On October 19, 2025, when Trump was interviewed by Fox News, he once again made China the focus. He said that he had "no intention of destroying China", but when the conversation changed, he put on an aggressive posture and talked about the "results" of the tariff war, claiming that China had been "forced to pay hundreds of billions of dollars" and threatening to let China accept "high tariffs".

These words sound like a victory declaration by a negotiator, but in fact, it¡¯s only his consistent approach ¨C first threatening and then waiting for the other party to make concessions.

However, this statement has no effect in Ukraine, and now it is even more impossible to use it to scare China.

Fight the world with one mouth? Trump's "destruction theory" is only full of rhetoric

Trump said it quite easily in front of the camera this time. He did not want to destroy China. He also emphasized that he only wanted China to "surrender" and accept the conditions put forward by the United States, especially in trade. He specifically mentioned that the last time the tariff war was fought, it was China that "suffered a loss" and the United States that benefited.

It seems like the United States has won an economic battle by raising taxes, but if it is so simple, he can safely withdraw, rather than frequently bring the Sino-U.S. trade out after 2024.

He talked about these things, hearing as if it was to rebuild the old path of the past term - to hit China with tariffs, to exchange concessions with pressure. but the problem is that this path has long been taken, and how it works, everyone knows.

By recalling the past, he tried to create himself as the only person who could "make China bow its head". But he ignores that reality has changed, and China is not standing still.

It can be seen from the "high tariffs" he mentioned that this is more like using numbers to create panic than talking about policy seriously. The whole world knows that tariff frictions between China and the United States do exist and have indeed brought pressure to both sides, but how can there be a one-size-fits-all high tariff? This is said more to scare people, because the United States simply does not dare to let these high tariffs be actually implemented.

Trump's usual expression of this exaggeration is to say the opponent first, then raise his own negotiating position. and the negotiator if he doesn't eat this set, then he will become stronger and keep adding.

He also cited a sentence, saying that China's "expansion" is because of "we expand the army", this logic is also familiar.

China¡¯s defense development has its own rhythm and goals, not because whoever puts pressure suddenly accelerates.This statement of ¡°changing because of me¡± can only illustrate that Trump is still accustomed to simplifying complex international situations into a game of ¡°you chase me¡±, rather than chillingly analyzing the long-term and autonomy of a country¡¯s strategy.

In his words, ¡°Destroy China,¡± at first sounds like a threat, in fact more like a false voice. China is the world¡¯s second-largest economy, and the economic ties with the United States are complicated, pulling the whole body at once. It is really necessary to ¡°destroy¡±, not to say if it can be done, only the cost, I am afraid that not a word can bring through. Trump, of course, knows this, but he is more clear that crying can bring attention, and this is what he most value.

From Ukraine to China, a series of plays.

On the same day that Trump spoke about China, another White House news was exposed, a recent private conversation with Ukrainian President Zelensky. he said when he faced Zelensky that if he did not accept certain conditions, the United States "cannot save you" and Russia could "destroy Ukraine".

The phrase, along with his distinctive speech about China, first depicts the opponent very strongly and then tells you, ¡°I have a way here,¡± but on the assumption that you have to listen to me.

Zelensky didn't buy it, and Ukraine didn't give in. Instead, the war dragged on, and the situation didn't develop as Trump envisioned.

The reality of the Ukrainian battlefield has proved that Trump¡¯s judgment is not always accurate. He wanted to put pressure on the Ukrainian side by exaggerating the Russian offensive, but the result was that Ukraine was not quickly ¡°destroyed¡± and instead the battlefield fell into long-term stagnation.

The war situation was worse than expected, and Trump's script naturally failed, and he moved out of the script on the issue of China, but only replaced "Russia" with "tariffs", replaced "Ukraine" with "China".

This shows that Trump¡¯s habit of dealing with foreign affairs is still the main axis of pressure. He sets up a ¡°enemy very strong¡± scenario and uses this tension atmosphere to force the other party to make concessions. But this approach is actually very easy to fail in multilateral relations. Especially in the face of countries like China, with simple oppression strategies, it is often reversible.

More importantly, the situation in China and Ukraine is not at all on the same level. Ukraine was passive in the war, and international assistance was the key to its survival. China has a complete economic system, a strong domestic demand market, and sufficient strategic endurance. It is impossible for China to easily change its policy direction due to external pressure. Trump's confusion of these two countries is not only inaccurate, but also a misjudgment of the international pattern.

Trump¡¯s diplomatic thinking has always been transactional. He believes that better codes can be obtained as long as there is a good atmosphere and hard speech. But in reality, the chances of this approach to succeed are increasingly low. The leaders of all countries are not newcomers, they value stability, interests and long-term strategic arrangements, and will not be easily scared by a few threats.

No matter what, the strategy is hard.

The reason why Trump's remarks attracted attention is not because they are so new, but because he still seems to be stuck in the thinking that "threats can be exchanged for concessions." But today's international situation is no longer the era where the situation can be moved with just one mouth. Especially at the level of Sino-US relations, shouting alone cannot solve practical problems.

China, as a great country, has a wide range of economic networks and policy autonomy capabilities, and the tolerance for external threats is not low. Though there is competition, the basis of cooperation still exists.And Trump's unilateral threat method, not only cannot promote negotiations, but will make the other side more alert and deepen mistrust in the United States.

From the performance of the past few years, China, in the face of external pressure, has often taken a cold response, gradual counter-reaction, rather than emotional response. This long-term and strategic determination, is Trump's "fast-making" diplomacy difficult to understand. He is more accustomed to short-term effects, speaking instantaneously, but in the game of the great powers, this rhythm is often not applicable.

What is even more worrying is that Trump's capricious attitude will continue to diminish the credibility of the United States in the international arena. During his last term, he changed his position many times, withdrew from international agreements, and showed no mercy to his allies. This uncertainty has made other countries increasingly reluctant to take "Trump's promises" seriously. No matter how loudly he spoke, others would take more care of him.

Once the "wolf is coming" effect is formed, threatening words will slowly lose their effectiveness. Especially countries like China will pay more attention to independence and self-control when faced with external pressure. The tighter you are pressed, the less easily you will be able to give in. Trump's "theory of destruction", in this context, not only has no deterrent effect, but may stimulate a stronger awareness of strategic countermeasures.

The complexity of Sino-US relations goes far beyond the scope of a single event. It involves many aspects such as economy, security, science and technology, culture, etc. What it needs is long-term dialogue and mutual respect. If Trump still wants to rely on "I don't want to destroy you" in exchange for concessions from the other party, I'm afraid he can't even touch the door.

conclusion

Trump wants to shape the negotiating advantage in a threatening way, but reality tells us that this does not work on the Ukrainian issue, and it does not work in the face of China.

He thinks diplomacy too simply, thinking that as long as he has enough momentum, his opponent will give in. But the competition between major powers is about strength, determination and strategy, not who has the loudest voice. A diplomatic strategy that relies on intimidation will eventually be isolated due to loss of trust.

China-US relations are not a short deal, not a temporary contract. If Trump still wants to play an important role on the international stage in the future, I am afraid to let go of the talk and face reality. Because, the great powers will not be frightened, will only be forced to be more calm and firm.