On August 14, 2017 (June 23 of the 2017 lunar calendar), Trump signed an administrative memorandum authorizing a review of "China's trade practices." Today is August 14, 2019. If the United States signed an administrative memorandum on August 14, 2017 to authorize the review of so-called "China trade practices" and then launched the 301 investigation, this Sino-US economic and trade friction provoked by the United States has lasted for two full years. In the past two years, the Sino-US game process has been ups and downs and full of various changes. Fight and talk, talk and fight. On the evening of August 13, just as the United States was escalating the friction situation and the global market was bearish on the prospects of Sino-US consultations, there was news that the leaders of China and the United States had a phone call-on the evening of August 13, member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and State Council Vice Premier Liu He and Chinese leader of the China-US Comprehensive Economic Dialogue spoke with U.S. Trade Representative Lighthizer and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin at request. China has made solemn representations on the US plan to impose additional tariffs on China's goods exported to the United States on September 1. The two sides agreed to call again in the next two weeks. Minister of Commerce Zhong Shan, President of the People's Bank of China Yi Gang, Deputy Director of the National Development and Reform Commission Ning Jizhe and others attended the call. Compared with previous leader calls, the content this time is much richer. Judging from the word "on request", the United States 'proposal for telephone communication highlights the difficulty for the United States to absorb the pressure brought by the imposition of additional tariffs in the short term. On the one hand, taking the initiative of the United States to call is probably a short-term strategic act, mainly focusing on the domestic financial market of the United States. This can be seen from the recent performance of the U.S. stock market and the market reaction after the call between the two sides. On the other hand, this may not be a manifestation of the gradual return of U.S. behavior to rationality after the negative effects of extreme pressure exerted on the U.S. market. Shortly after the call, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) issued a statement on imposing US$300 billion in additional tariffs on goods, excluding some goods, and the additional tariffs on some goods were postponed until December 15. Foreign media generally believe that this move means that the US acknowledges that the US$300 billion plan to impose additional tariffs will hurt American consumers. According to Reuters reported on the 13th, President Trump gave in on Tuesday on a plan to impose a 10% tariff on US$300 billion of China goods exported to the United States on September 1, postponing taxes on mobile phones, laptops and many other consumer goods to avoid affecting U.S. year-end holiday sales. Bloomberg's analysis of U.S. imports from China last year showed that the value of such China exports to the United States that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative decided to impose a 10% tariff on September 1 was about US$110 billion. The value of such China exports to the United States that took effect on December 15 was about US$160 billion. Another US$2 billion of products were removed from the original tax list. Analysis by the British Financial Times shows that the value of the batch of China exports to the United States that the United States postponed to December is about US$156 billion, more than half of the US$300 billion in China exports to the United States previously planned to be imposed. According to US media AXIOS, President Trump told reporters on the same day that the postponement of the entry into force of some tariffs was to alleviate the impact on retailers and consumers. This was the first time Trump publicly admitted that American consumers would be affected by tariffs. The next step of the United States remains to be seen. In fact, China and the United States have been talking and fighting for a long time, but some actions of the United States are still traceable. Whether the U.S. behavior is rational often depends on two factors-internally, the greater the response of the U.S. market and economic trends to U.S. policies, the greater the possibility that its policies will return to rationality. From the outside, China's firm attitude and stance will also put pressure on the United States. This message was conveyed by the leader's call last night. Judging from the content of the news, it is extremely rare for China to use diplomatic terms such as "solemn representations." The content of the news has both "serious" and "positive" connotations. I say "serious" because diplomatic terms such as "solemn representations" are rarely used in communication in the economic and trade field. The Sino-US trade war has been discussed for so long, this should be the first time China has used this method to express its attitude. Why? The United States 'claim that it plans to impose additional tariffs on China goods exported to the United States on September 1 is a breach of trust in violation of the Osaka Consensus between China and the U.S. dollar. In economic and trade consultations, without basic credit guarantees, other issues cannot be discussed. If this behavior is not corrected, it will inevitably create serious obstacles to Sino-US consultations. Therefore, the seriousness conveyed by China's rare use of diplomatic language is beyond doubt. To say "positive" means to show the outside world that the communication channels between the two sides are still open so far and there is a willingness to communicate further. For the market, this is a positive sign in the near future. "The two sides agreed to call again in the next two weeks." It is now mid-August, and the next two weeks, which is before September 1. Progress during this period mainly depends on the actions of the United States. It was a promise made by the United States during its meeting in Osaka not to impose new tariffs on China's exports. If this commitment is violated, the "foundation for equality and mutual respect" will no longer exist, and nothing else will be possible. Only by returning to the consensus reached at the first China-U.S. dollar meeting in Osaka and on the basis of equality and mutual respect can Sino-U.S. economic and trade consultations continue effectively. In addition, China also participated in the call with Minister of Commerce Zhong Shan, President of the People's Bank of China Yi Gang and Deputy Director of the National Development and Reform Commission Ning Jizhe. The National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Commerce, and the People's Bank of China, these three major departments have some time ago voiced their voices on issues such as the purchase of agricultural products from the United States and the labeling of my country as a "currency manipulator" by the United States. I wonder if this call involved any related content? In fact, at this time, the outside world should not have any illusions about China's position. Regarding a trade war, China does not want to fight, is not afraid of fighting, and has to fight when necessary. This position covers the sincerity of full communication and declares the will to be forced but resolutely counterattack. In the final analysis, what demonstrates China's determination to resolutely develop itself. The next step is actually very clear. If we return to the consensus reached at the first China-U.S. dollar meeting in Osaka, there is still hope that the consultations will move forward on the basis of equality and mutual respect. If we still insist on extreme pressure, even if tariffs are imposed on all goods exported from China to the United States, the United States 'goal will not be achieved. This position has not changed. Keep it unchanged and respond to all changes.