In recent times, Trump has obviously been unable to push, again facing China, and also trying to pull his allies together to impose tariffs on China.

However, what Trump didn't think about is that it was in China that it just shone in less than 24 hours. Japan immediately poured him a bowl of cold water and answered his plan with three words: "There are difficulties."

These three words, to put it bluntly, are rejection, and more interestingly, this time Japan not only has not given the face of the United States, but also to a certain extent has stumbled through the real intentions of the U.S. to force its allies against China.

It should start with the actions of the U.S. in the past. The Trump administration has always liked to use tariffs as weapons, and in his mind, as long as tariffs are continuously increased, it can ¡°treat opponents with economic means.¡±

Recently, he has repeatedly urged the EU, the G7 and NATO to jointly impose high tariffs on China, saying it would force Russia to make concessions in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.

But a little bit of common sense can see that the real goal behind this proverb is not Russia, but through the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, economic blockade of China, forcing allies to participate in sanctions against China.

The Chinese side cannot naturally remain silent about this obviously conspicuous economic measure.On September 15, China responded to the United States with a very direct and decisive statement: China has consistently opposed the adoption of economic and trade restrictions against China on the grounds of "relating to Russia", and the U.S. practice is typical of unilateral bullying and economic coercion.

The Chinese side stressed that if any side damages China¡¯s interests, China will take all necessary measures to safeguard its own rights and interests.

After China has expressed this attitude, it is logical that U.S. allies should keep pace, at least in public, to continue to address the U.S. position.

But what I didn¡¯t think was that it was less than a day ago that Japan openly struck the United States.

On September 16, Japan's finance minister, Kato Zheng, directly stated at a press conference after the Cabinet meeting: It is ¡°difficult¡± to impose high tariffs on China simply because of the continued purchase of Russian crude oil.

Obviously, the finance minister clearly knows that for Japan, standing on the side of the U.S. to open a knife against China is nothing more than shutting down its economic vitality.

China is one of Japan's largest trading partners, Japan's automotive, electronics, precision manufacturing and other industrial chains are deeply dependent on the Chinese market.

If Japan follows U.S. tax hikes, China¡¯s countermeasures will hit Japan¡¯s own enterprises and jobs once they come into effect, which are the very foundations of the Japanese economy.

More importantly, Japan clearly knows more than the United States that engaging in such high tariffs is not a stable and profitable trade, and even the initiator of the United States itself has not taken advantage of it.

The results of trade frictions over the past few years have proved that U.S. consumers and have borne the main cost of tax increases, and U.S. exporters have also suffered equal reprisals.

Since even the initiator does not get the benefit, Japan naturally does not want to be the wrongdoer, let alone not to protect the U.S. for the gun.

The incident also exposed the reality of the decline of the US global "ally calling power". In the past, the United States, thanks to its military and economic influence, was able to force its allies to follow in their own footsteps on key issues.

But now that things have changed early, countries understand that following the US line of confrontation to the end, the sacrifice is often the real economic interests of their own countries, and the United States does not share the losses for allies when making decisions.

In addition to, Japan itself also buys Russian oil and gas, but it¡¯s smaller than China.If it¡¯s done seriously according to U.S. logic, Japan is obviously also within the ¡°standard¡± range.

This means that the reasons for the US sanctions are selectively targeting China.

It is foreseeable that the U.S. will not strike on this.It is likely that there will be more diplomatic pressure, public opinion pressure, and even influence on Japan in other areas, trying to get Japan to succumb.

But the problem is that in today¡¯s highly globalized and deeply intertwined economic environment, no country can bear the cost of long-term opposition with the Chinese market.

Not to mention Japan, even some core European countries have to weigh in front of trade interests.

For China, the incident also showed once again that adhering to principles and clear statements are effective. faced with external economic pressure, China has no ambiguity, but in a clear and decisive language to tell the other party where the bottom line is.

This clear attitude not only makes the opponents numerous, but also forces third countries to carefully consider costs and risks when making choices.

In the future, it will only become increasingly difficult for the United States to establish a unified front in its economic policy towards China.

In the face of the reality, the interests are always in the first place when countries are dealing with foreign affairs, and those political and economic acts that hurt the enemy a thousand and hurt themselves eight hundred, in the end, can no longer make everyone fair to pay.