The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Gyeongju ended Saturday with leaders signaling cautious optimism after a bilateral trade truce between Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, photographed alongside Xi during the Economic Leaders' Meeting, presided over sessions that emphasized economic recovery, supply-chain resilience and the region's fraught geopolitical environment.

Host South Korea used the gathering to project a steadying presence, staging talks in Gyeongju, the ancient capital whose cultural sites underscored the summit's theme of continuity amid change. Delegates from APEC's 21 economies engaged in a mix of formal communiqués and private negotiations, focused on translating the Trump-Xi understanding into tangible steps that could calm trading tensions and reduce uncertainty for businesses across Asia and beyond.

The truce, announced during high-level encounters at the summit, marked a temporary halt in escalating trade measures that have complicated global commerce in recent years. For many economies in the region — from exporters of raw materials to producers of advanced electronics — a pause in bilateral confrontation offers breathing room to rework contracts, avert tariff cascades and stabilize investment plans. Yet officials and analysts attending the summit emphasized that questions remained about enforcement mechanisms and the timeline for any substantive rollbacks of trade barriers.

South Korea occupies a sensitive position in these developments. Its economy is highly integrated into East Asian manufacturing networks, particularly semiconductors, automotive components and shipbuilding. Lee Jae Myung, as host, sought to balance relations with the world's two largest economies while advancing Seoul's own agenda on digital trade rules and green transition finance. The summit provided an opportunity for middle powers to press for clearer rules that can protect smaller economies from being caught between strategic rivals.

Beyond trade, leaders used APEC to address related pressures, including investment screening, export controls on critical technologies and the need to protect cross-border data flows. The truce between the United States and China does not eliminate these challenges; instead it reframes them, shifting emphasis from punitive measures to negotiation over regulatory standards and industrial policy. Observers at the summit noted that any durable easing will depend on sustained diplomatic engagement and the willingness of parties to reconcile domestic political imperatives with international commitments.

The diplomatic choreography in Gyeongju also highlighted broader regional dynamics. For U.S. allies and partners in Asia, the truce offers both relief and dilemmas: a reduction in immediate risk, yet the risk that bilateral arrangements could sideline multilateral institutions and norms. Smaller APEC members, which lack the leverage of Washington or Beijing, called for stronger collective frameworks to ensure fair treatment and dispute-resolution pathways.

As leaders departed, attention turned to follow-up mechanisms: whether working groups at APEC will be tasked with monitoring implementation, and how the World Trade Organization and regional trade agreements might absorb or reinforce any accord. For business leaders and policymakers, the central question now is less the headline of a truce than its durability and the depth of cooperation it will produce across the interconnected economies of the Asia-Pacific.