It has been described as a new Yalta summit or as the "triangle of happiness." The possible meeting that Donald Trump, Xi Jinping, and Vladimir Putin could hold next week on the sidelines of APEC, which will take place in Shenzhen, China, would be a meeting with great symbolism that, although without major expectations of achieving great results, would seek to redefine global geopolitics. The meeting would come at a time of great tension. On one hand, it has as its backdrop the scandal involving Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang over his affair with a supposed Chinese spy, amid an investigation into whether he helped channel restricted artificial intelligence technology to Beijing. The businessman is important for this trilateral meeting, because he has been part of Donald Trump's diplomacy with China and, in fact, the U.S. president had invited him to Shenzhen, but now it is unknown whether he will attend. On the other hand, the summit would take place one week after a trilateral meeting between the United States, Ukraine, and Russia in Abu Dhabi, which achieved no major breakthroughs except for a prisoner exchange. The Kremlin's goal is to link Russia's war in Ukraine to a broader agreement on the protection of the rest of the continent. Moscow's main demand is that NATO withdraw all its military infrastructure from Eastern Europe and position its defenses in Germany, thus returning to the point prior to the accession of new countries after 1997. Added to this is the fact that President Trump suffered a serious defeat in the midterm elections on November 3, so he could arrive in a position of weakness. This, while he evaluates a strategy for Iran that does not lead to an economic disaster. It would have been Vladimir Putin who promoted the idea of a three-way meeting to address the war in Ukraine when he spoke by phone with Trump on October 9, according to what a former Russian intelligence officer informed about the matter, who spoke with The Wall Street Journal, disclosed at the time. That conversation also resulted in an agreement for the United States to purchase Russian diesel fuel and facilitate its sale on the global market. Ukraine's Foreign Minister rejected the plan for a peace summit without Kyiv, stating that it "would encourage Putin to continue his war." "As long as he continues this terror, there should be no place for him at any table," Andrii Sybiha wrote on X. Trump shed more light on the meeting last Sunday, when he stated that it will address denuclearization and efforts to end the war with Iran. "I think one of the meetings will be with President Putin and President Xi (Jinping), and that will be interesting. We'll be talking about many things, including denuclearization, but we'll talk about many other topics. We're trying to end the war in Iran," he said. However, the Russians have not given up, and Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov declared that the three countries were proposing points for the agenda, and that differences still existed that required consensus. For her part, in a sign of greater caution, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning confirmed that Beijing was in communication with the relevant parties about a meeting of the three heads of state. "I think it will happen. The question lies in the format and the content," Sun Yun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center, told The Wall Street Journal. "China wants the image, but not the costs," she added. Yalta 2.0 If it takes place, the meeting would be a historic event, although experts believe it is unlikely that the three leaders will address substantive issues due to the divergence of their interests, which would explain the caution with which China has spoken on the matter. Precisely, the issues to be discussed are what hold back the Chinese leader. German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier stated that Xi Jinping declared there were no plans for a trilateral meeting to discuss the war in Ukraine, and that the Chinese leader added that Europeans should be present, given that the war was a European conflict. The Wall Street Journal reported that Putin raised the idea of a trilateral summit not only with Trump but also with Xi, since the Russian leader aspires for such a meeting to become a "second Yalta," where the three world leaders would divide the world into spheres of influence. The Yalta Conference, held from February 4 to 11, 1945, was a summit held at the Livadia Palace in Crimea, in which the Allied leaders—Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union, Franklin D. Roosevelt of the United States, and Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom—agreed on the postwar world order and the end of World War II. "It is a historical lesson about great-power politics that China will never forget," Xin Qiang, an expert on U.S.-China relations at Fudan University in Shanghai, told The New York Times. "Everything was done behind China's back and at the expense of its interests," he added. "Putin is the one with the most to gain from a trilateral leaders' meeting, and the Russians are clearly behind the pressure for such a meeting to take place, which would be a major diplomatic achievement," Danny Russel, a former senior State Department official who worked in the administration of former President Barack Obama, told NBC News. Experts agree that even if Xi and Trump did not reach a substantial agreement, the image of the leaders of the U.S., Russia, and China negotiating the fate of a third country would send a powerful signal, generating concern in Taiwan, among other places. The first Yalta recognized Soviet domination over the areas of Eastern Europe that the Red Army controlled. Now Putin wants, as a gift, the Ukrainian territories he cannot manage to conquer. https://t.co/cdSwB5CmCc — Radosław Sikorski 🇵🇱🇪🇺 (@sikorskiradek) October 19, 2026 Radosław Sikorski, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Poland, criticized the idea and wrote on X that "the first Yalta Conference recognized Soviet domination over the areas of Eastern Europe that the Red Army controlled," but that "now Putin wants, as a gift, the Ukrainian territories he fails to conquer." China's Dilemma For analysts, the realization of a new Yalta is impossible not only because the three powers do not share the same strategic calculus when trying to delineate their spheres of influence under current geopolitical conditions, but also because third countries have their own capacity for action, as Ukraine and Iran have clearly demonstrated in wartime. "Beijing seems to be aware of this dynamic and is looking for ways to navigate these risks in a way that maximizes its benefits and minimizes potential losses," analyst Alicja Bachulska stated in an essay published by the Lowy Institute. Organizing such a meeting would reinforce China's position as an indispensable actor in global security governance. However—as Hudson Institute researcher Tsiporah Fried stated in an essay—Beijing has reasons to be cautious, because Xi might be reluctant to endorse an agreement that legitimizes the dismemberment of Ukraine and further damages relations with the European Union. Nor would he look favorably on a rapprochement between the United States and Russia negotiated at China's expense. In any case, the meeting could reaffirm China's ambition to become an indispensable world power on equal footing with the United States. "Xi seeks to project the image of China as a world superpower, while Washington wants Beijing to help resolve the conflicts in Ukraine and Iran. Xi would welcome the opportunity to showcase China's global influence without making substantial commitments," Victoria Hui, an academic at the University of Notre Dame, told La Tercera. "Xi has already cultivated the image of a bipolar world, the G2, through his meetings with Trump. The inclusion of Putin would further reinforce Xi's image as a world leader at the center of great-power diplomacy," she added. "As with the proposed summit, Beijing would welcome the image of Xi as a global statesman shaping the future of AI governance. However, it is unlikely to accept binding commitments that could limit China's technological or military ambitions," Hui stated. Nuclear Weapons Experts believe that President Trump's suggestion that the summit focus on nuclear disarmament rather than Ukraine could divert attention from what Washington is willing to concede to Moscow. However, analysts have noted that nuclear arms control should not be dismissed as mere diplomatic theater. This, considering that the world has entered a new era of nuclear competition. Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump hold a private meeting at the Zhongnanhai complex in Beijing, China's capital, on May 15, 2026. Photo: Xinhua During his first term, Trump questioned arms control agreements that excluded China. Beijing's absence from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) was one of the reasons Washington withdrew in 2019, although Russian violations remained the main justification. His administration also attempted, unsuccessfully, to bring China into broader negotiations on strategic arms control. The challenge has intensified since then. The New START treaty expired in February 2026, ending the last binding bilateral treaty limiting the strategic nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia. Together, Washington and Moscow possess approximately 86% of the world's nuclear weapons, while China's growing arsenal is transforming a mostly bilateral balance into a three-power competition. "Washington wants to bring China into nuclear arms control negotiations, but Beijing considers itself a weaker nuclear power compared to the United States and Russia. It is unlikely that Xi would accept restrictions that could limit China's continued nuclear modernization and military development," Hui stated. For Vladimir Putin, the advantages could be even greater. Recent decisions by Washington have eased pressure on Moscow, while tensions between Washington and Kyiv have intensified. "For Donald Trump, the summit would reflect his preference for direct great-power deals over multilateral institutions, which he considers ineffective. Bringing together the leaders of Russia and China would reinforce his image as a negotiator capable of dealing directly with the United States' main competitors," Fried wrote. "China does not necessarily expect major political breakthroughs. The mere fact that world leaders, including Trump and Putin, gather in China would in itself constitute a diplomatic success, reinforcing Xi's image as a leader whom other great powers must court. The controversy surrounding Jensen Huang could complicate the process, but Beijing's main goal is likely more symbolic than substantive," Hui concluded.