In the past eight months, the US-China confrontation, especially in the area of tariffs, can be said that the United States not only did not take advantage of the cheap, but instead stepped back and continued to make concessions to China.Looking back at the beginning of the tariff war, the U.S. government was full of confidence, thinking that by imposing tariffs, it would create export obstacles for China and press us in economy and trade.
China holds high-level trade talks several times
But what about reality? Relying on its strong manufacturing capacity, complete industrial chain and huge domestic market, China quickly adjusted its rhythm and steadily caught the move of the United States.
On the contrary, it is the United States itself, because the rise in tariffs has led to the rise in domestic prices, the increase in corporate costs and the impact on exports.A series of chain reactions put great pressure on them and finally had to rethink their tariff policy.
In the past few months, China and the United States have held more than one round of talks, and every time they have touched the nerves of the global market.From the initial tension to the later slowly easing, the economic and trade relations between the two sides can be said to be a fight while talking. Interestingly, in several key negotiations, the United States made more obvious concessions each time.
Behind this, there is not only the reason why their domestic economy can't hold up, but also the reason why they are slowly realizing that, It is not good to tighten relations with China.
The British Financial Times recently published an article, which was titled... "Trump's China Policy 180-degree Uturn".
[Trump's attitude towards China changes 180 degrees]
The article is written in the form of a dialogue between column writers and editors, which cites a key point of view: Although the US politics in the past few years reached a rare consensus on the "hard against China", the recent attitude of the Trump administration toward China has changed 180 degrees.
For example, after the 1993 military parade, the U.S. Defense Secretary publicly stated "We are not seeking a conflict with China.During the talks between the Secretary of State and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, the voice was also clearly soft.
Even more striking, a memorandum was leaked inside the Pentagon. Proposing to move the strategic focus away from China (including the Taiwan issue),Turn to regional affairs and local security.
These combined signals indicate that the U.S. is undergoing a clear strategic reversal from Obama’s “return to Asia” to Trump’s second term.
Why do you suddenly turn around? article analysis suggests, The underlying reason is that the U.S. military power is no longer able to withstand its ambition to “protect the world.”Moreover, the Trump administration's interest in Taiwan is actually mainly focused on the semiconductor industry.
The U.S. government attaches great importance to Taiwan’s semiconductor industry.
The article even speculated: Once the United States' own chip industry is developed, their enthusiasm for "protecting Taiwan Province" will be greatly reduced.To put it bluntly, the United States is tossing around on the Taiwan Province issue, and economic interests are the biggest motivation. If the chip is no longer dependent on others, the importance of this "economic pawn" in Taiwan will naturally decline.
For this reason, the article directly questions whether the US's so-called "protection of Taiwan" is really feasible militarily and politically. It is even suggested that the United States re-think that spending so much money "to protect Taiwan" is not worth it.
In fact, China’s military power today is not the same as it was decades ago, and we have enough deterrence to prevent any opponent from agitating.
If the United States insists on stepping on the "one China" red line and interfering in China's internal affairs, the price will definitely be beyond its reach. If the situation really goes to that point, the United States 'military layout in the Asia-Pacific may be severely damaged, and its global strategy will also collapse in a chain manner. In the end, it will only suffer its own consequences.
[The United States does not dare to conflict with China]
On the other hand, now the world pattern is also quietly changing, regional cooperation is becoming more and more important, and China has become a key driver of many regional cooperation thanks to economic stability, large markets, strong science and technology, and opening up.
More and more countries see opportunities for cooperation with China, from Asia to Africa to Latin America, and they are getting closer and closer to China.For example, trade between ASEAN and China is tightly tied, and RCEP has also deepened economic ties; many countries in Africa have found development paths through the "Belt and Road"; Latin American countries like Brazil have also cooperated vigorously with China.
This trend is actually good for the world, resources can be better allocated, the economy can be more balanced, and countries can learn from each other and deal with global problems together.
But the United States, in order to maintain its hegemonic position, when it looks at China's and other countries' cooperation, always wants to do a small move to interfere, which in fact adds a lot to regional and global stability.
[Trump's foreign policy is very chaotic]
The Financial Times article is quite straightforward: trying to summarize a complete set of diplomatic theories from Trump’s remarks is basically in vain.
However, from the comments of his team’s other members, you can see a bit of a sneeze... Somewhat like a 21st-century replica of 19th-century “Monroeism” is trying to keep China’s influence outside of the Western Hemisphere.
But the article also pointed out that China's influence in Latin America is mainly economic, and we have long been the largest trading partner and infrastructure investor of many countries. Like Peru, China's economy has been deeply rooted there.
Therefore, even if the United States wants to use a new version of the "Monroe Doctrine" to stop China, it is already too late. China's economic existence is not something that can be moved just by persuasion.