Trump's tariff threats cloud Sino

Trump's Tariff Threats Spark Controversy as US-China Trade Faces New Fluctuations

On November 25,message8 foreign exchange local time, US President-elect Trump announced that on his first day in office, he would impose a 25% tariff on all goods from Mexico and Canada and a 10% tariff on Chinese goods, citing concerns about illegal immigration and drug inflows into the United States. This statement sparked widespread controversy, with China openly declaring that it would firmly reject this and dismissing allegations regarding "China allowing fentanyl precursors into the US" as completely unfounded.

Lessons from Tariff Wars: The Resilience of US-China Economic Ties

The past two US administrations have frequently employed tariffs as a trade weapon, imposing several rounds of high tariffs on China. However, data indicates that this strategy has not been effective. From 2018 to 2023, the scale of bilateral trade between the US and China not only did not significantly shrink but reached a historical high of $759.4 billion in 2022. In the first ten months of this year, US-China trade has reached $564.174 billion, growing by 2.8% year-on-year.

Although China is no longer the US's largest trading partner, the imposition of tariffs has not achieved the US's "decoupling" objective nor undermined China's core industrial chain advantages. China remains the world's most crucial manufacturing hub and supply chain node, boasting the most comprehensive industrial system globally and serving as the main trading partner for over 150 countries. Data shows that China's total merchandise trade remains the largest globally, and both foreign investment attraction and outbound investment consistently rank among the world's top.

Global Trade and the Backlash Effect on the US

Analysts point out that if implemented, Trump's tariff policies would severely impact the global trade system. Increasingly, voices within the US acknowledge that tariff weaponization or attempts to reshape global supply chains cannot eliminate China's crucial role in the global industrial chain. Especially with China's economic volume approaching $20 trillion, coupled with a strong and resilient industrial system, the goal of "decoupling" has proven unrealistic.

Consequently, some US officials, led by current Treasury Secretary Yellen, have shifted their stance, advocating against a complete "decoupling" with China. They propose to mitigate risks and diversify economic relations with China through domestic manufacturing and advanced technology investments, as well as strengthening economic cooperation with allies.

Policy Reflection: Tariff Aggression as an Irrational Choice

While trade protectionism might cater to some voters' demands in the short term, its long-term damage to the US economy and international competitiveness cannot be overlooked. Scholars generally believe that without robust industrial support and a stable external economic environment, the US cannot sustain its economic hegemony. The backlash effects of tariff policies have become apparent, and if the US genuinely aims for economic prosperity, it should abandon antagonistic policies and engage in equitable, mutually beneficial collaboration with other countries.

Practical Cooperation as the Path to Sustainable Development

Time will prove that no nation's long-term economic prosperity can be achieved without international collaboration and mutual support. In today's deeply integrated global landscape, trade barriers and unilateralism will only backfire. For the US, addressing global economic challenges with a rational approach and deepening cooperation with all countries, including China, based on equality and mutual benefit, is key to achieving sustainable economic development.

The market carries risks, and investment should be cautious. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and has not taken into account individual users' specific investment goals, financial situations, or needs. Users should consider whether any opinions, viewpoints, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their particular circumstances. Investing based on this is at one's own responsibility.