On October 31, 2025, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Forum was held at the Hwabaek International Convention Center in Gyeongju, Gyeongsangbuk-do (North Gyeongsang) province, South Korea.
The meeting took place at a particularly sensitive international moment, marked by market uncertainty, technological competition, and the reconfiguration of strategic alliances in the Indo-Pacific region. There, the leaders of the member economies discussed how to strengthen trade stability and ensure more secure supply chains in the face of geopolitical tensions and the resurgence of protectionism. Although the United States did not participate directly in the main leaders' meeting, its rivalry with China dominated the additional discussions, demonstrating that regional cooperation is not only an economic necessity but also a political challenge.
What is APEC and why does it matter in the global economy?
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum is a multilateral platform established in 1989 to promote sustainable economic growth, regional integration, and cooperation among Pacific Rim economies. Currently, the forum comprises 21 members: Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, South Korea, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, the Philippines, the United States, and Vietnam. These economies collectively represent approximately 60% of global GDP, around 50% of international trade, and roughly half of the world's population. This economic and demographic weight makes APEC a key player in shaping global trade strategies.
Unlike other international organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), APEC is not based on binding treaties or sanctions, but rather on consensus and voluntary political commitment. This flexible structure allows a wide range of economies—from industrial powers to developing countries—to advance trade liberalization, investment facilitation, and technical cooperation in accordance with their own national realities. Its significance is measured not only by concrete agreements, but also by the creation of shared standards, regional projects, and spaces for dialogue that make it possible to build trust in a region marked by strategic rivalries.
In a context where economics, security and technology are increasingly intertwined, APEC acts as a 'diplomatic laboratory' to balance interests and promote stability.
South Korea's role as host country
For South Korea, hosting and presiding over the summit held strategic significance, both economically and diplomatically. As a middle power with trade and security ties to the United States and, at the same time, strong economic links with China, Seoul has sought to play a mediating role in a region marked by geopolitical rivalry between the two powers. Hosting the summit provided the South Korean government with a platform to project itself as a responsible and stabilizing actor, capable of fostering dialogue and promoting cooperation even in a tense international climate.
South Korean President Lee Jae-myung focused the agenda on three key areas: technological innovation, economic resilience, and sustainability, emphasizing that “to maintain the region’s prosperity, we need to expand trade and cooperate with one another.” In sectors such as semiconductors and advanced batteries—where Korea holds a leading global position—Seoul stressed the importance of strengthening regional supply chains and reducing vulnerabilities caused by trade tensions or global disruptions.
The choice of Gyeongju as the venue was no accident. Beyond its rich cultural and historical significance, the city symbolizes South Korea's commitment to bridging tradition and modernity, projecting an image of stability and continuity. Thus, the summit served to reinforce its role as a diplomatic bridge in the region and as a leader in innovation, particularly in emerging fields such as artificial intelligence (AI), demographic change, and green technologies.
The United States' position: economic security and regional alliances
Although the United States did not participate directly in the main APEC leaders' meeting, it maintained an active presence through side events and bilateral meetings. The administration of President Donald Trump sent senior White House officials to the summit. Blanca and trade representatives to strengthen alliances with strategic partners and reiterate the country's commitment to regional stability. Washington considers this forum essential to counter China's growing influence, especially in the technology and energy sectors, where strategic competition is increasingly intense.
In this context, the United States focused on economic security, which links geopolitical stability to the strength of its strategic industries and supplies. The House Blanca He emphasized the diversification of supply chains to reduce dependence on a single supplier, promoting partnerships with countries considered reliable allies. This approach was particularly relevant in the areas of semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and clean energy, sectors in which Washington is trying to establish a sustainable advantage.
Beyond multilateral debates, the most significant developments occurred bilaterally. The US administration promoted proposals for technological and energy cooperation, as well as initiatives to diversify supply chains and strengthen economic security in the Indo-Pacific. Trump announced a new trade agreement with South Korea that included tariff reductions from 25% to 15% in the automotive sector in exchange for a $350.000 billion South Korean investment. Likewise, the House Blanca It unveiled a $20 million initiative aimed at boosting the development and regulation of AI in the region, aligning with Seoul's technology agenda.
Despite its absence from the main session, Washington sought to project the message that it remains committed to the values of openness, transparency and fair competition in the region.
Repercussions of the US absence
The United States' non-participation in the main APEC meeting could have both symbolic and strategic repercussions. On the diplomatic front, several analysts interpreted the absence as a sign of distancing itself from the region's multilateral mechanisms, which could weaken its influence vis-à-vis China, which did participate actively and used the occasion to project itself as a regional leader.
However, Washington has sought to compensate for its lack of a formal presence through a parallel agenda focused on bilateral meetings and the promotion of technological and security initiatives. This strategy reflects a prioritization of bilateral and thematic approaches over traditional multilateral engagement, consistent with its recent foreign policy.
In the long term, this absence could erode some of the United States' diplomatic weight within APEC, especially if other members perceive a reduced institutional commitment. However, its economic power and network of strategic alliances allow it to remain a central player, albeit with a more fragmented influence and dependent on its ability to coordinate directly with key allies.
The China-United States relationship within APEC
The relationship between the United States and China was once again a central theme of the summit. Although the strategic rivalry between the two powers remains structural, Seoul provided a space for dialogue where tensions could be avoided and areas of limited cooperation explored. According to the presidential office, South Korea “exercised strong leadership in reaching a text that the U.S. and China could agree on.”
The bilateral meeting between the delegations of both countries was the most watched moment of the forum. After nearly two hours of discussions, both leaders announced a partial truce in the trade dispute that has affected the global economy since 2018: China pledged to postpone new restrictions on the export of rare earth elements—essential minerals for the technology industry—and to strengthen controls on chemical precursors linked to fentanyl. In return, the United States announced a 10% reduction in tariffs applied to Chinese technology products, lowering the average from 57% to 47%, and confirmed the resumption of soybean exports to the Chinese market.
Although these gestures were considered a significant step toward de-escalating trade tensions, no definitive agreements were signed, and the most sensitive issues—such as Taiwan, access to advanced technologies, and energy policy related to Russia—remained outside the formal negotiations. Both Washington and Beijing were careful to maintain a diplomatic tone that allowed them to demonstrate progress without compromising their strategic positions. Likewise, the lack of a high-level meeting highlighted the cooling of political dialogue between the two powers within APEC, although it did not prevent China from seizing the opportunity to reinforce its image as a promoter of free trade and regional integration.
The bilateral dynamics influenced the overall atmosphere of the summit: on the one hand, they generated a degree of optimism in the markets, demonstrating that dialogue remains possible; on the other, they made it clear that the competition for influence in the Indo-Pacific will remain a backdrop. In this sense, APEC served as a useful forum for managing tensions and preventing ruptures, but also as a reminder that cooperation will remain selective and limited in those areas where both countries vie for technological and geopolitical leadership.
Summit results and agreements
The summit concluded with the adoption of the Gyeongju Declaration. This document reaffirms the countries' commitment to economic cooperation, open trade, and technological innovation. While the agreements are not legally binding, they establish a shared roadmap that will guide regional policies in the coming years.
The United States, despite not participating directly in the signing, expressed its support for the general principles of the declaration through a statement issued by the House BlancaThe leaders focused their efforts on four strategic areas essential for the stability and development of the Indo-Pacific:
Technological cooperation and artificial intelligence
One of the central themes of the declaration was the commitment to boosting cooperation in advanced technology sectors, especially artificial intelligence and semiconductors. Support was given to the South Korean initiative to promote a common framework for the development and responsible use of AI, as well as to strengthen regional capacity in chip manufacturing, a crucial area where South Korea, Japan, and the United States play leading roles.
Resilient and secure supply chains
The leaders agreed on the need to strengthen the resilience of supply chains, after the pandemic and global trade tensions highlighted their fragility. The goal is to reduce dependence on single suppliers and promote more diversified and transparent production networks within the region. This commitment addresses concerns shared by both industrialized and developing economies.
Energy transition and sustainability
Another key point was the commitment to a more sustainable economy, through the promotion of renewable energy, the progressive reduction of emissions, and cooperation in green technologies. The declaration emphasized that the energy transition is not only a climate responsibility but also an opportunity to generate new industrial sectors and high-value-added jobs.
Digital commerce and common regulation
Finally, the summit reaffirmed its commitment to promoting digital trade to facilitate cross-border exchange and ensure the protection of consumers and businesses. The countries agreed to work on harmonizing digital rules and standards, given that the global economy increasingly relies on online services, digital platforms, and data as a strategic resource.
Conclusions: The future of APEC and the challenges of the Indo-Pacific
The summit made it clear that the Indo-Pacific remains the center of gravity of the global economy and the primary arena where the balance of power among major powers is defined. Despite the rivalry between the United States and China, the meeting demonstrated that there is still room for economic and diplomatic cooperation, provided that channels of dialogue are maintained and shared objectives are prioritized.
APEC, while not yet imposing binding obligations, reaffirms itself as a fundamental forum for managing tensions, building trust, and advancing agreements that facilitate sustainable development, the energy transition, and digital integration. Its main strength lies in its ability to bring economies together and promote consensus that, over time, can translate into stronger policies at the national and regional levels.
However, the key challenge will be transforming commitments into concrete actions. Supply chain stability, the adoption of emerging technologies, competition for technological leadership, and the need to accelerate sustainability will shape the Indo-Pacific agenda in the coming decade. APEC's success will depend on the political will of its members to balance national interests with common goals and maintain the spirit of cooperation even in an increasingly competitive geopolitical environment.
