China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced on September 26 that the Chinese and US militaries have agreed to sign, as soon as possible, a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on 'crisis communication and prevention,' establishing a new mechanism for managing military crises between the two countries. The announcement came after President Xi Jinping's three-day state visit to the United States from September 23 to 25, during which he met with US President Donald Trump, and represents the latest effort by both sides to preserve channels of dialogue and prevent misunderstandings from escalating into conflict amid intense strategic competition.

This Xi-Trump meeting was the two leaders' second summit this year — following talks held in Beijing in May — and one of the highest-level exchanges in US-China relations since Trump returned to office. According to China's Foreign Ministry, the visit produced 'eight deliverables and understandings' covering trade, an AI safety dialogue, and counternarcotics cooperation, including a reciprocal tariff arrangement worth roughly $30 billion, a reaffirmed joint opposition to Iran developing nuclear weapons, and an agreement to maintain high-level contacts around the upcoming APEC and G20 meetings. The pledge on a military crisis-communication mechanism was not included in that official list of 'eight' items but was announced separately by China's Foreign Ministry after the summit concluded, underscoring its status as a sensitive yet pivotal issue in the bilateral relationship.

According to China's Foreign Ministry readout, Xi Jinping told Trump during their talks that the two militaries should maintain regular dialogue and improve mechanisms for crisis communication and prevention. The two countries' defense departments subsequently confirmed they would move 'as soon as possible' to negotiate and sign a memorandum of understanding on 'crisis communication and prevention,' aiming to create smoother channels of communication in the event of unplanned encounters or misjudgments at sea or in the air, so as to prevent localized friction from escalating into broader confrontation. China's state news agency Xinhua described the agreement as the two militaries agreeing 'to strengthen crisis communication and crisis prevention,' calling it an important step toward the continued stable development of military-to-military ties.

Yet considerable uncertainty surrounds the pledge. The South China Morning Post noted that Beijing's statement did not specify whether the memorandum would establish an entirely new military hotline or merely set out procedures for using existing channels of contact, nor did it define what types of incidents would trigger the crisis-consultation mechanism; no specific deadline was set for signing the document either. Notably, China's Minister of National Defense, Admiral Dong Jun, did not accompany Xi Jinping on the trip to the United States, and no other senior military official was included in the Chinese delegation. For its part, the White House's public readout of the summit made no mention of the military communication mechanism, and as of the time the news broke, neither the Pentagon nor US Indo-Pacific Command had publicly confirmed the arrangement — leaving the commitment, to a large extent, resting on Beijing's unilateral statement.

In fact, the Chinese and US militaries have made repeated attempts in recent years to rebuild and expand communication channels. In November 2025, US Secretary of Defense (now titled 'Secretary of War') Pete Hegseth announced, after a phone call with Dong Jun, that the two sides had agreed to establish military-to-military communication channels to 'deconflict and de-escalate' problems as they arise. On October 31 of that year, the two met face to face on the sidelines of the ASEAN Defence Ministers' Meeting-Plus (ADMM-Plus) in Malaysia — the first in-person meeting between the US and Chinese defense chiefs since Trump returned to the White House. Moving into 2026, Hegseth spoke again with Dong Jun on September 9, telling the Chinese side that Washington had no intention of seeking conflict with China, nor was it pursuing regime change or the strangulation of the PRC, while also stressing that the United States has significant interests in the Asia-Pacific that it will resolutely defend. These exchanges laid the groundwork for the outcomes of the September summit, though they also suggest that the practical effectiveness of previously established communication mechanisms in an actual crisis still remains to be tested.

The push by the Chinese and US militaries to strengthen communication comes against a backdrop of persistent tension over flashpoints such as the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea. At another summit with Trump in Beijing this past May, Xi Jinping had already warned that if the US side mishandled the Taiwan issue, the two countries 'will have clashes and even conflicts, putting the entire relationship in great jeopardy.' Meanwhile, Chinese coast guard vessels have repeatedly entered the restricted waters around Pratas Island (Dongsha), which is controlled by Taiwan, several times this year, and close encounters at sea and in the air have also occurred periodically in the South China Sea and East China Sea — underscoring the real-world need for a stronger crisis-management mechanism. Analysts say it is precisely against this backdrop of persistent friction risk that both sides need a communication mechanism capable of being activated quickly in an emergency, to prevent isolated, unplanned incidents from escalating into more serious confrontation for lack of communication.

Analysts at the US think tank the Stimson Center noted after the summit that Xi Jinping had proactively raised the issue of regular dialogue channels between the two militaries and mechanisms for crisis communication and prevention — an issue Washington had been pushing for years without making substantive progress. China's newfound willingness to take a step on this front is itself a positive signal, one analysis noted, adding that such a step would likely not have been possible without the recent improvement in the overall tone of bilateral relations. The think tank also pointed to some concrete recent gestures from the Chinese side on military communication, including sending the commander of its Eastern Theater Command to a defense chiefs' conference on August 31 to meet with Admiral Samuel Paparo, head of US Indo-Pacific Command. Still, other analysts remain cautious about how effectively the mechanism will actually function, noting that in past crises China has often struggled to share information and maintain communication promptly, owing to its domestic decision-making processes and political considerations — raising concern that even once signed, the new mechanism may struggle to work quickly in a genuine emergency.

Overall, this not-yet-signed military crisis-communication memorandum, with its details still to be worked out, reflects an effort by both China and the United States to erect 'guardrails' around their bilateral relationship even as strategic rivalry persists and structural contradictions remain unresolved. Whether on trade, the AI safety dialogue, or the military crisis-communication mechanism, the signals released at the September summit suggest that both Beijing and Washington prefer to keep their competition within manageable bounds rather than let the situation slide into uncontrolled confrontation. Yet past experience suggests that whether such a memorandum can truly be turned into a functioning 'safety valve' in an actual crisis will depend largely on whether both sides sustain the political will to translate their commitments into concrete, operational communication procedures. Whether the memorandum is ultimately signed on schedule, and how its specific provisions are designed, will serve as an important bellwether for the future direction of China-US military relations.