultaneously promotes global integration while pursuing a ‘dual circulation’ strategy that prioritizes domestic production and consumption. This creates uncertainty for trade partners about China’s long-term economic direction.”

Historical Context and Future Implications

Xi’s remarks at the summit represent the latest chapter in China’s evolving diplomatic narrative, which has grown more assertive since he assumed leadership in 2012. Under his direction, China has abandoned Deng Xiaoping’s strategy of “hiding strength and biding time” in favor of a more confident posture on the world stage, reflected in policies like the ambitious Belt and Road Initiative and the assertion of territorial claims in disputed waters. This transformation coincides with China’s remarkable economic ascent, which has seen it emerge as the largest trading partner for most countries in the region and the second-largest economy globally. “Xi’s China no longer sees itself as a developing country learning from Western models,” explained Dr. Mei-Ling Tan, historian of Chinese foreign policy at Hong Kong University. “Instead, it increasingly presents itself as an alternative center of global power with its own values and approaches to international relations. This summit rhetoric reflects that fundamental shift in self-perception.”

The immediate aftermath of Xi’s speech revealed the complex reactions among participating nations, with responses largely reflecting each country’s relative economic dependence on China and security concerns about its growing influence. Smaller Southeast Asian nations, many of which rely heavily on Chinese investment and trade, offered cautious support for the cooperative elements of Xi’s message while carefully avoiding endorsement of any language that might antagonize either Beijing or Washington. Meanwhile, countries with ongoing territorial disputes with China—including Vietnam and the Philippines—remained skeptical about reconciling Xi’s calls for mutual respect with China’s actions in contested waters. As delegates departed the summit venue, the fundamental question hanging over the Asia-Pacific region remained unresolved: can countries navigate a path that maintains productive economic ties with China while addressing genuine concerns about its growing assertiveness? In the eloquent but loaded language of international diplomacy, Xi Jinping’s call against “unilateral bullying” may have resonated with many participants—but for others, it underscored the growing gap between China’s diplomatic rhetoric and the complex realities of its regional behavior.

Navigating a New Era of Asia-Pacific Relations

For policymakers across the region, Xi’s address highlighted the difficult balancing act they face in the coming decade. Many countries recognize the economic opportunities that come with Chinese engagement while harboring concerns about potential dependencies and vulnerabilities. “We’re entering a period where nations will need to develop more sophisticated and nuanced approaches to China,” suggested Ambassador James Wu, former diplomatic representative to Beijing from a Southeast Asian nation. “The binary choice between alignment with China or the United States that some analysts present is far too simplistic. Most countries are seeking to maximize benefits from relationships with both powers while preserving their strategic autonomy.” This pragmatic approach was evident in the careful diplomatic language employed by several leaders following Xi’s speech, acknowledging areas of agreement while subtly indicating points of divergence.

The summit’s conclusion left open questions about the future trajectory of Asia-Pacific cooperation in an era of heightened great power competition. Will Xi’s call against “unilateral bullying” translate into a more accommodating Chinese approach toward its neighbors, or will regional tensions continue to simmer beneath diplomatic pleasantries? Can the economic interdependence that has fueled the region’s prosperity be preserved despite growing security concerns? As delegates departed with these questions unresolved, one thing remained clear: the contradiction between China’s diplomatic messaging and its regional behavior represents one of the most significant challenges facing the international order in the Asia-Pacific region. How nations navigate this contradiction—and whether China itself addresses it—may well determine whether the coming decades bring greater cooperation or conflict to one of the world’s most economically vital regions.