After two days of high-level talks in London, the United States and China reached a trade agreement framework on Tuesday, with representatives from both sides unanimously stating that this is a key step in implementing the Geneva consensus and the content of the leaders' phone call.
U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick pointed out at a press conference that both sides have reached a framework agreement on implementing the Geneva consensus. He stated: "We have reached a framework for implementing the Geneva consensus and the content of the presidents' phone call." China's Vice Minister of Commerce and International Trade Representative Li Chenggang also made a similar statement to reporters, indicating that substantial results were indeed achieved in these negotiations.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping had a phone conversation late last week, successfully cooling down the increasingly tense bilateral trade relations. Previously, both sides had accused each other of violating the Geneva trade agreement, with tensions on the brink of escalation.
At the conference held in Geneva, Switzerland in mid-May, the U.S. and China had agreed to suspend newly imposed retaliatory tariffs from April for 90 days and roll back some implemented restrictive measures. This London talks were an extension and implementation of that consensus.
Lutnick noted that he and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer would return to Washington to report the results to President Trump, and the framework would only be actually implemented after Trump's approval. He stated: "If Xi Jinping also approves, then we will implement this framework."
Lutnick emphasized that China's restrictions on rare earth exports to the United States are a "key part" of this agreement. He said the U.S. expects the rare earth issue to be resolved in this framework. He further suggested that recent U.S. restrictions on high-tech product exports to China might be eased after Beijing releases rare earths.
These comments reveal an underlying message of "mutual concessions": China releases rare earths, and the U.S. relaxes high-tech export restrictions.
Despite high-level Chinese participation in these talks, Beijing's response was unusually low-key compared to the U.S. side's active external statements. Over an hour after Lutnick's remarks, Chinese official media had not extensively reported on the matter, with only a few reports citing Li Chenggang's comments, indicating that this round of negotiations helps build bilateral mutual trust.
This contrasts with the Chinese official media's quick publication of the Xi-Trump phone call last week, perhaps reflecting Beijing's more cautious approach to handling the results of these negotiations.
The London talks featured heavyweight participants. Besides Lutnick and Greer, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also made a brief appearance, stating he would return to the U.S. to testify before Congress.
The Chinese side was led by Vice Premier He Lifeng and Minister of Commerce Wang Wentao, demonstrating China's high importance attached to these trade consultations.
Although both the U.S. and China have shown a certain consensus and confidence in reaching a framework agreement, everything still depends on final approval by the leaders of both countries. The actual implementation and subsequent mechanism arrangements are the true test of bilateral sincerity and mutual trust.
Stablecoin issuer Circle recently successfully IPO, which is undoubtedly a milestone for the overall crypto market, but it has also sparked a debate within the crypto community about "value distribution". Long-time USDC supporters who haven't received any returns are questioning: "Do they really have a share in this victory?"Toggle
Who Created USDC, Now Forgotten?
DeFi analyst Ignas frankly stated on X that he felt a bit uneasy about Circle's successful listing. He pointed out that the early adopters of USDC were actually the crypto native community and DeFi users, who were the first group to support the stablecoin infrastructure, but now they are unable to share any of the benefits:
Bitcoin, Ethereum, and various airdrops have always rewarded early users, which is the core value of the crypto world. However, USDC has no base yield, no $CRCL stock distribution, no airdrops - nothing at all.
Ignas believes that while Circle's success brings a halo to the crypto world, for the DeFi community, it's like "standing outside watching others receive dividends".
From Chain to Traditional Finance, Betraying the Crypto Community?
Circle enters the traditional market through its stock ($CRCL), which ordinary investors can only buy through securities accounts. This made Ignas feel that the entire crypto value is being "extracted". He worries that USDC's prosperity might instead cause funds to flow from the chain to the traditional financial system, creating a value outflow.
Nevertheless, he also acknowledges that Circle's success is not a bad thing for the overall industry:
Payment applications will become more widespread, stablecoin supply will expand, thereby boosting on-chain transaction activity and underlying public chain valuations.
He said helplessly, "In the future, I will tend to support stablecoin projects that are willing to leave rewards for early users, such as Ethena, MakerDAO, Frax, rather than Tether or Circle."
DeFi Protocol IPO Wave?ETF and SPAC as Channels
Daily Degen news writer @rektdiomedes responded that this "value distribution imbalance" issue will eventually find a solution:
In the future, DeFi protocols will transfer value to native users and token holders through different methods, which may include token valuation repricing, protocol listing through Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPAC), or even launching ETFs.
He gave examples, such as Frax considering listing through SPAC, and Aave possibly entering the traditional financial market through an ETF in one or two years.
In other words, even though native users are marginalized in Circle's listing, in the long run, this wave of compliance will drive DeFi protocols into broader capital channels.
Tether Regular Coin Buying: Unexpected Praise for Feedback Method
Interestingly, some mentioned Tether's alternative "feedback method". @happysubstack pointed out that although Tether has always been opaque and does not provide direct user profit sharing, they at least recycle part of their profits back into the crypto market, such as large-scale Bitcoin purchases, indirectly stabilizing market prices.
Ignas even agreed with this point and raised a question: "So, might Tether actually be better for the crypto field than USDC?"
In the absence of a direct feedback mechanism, Tether's strategy has instead sparked a positive community response, highlighting the gap in Circle's approach to returning value to users.
Next Stage: Stablecoin War Returns to "User-Centric"
This debate is not just an emotional reaction, but reveals a critical crossroads in the crypto industry: "Do stablecoin issuers want to serve the traditional market or focus on the crypto native community?"
The DeFi community has always cared about "how value is distributed", highlighting that they support not just the stablecoin itself, but the values it represents - whether there's shared prosperity, transparency, and whether it still belongs to this on-chain world.
As Circle takes the stage in the traditional capital market, this battle for the right to speak about stablecoins is just beginning.
Risk Warning
Cryptocurrency investment carries high risks, and its price may fluctuate dramatically. You may lose all of your principal. Please carefully assess the risks.
Disclaimer: The content above is only the author's opinion which does not represent any position of Followin, and is not intended as, and shall not be understood or construed as, investment advice from Followin.
