The civilian.
All information is provided in the article and at the end.
The cold winter in the shipping industry came earlier than expected, and while global traders were still watching the move of the Sino-U.S. trade, two documents landed at the same time on the morning of October 14, radically changing the rules of the game.
One is the new regulations on port fees for ships, and the other is the sanctions against the US subsidiaries of Korean companies. The timing, strength and accuracy of these two combination punches all reveal extraordinary signals.
When Washington thought Beijing would choose the negotiating table, the other side directly overturned the table. Where will this contest without smoke take the global shipping industry?
The story goes back to this spring, when the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office, in the name of national security, launched an investigation into China’s maritime industry, a reason that sounds coronary, but some common sense people know that what really left Washington unable to sit is the dominance of China’s shipbuilding industry in the global market.
Data won't lie. The orders of Chinese shipyards have accounted for 60% of the world's share. This figure was less than 30% ten years ago. The ebb and flow of industrial advantages has made American policy makers feel unprecedented threats.
So the U.S. has designed a seemingly reasonable tariff scheme, starting at $50 per net tonne, increasing year by year, and eventually reaching $140 by 2028, a warming-water frog strategy that tries to gradually weaken the competitiveness of Chinese shipping enterprises without triggering a sharp reaction.
According to this standard, every time a medium-sized container ship enters an American port, it will have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars more. Accumulated, this account is enough to make any shipping company feel distressed.
Beijing's reaction speed exceeded everyone's expectation, the Ministry of Transportation introduced the special port charges standard, not only in the amount achieved peer-to-peer, but also in the implementation details made the accurate peer-to-peer, per net tonne of RMB 400, according to the exchange rate after calculation with the US side charges basically equal, a maximum of five charges per year, the main port once.
These terms seem to be written in accordance with U.S. documents, but the real genius lies in the choice of time nodes, and the time of entry into force of both sides is exactly the same hour, this operation is not coincidental, but through carefully calculated strategic deployment.
Even more shocking was the introduction of the Ministry of Commerce's Order No. 6, when everyone thought it was just a port fee dispute, the sanctions on the Chinese subsidiary of Huawei Ocean America suddenly crashed, the five companies were listed on the blacklist because of cooperation with the U.S. investigation, and have since been unable to conduct business with any organization in China.
The killing force of this trick far exceeds the port fee itself, because it breaks the inherent boundaries of the game, and previous trade frictions are more limited to the bilateral level, and this time China will point to third-party collaborators, which is equivalent to sounding the alarm clock to all potential collaborators.
Hanwha Ocean plays an important role in the global shipbuilding industry, and its U.S. business also occupies a considerable share. The inclusion of such a company in the sanctions list means that it must choose between China and the United States, either giving up cooperation with China and bearing huge economic losses, or cutting off business dealings with the United States and facing political pressure.
Whichever option is easy, and this is exactly what China wants to, allowing other players in the entire industry chain to re-evaluate the cost of the station by precisely hitting key node enterprises.
The market's response came quickly and directly. The Baltic Dry Index rose for three consecutive days after the policy was announced, and freight rates on several major routes were adjusted.
What's more interesting is that some Chinese ships that originally planned to berth at American ports suddenly diverted to Mexican or Canadian ports, and then sent their goods to the United States by land transportation. Although this circuitous strategy increased the cost, it was still economical compared with paying high port fees directly, and the flexible response of shipping companies greatly reduced the effect of the US charging policy.
Trump’s reaction was dramatic, and before China’s two documents landed, he also announced on social media that he would impose a hundred percent tariff on Chinese goods, but when real countermeasures appeared, his tone suddenly weakened, and began to emphasize the importance of Sino-U.S. relations, saying all problems could be solved through dialogue.
This sharp turn in attitude exposes Washington's lack of confidence in responding to China's resolute counterattack. After all, U.S. ports rely far more on China ships than they appear on the surface.
From the perspective of the industrial chain analysis, the essence of this game is the inevitable result of the global manufacturing focus shift, the past two decades, China's accumulated advantages in shipbuilding, port operations, logistics management and other fields, can not be wiped out by administrative orders.
The United States tries to curb China's shipping industry by raising costs, but ignores the power of market rules. When ships built in China occupy the global market because of their high quality and low price, and when the operating efficiency of Chinese ports leads the world, these competitive advantages become an unshakable moat.
Both sides showed a high degree of restraint, and China's countermeasures, although accurate and strong, have always been controlled within the reciprocal range, there are no signs of unlimited escalation, and the U.S. side has also rapidly released a signal of willingness to communicate after facing countermeasures.
This shows that both sides know that comprehensive decoupling is not good for anyone. The real game lies not in who has a louder voice, but in who can better grasp the sense of discretion and leave room for future cooperation while safeguarding their own interests.
This port deal in mid-October has written new footsteps for the global trade pattern, the unilateralism approach will eventually encounter reciprocal countermeasures, attempts to distort the market by administrative means are destined to return in vain, and the future road may still be twisted, but one thing is already clear that mutual respect and equal consultation is the right way to resolve differences.
Source of information
Qianlong.com The Ministry of Transport issued an announcement to charge special port fees for US ships starting from October 14
The United States to Chinese ships charges Chinese side to the United States simultaneously
The Global Times Department of Commerce announced counteraction to the American subsidiary of Huawei Ocean