U.S. and China Forge Path for Trade Truce in Paris, Eye Deals on Farm Goods and Critical Minerals

By David Lawder

PARIS, March 15 (Reuters) – In a bid to de-escalate prolonged trade tensions, high-level economic officials from the United States and China convened for closed-door discussions at OECD headquarters in Paris on Sunday. Sources familiar with the negotiations characterized the atmosphere as "remarkably stable," marking a significant shift from the rhetorical volatility that has defined the relationship in recent years.

The talks, led by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, aimed to identify concrete "deliverables" for a potential meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing later this month. While the leaders will have the final say, the Paris meeting served as a critical technical groundwork session.

According to one source, Chinese negotiators signaled openness to increasing purchases of specific U.S. agricultural products, including poultry, beef, and non-soybean row crops. This comes alongside a reaffirmed commitment to a pre-existing deal to buy 25 million metric tons of American soybeans annually for the next three years—a key demand from U.S. farm states.

A central focus was the proposed establishment of new formal mechanisms to manage the complex trade and investment flows between the two economic giants. Technical teams are scheduled to meet on Monday to flesh out proposals for a bilateral "Board of Trade" and a "Board of Investment."

The Board of Trade, described as the more developed concept, would seek to identify sectors where trade could be expanded in a "balanced way" without infringing on national security or critical supply chains. The parallel Investment Board would function as a dispute-resolution channel for specific investment issues, rather than setting broad policy.

Critical minerals, vital for everything from electric vehicles to defense systems, were another key agenda item. U.S. officials raised specific concerns about access to Chinese-produced yttrium, used in jet engine turbines, and discussed ensuring stable supplies for American manufacturers. Sources indicated progress in "finding ways to loosen up" bottlenecks in this strategically sensitive area.

U.S. negotiators also reiterated longstanding requests for China to increase purchases of Boeing aircraft and U.S. energy exports, including coal, oil, and liquefied natural gas—topics expected to be revisited in follow-up discussions.

Spokespersons for the U.S. Treasury and the U.S. Trade Representative's office declined to comment on the substance of Sunday's talks. The Chinese delegation left without speaking to reporters.

Reporting by David Lawder; Editing by Diane Craft

Reaction & Analysis

Michael Thorne, Trade Policy Analyst at the Global Economics Institute: "The 'stable' descriptor is the real headline here. After years of tariffs and threats, both sides appear to be prioritizing predictability. The proposed boards could institutionalize dialogue, preventing minor disputes from spiraling. However, their success hinges on whether they have real authority or are merely talking shops."

Linda Choi, Former U.S. Commerce Department Official: "The agricultural commitments are a political necessity for the U.S. administration, but the real story is the quiet work on critical minerals and managed trade structures. This isn't about a grand deal; it's about building guardrails and supply chain assurances—a more pragmatic, if less glamorous, approach."

Rajiv Mehta, Commentator for 'The Sovereign Economist': "This is capitulation dressed as diplomacy. The U.S. is again begging for soybean sales while China continues to dominate the minerals that power our future. These 'stable' talks just stabilize China's strategic advantage. Where is the forceful action on intellectual property theft or industrial subsidies? It's all managed decline."

Professor Elena Vargas, International Relations, Sciences Po: "Holding these talks in Paris, under the shadow of the OECD, is telling. It suggests both powers, while negotiating bilaterally, are mindful of the need to be seen as operating within a multilateral framework—or at least not actively undermining it. The EU will be watching the outcomes on managed trade closely."