There is much talk about a potential global trade war, arising from the tit-for-tat announcements by Washington and Beijing about punitive tariffs on some of each other’s trade goods. US President Donald Trump initiated it by saying that China must reduce its massive trade surplus with the US.
An important plank of then-US presidential candidate Trump’s electioneering was to set right the perceived unfair — to the US — trade regime with its trading partners, particularly China, which had led China to accumulate large trade surpluses through low US tariffs on Chinese goods, as well as “manipulating” its currency to make its exports even cheaper than they already were with depressed wages in China.
China had everything going for it to the disadvantage of the US, and Trump thought that the US had enough of it.
Interestingly, however, after becoming president, Trump toned down — but did not give up — his avowed intention to correct the trade imbalance with China. He paraded his new friendship with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), and when Xi became president for life, Trump even felt that the US might consider such a change.
One important reason for this change of tone might have been to secure China’s cooperation for the denuclearization of North Korea, where North Korean leader Kim Jong-un had been testing a new and more powerful atomic and missile arsenal.
It would seem that Beijing has managed to put the economic squeeze on North Korea, necessitating Kim’s first visit to China, and a flurry of summits between the leaders of the two Koreas, as well as a planned summit between Trump and Kim.
Even though not much has been achieved so far in terms of North Korea’s denuclearization, the US does not seem as much worried, at least in the short term.
This might explain the renewed emphasis on the “unfair” trade regime with China.
Beijing’s response to Trump’s flurry of tweets and announcement of tariffs has been twofold.
First, it has declared that it will fight US tariffs at any cost, and has announced a package to hit US exports to China that would hurt Trump’s constituency, such as US soybean farmers.
The Chinese Ministry of Commerce has said that Beijing would fight unilateral US protectionism, to which Trump replied that further tariffs were being considered.
To quote Trump: “In light of China’s unfair retaliation, I have instructed [the US trade representative] to consider whether US$100 billion of additional tariffs would be appropriate under section 301 and, if so, to identify the products upon which to impose such tariffs.”
It is a tit-for-tat situation, which has the potential of getting out of control. The only consolation is that the tariffs being threatened have a time lag of about two months before they come into force. There is still time for China and the US for calm reflection before the world is plunged into a trade war.
Second, China has said that it is considering a whole new level of changes to open up its economy for a more balanced trade with the US and other countries. China has set a deadline of June 30 for these new measures.
People’s Bank of China Governor Yi Gang (易綱) announced the measures, saying that the trade imbalance with the US was a structural problem and Beijing was prepared to take steps to create a healthy balance by opening up China’s economy.
Among the measures, “domestic and foreign capital will be treated equally,” thus encouraging foreign investment, and China will be “allowing more US companies to invest in services in China.” To this end, the cap on foreign investment in securities companies, fund management companies and personal insurance companies is to be lifted to 51 percent, and would be abolished completely in three years.
Furthermore, securities companies would no longer require a Chinese joint venture partner, while foreign-funded insurance companies would be able to broaden the scope of their business activities to compete with Chinese insurers.
By the end of the year, China is to allow foreign investors into the car and consumer finance market, as well as remove caps on foreign investment in new wealth management companies linked to banks.
This is all very well, and long overdue. However, much will depend on how China goes about implementing the opening up of its services sector.
Besides, any real and visible results from these measures will take quite some time for Trump to sell them to his constituency, who demands more jobs in the US.
Therefore, even if there might be some easing of trade tensions, the politics of trade will continue to create problems.
Sushil Seth is a commentator based in Australia.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS