Trump Allies Hold Backchannel China Talks in London — Without a Single US Diplomat Present

A high‑level, unpublicised meeting took place at Lancaster House, London, on 9 June 2025. Vice‑Premier He Lifeng led China's delegation in discussions with senior former Trump administration advisers. The meeting occurred without any current US representatives present, focusing on trade, investment and emerging technology.

Reuters recently confirmed that the meeting formed the first branded China–US economic and trade consultation mechanism, aligning with Reuters‑reported plans that He Lifeng would meet US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer in London between 8 and 13 June 2025.

Back‑channel or Bad Precedent?

Described by some attendees as a candid, low‑key dialogue, the meeting bypassed formal diplomatic channels. Critics in Washington warn that such shadow diplomacy can cloud US foreign policy by sending mixed signals.

'Foreign governments need clarity, not a guessing game about who's driving policy,' cautioned one retired ambassador.

The gathering closely followed a private phone call between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping—another engagement that reportedly took place without Biden administration awareness—raising fresh questions about unofficial diplomacy.

UK's Quiet Support, US Demands Clarity

The UK government neither confirmed nor denied the meeting. A Whitehall spokesperson stated Lancaster House hosted a private event but offered no further details, suggesting the UK may view the location as neutral for informal dialogue.

In Washington, lawmakers are demanding answers. Key questions include whether the White House was informed, if sensitive national interests were discussed, and whether the talks signal early foreign policy planning ahead of a potential 2026 Trump campaign.

Strategic Hedge or Unauthorized Policy?

Beijing supporters claim the meeting reflects strategic foresight: maintaining back‑channel connections amid volatile US politics. Critics, however, see blurred lines: 'There's a difference between staying informed and stepping into diplomatic roles you no longer hold,' said Professor Elena Morris at Johns Hopkins.

Historically, shadow diplomacy has proven stabilising—such as Kissinger's 1971 trip to China—but this instance lacked formal safeguards, transparency or government endorsement, prompting deeper scrutiny.

Eroding Public Trust?

The secrecy and lack of public record for such meetings fuel scepticism. With trade, cybersecurity and strategic minerals discussed—issues with clear national security implications—critics ask: What commitments were made, and to whose benefit?

Advocates suggest former officials' relationships can pave the way for future formal talks. Still, they agree transparency is essential to uphold public trust and legitimacy.

Shifting Diplomatic Norms

The talk at Lancaster House hints at a changing diplomatic landscape, where influence is increasingly exercised outside formal frameworks and between administrations. As off‑record networks gain prominence, the public, media and policymakers must adapt to new forms of diplomatic engagement.