As of today, the U.S. government has been closed for 15 days, Trump said in his mouth is not in a hurry, but also let the Republicans put forward a provisional allocation bill, not by surprise and give the Democrats with 49:45.
Later, Trump said that layoffs would continue and all Democrats would be laid off. At the same time, in an interview, he proudly said that the funding of the US military was not a problem. Recently, a very wealthy man called him and said that if there was any shortage of funds in paying for military expenses, he was willing to make every effort to help the Trump administration get out of its predicament.
U.S. government shutdown stalemate
The US government shutdown has lasted for 15 days and has had a different impact on many areas of American society. Trump has previously publicly stated that the shutdown is “not urgent”, but has pushed the Republican Party to propose a temporary funding bill to try to break the current impasse. However, the bill was not passed in Congress with 49 votes in favour and 45 against, with a majority of Democratic lawmakers vetoing.
From the point of view of the U.S. political operation mechanism, the provisional allocation law is an important means for the government to maintain the basic operation when the budget has not reached a consensus. The bill has not been passed, reflecting that there are still significant differences between the two U.S. parties in the budget distribution, policy proposals and so on. With the extension of the shutdown time, some departments of the U.S. federal government are stalled, a large number of civil servants face unpaid work or vacation status, social welfare distribution, public service security and other work are also affected to varying degrees, and people's lives are gradually affected.
Trump's response
After the provisional allocation bill was not passed, Trump said he would continue to advance the cuts, and made it clear that the cuts were mainly aimed at Democratic officials. This initiative was interpreted by the outside world as a manifestation of further escalation of the two-party struggle in the United States, and when government governance faces difficulties, the confrontation between the political parties not only failed to ease the problem, but may exacerbe internal contradictions.
At the same time, Trump mentioned in an interview with the media that there is no need to worry about the funding issue of the US military, claiming that a "very wealthy person" recently took the initiative to contact him and expressed his willingness to provide help if the US military encountered a shortage of funds in payment of expenses. Help the government tide over the difficulties.
In fact, the U.S. military spends $20 billion a month, so much money needs, even if individuals are willing to help, it is difficult to sustain for the long term. From the analysis of the U.S. financial system and military expenditure guarantee mechanism, personal assistance is not a reasonable way to solve the problem of U.S. military expenditure, this statement also raises external questions about the U.S. government's financial condition and the ability to guarantee military expenditure.
Sino-US trade interaction
In the field of Sino-US trade, Trump recently put forward new requirements, threatening that the United States will stop purchasing Chinese edible oil if China does not increase its soybean purchases. After this remark was released, the U.S. stock market responded quickly. In just 7 minutes, the total market value of U.S. stocks evaporated by about $450 billion.
An in-depth analysis of the trade data behind this dispute shows that China's edible oil exports to the United States are only 20,000 tons, which accounts for a very low proportion of the total trade between China and the United States and has limited overall impact on China's edible oil industry. Most of the "edible oil" purchased by the United States from China is actually gutter oil, which is mainly used to make biofuels.
If the United States stops purchasing, the most affected will be U.S. biofuel manufacturers, whose raw material supply will be short, which will lead to an increase in fuel production costs, which will adversely affect corporate operations and the development of the U.S. biofuel industry. This kind of policy will eventually have an impact on its own industry, which is relatively rare in the implementation of trade policies by successive US presidents.
Trump is ignorant.
According to the report of Hong Kong 01, the U.S. Department of Commerce had previously introduced the sanctions of penetrating rules, but Trump said he was completely unaware of this. He didn't know the implementation of the rules until China took countermeasures. Subsequently, Trump angrily denounced Commerce Secretary Lutnick at an internal meeting, arguing that his implementation of the rule "messed things up".
This incident exposed problems of poor communication and unclear division of powers and responsibilities within the U.S. government at the policy formulation and implementation levels. Judging from the operating process of the U.S. administrative system, the introduction of important sanctions usually requires multi-departmental coordination and high-level decision-making. This time Trump said he was "unaware", which not only raised questions about the administrative efficiency of the U.S. government, but also further highlighted the contradictions and differences within his government.
The American Internal Voice
The Financial Times interviewed an anonymous U.S. government official in response to the Trump administration’s “drop-down” behavior in the penetration of rules. The official revealed that as early as August, the Chinese side had clearly informed the U.S. that if the U.S. insisted on unilateralism, China would take corresponding countermeasures. But at the time U.S. politicians did not pay attention to the Chinese side’s early warning and were determined to implement the relevant sanctions rules.
After the Chinese side took countermeasures, the U.S. side attempted to confuse video and audio in various ways, transferring responsibility to the Chinese side, covering up the fact that it was pursuing unilateralism.The official stressed that despite the U.S. side constantly creating public opinion and distorting facts, the international community has a clear perception of the truth of the events, the U.S. side's actions can not deceive the world, its unilateralism and the practice of creating antagonism, has also been widely opposed by the international community.
New trends in the Sino-US game
With the escalation of Sino-US trade war and multi-field games, external analysts believe that the US may take new measures in many fields next, including using the Taiwan Island issue and uniting with the Philippines and other allies to counter China.
In the face of possible actions by the United States, China has already been ready to deal with them. On the Taiwan Island issue, Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council has recently voiced intensively, explicitly opposing any form of "Taiwan independence" separatist acts, emphasizing that safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity is China's core interest, and any separatist acts will be resolutely cracked down.
In the South China Sea, China has strengthened the control and construction of relevant sea areas and built an effective "Great Wall on the Sea". In response to the Philippines' previous improper behavior in some waters of the South China Sea, China has taken necessary measures to respond to it and firmly safeguard the national maritime rights and interests.
In response to U.S. allies, against the Dutch enterprises forcibly seize China Anselm Semiconductor-related assets, China has taken the strategy of "shoot out the head bird" and announced the ban on exports of Anselm Semiconductor-related products. This move made the Dutch side forcibly seized assets not able to normally sell abroad, effectively safeguarded the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises, and also to the U.S. side and its allies showed China's firm position in safeguarding its own interests.
Middle American game.
Summarizing the current situation of China-U.S. interaction in trade, politics, diplomacy and other fields, the outside world generally believes that in the course of this China-U.S. trade war and multi-sphere game escalation, the Chinese side, with clear strategic planning, effective response measures and a solid domestic industrial foundation, once again occupies the advantage in the game, leading a position.
From the current situation of the United States, the government closure impasse is difficult to break, domestic two-party contradictions continue to exacerbate, the financial situation is challenged, the unilateralism policy implemented internationally has been widely opposed, the initiative of the allies to counter China is also difficult to work because of the effective response of China. Signs indicate that the United States is gradually falling into an unbeatable situation in the game with China, and in the near future, the United States may have to adjust its policy to China, make concessions to the Chinese side, seeking to resolve the differences between the two parties through dialogue and consultation.