Xinhua News Agency released a message on the 26th: Li Chenggang, international trade negotiator and vice minister of China's Ministry of Commerce, said that the discussions between the two sides included many topics, such as export control issues that both sides are concerned about, further extension of the suspension period of reciprocal tariffs, cooperation between fentanyl tariffs and fentanyl drug control, further expansion of trade, and measures related to US 301 ship charges. China and the United States had constructive discussions on this.After more than a day of very intense discussions, China and the United States constructively discussed some plans to properly handle mutual concerns on these issues, and reached a preliminary consensus. In the next step, each of them will perform internal approval procedures.
As soon as the news came out, the circle of friends instantly flashed on the screen: China and the United States have been talking all day, but it is still "constructive"! It's still a "preliminary consensus"! It's still "internal approval"! Familiar taste, familiar formula, and familiar "three companies of diplomatic rhetoric".
But by the way, some read the excitement, as if the tariffs would be zero tomorrow; some read the headache, thinking that we need "strategic patience."
They say, “You are too young.
Today's article will take everyone to break the sentence "We have had a constructive discussion, the United States expresses its stance firmly, and China is firm in safeguarding its interests" into eight paragraphs, sprinkle some cumin, roast it, and see how many kilograms of real beef are in it, and how much is filled with water.
First, give the “constructive” name.
A layman watches the excitement, but an expert watches the doorway. The word "constructive" can be called the "fire extinguisher" in diplomatic occasions.
It is neither “victory,” nor “failure,” nor even “compromising,” but it tells us only one thing: you can’t go to the table today, you can keep chatting tomorrow.
Like two quarrels, after dropping a cup, the husband said a phrase "Let's still sit down and talk about it", the wife replied a phrase "go, talk about it."
Therefore, those who see "constructive" and shout "accomplished" can basically be concluded that they are the batch of leeks in the stock market who "listen to the wind and rain"; those who see "constructive" and ridicule "and give in again" are mostly members of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the keyboard.
The real old artillery will look at the following sentence – “the individual performs the internal approval procedures.”
We just painted a cake orally, can we cook home, and we have to watch the grandmothers in the two kitchens not knock their heads.
Paragraph 2: “The US position is tough”
The Americans negotiate and bring their own BGM-the theme song of Star Wars. They used to pull you to the edge of the cliff first, and then ask you "do you want to go back?"
Export control, 301 ship charges, and fentanyl tariffs, three big knives are hanging brightly above your head: chips will stick to your neck, ships will charge you tolls, and even painkillers will impose tariffs on you.
Is it hard? hard of course.
But the elderly reminded: Washington's "hard" has always been open-price hard, not late-day hard.
To do this, they have to count their own inflation index, Dow Jones, Boeing orders, and agricultural votes.
Therefore, the U.S. side shouted "tough" loudly, which was more like posting "Massive bleeding sale, if you don't buy it, it will go up" at the door of the store. If you really go in, you can still cut it twice.
The most frightening is that someone is scared by the sign on the door, enters the door directly and brushes the card, which is called blood loss.
Paragraph 3: “China firmly upholds its interests”
This sentence sounds like a cliche, but it can be put in the present, and its weight is comparable to the "last high temperature" in striking the iron.
Why? because the opposite side has written "disconnect" and "risk" into the bill, drawing more than a hundred Chinese companies into the blacklist, defining "competition" as "let me win and let you lose."
To talk about "firmness" at this time is not a simple statement, but to weld the bottom line: there is no way for me to abandon high-end manufacturing, cut off new energy, and abandon the digital economy.
There are always people on the Internet shouting "Why don't you fight back?" And "Why don't you negotiate again?" Lao Gao just wants to reply: the real counterattack is not to slap the table every day, but to move the table to his own courtyard, so that the opponent has to sit over.
Today we can force the American side to sit on the “constructive” table, which is itself the gold amount of the word “solid”.
The fourth paragraph, the chain of "export control" and "301 ships"
Many people did not pay attention to the fact that the US side reversed the "301 ship charges" as a "return gun".
The first wave of 301 in 2018 was called "Made in China 2025"; The second wave in 2021 will focus on "Xinjiang Photovoltaics"; The third wave this year focuses on "Chinese ships".
The logical chain is clear: if you ship globally, I charge the port fee; if you make money in the port, I block your engine; if you nationalize the engine, I limit the lubrication oil.
China can only use "export control" in turn as a code: if you want me rare earth, I permanent magnetic, I power battery-grade chemicals, then the ship charges talk together.
Therefore, each side held a knife and pressed it at each other's throats, which made it "constructive"-no one dared to stab it first.
The fifth paragraph, the absurd drama of "fentanyl tariff"
Americans themselves overdosed on drugs, but blame China's chemical factories; their own doctors prescribe overdosed, but they have to make China pay the bill.
The miracle of logic is the equivalent of fat people who can't keep their mouth and run to the cook to raise taxes.
More absurdly, congressional gentlemen viewed the Fentanyl as a “all-powered amendment”, and any bill related to China could eventually be attached to a “add Fentanyl tariff.”
As a result, a painkiller became the "political monosodium glutamate" in Washington, and every dish had to be sprinkled with a little.
The Chinese side put the "anti-drug cooperation" on the table, in fact, is the true source: you want to really fight against drugs, I will share intelligence with you, joint investigation; you want to borrow anti-drug tariffs, then I will tighten the synthetic precursor export license, and you will not even find the material of "accusation".
This trick, called "play my play with your script," occupies the moral heights first, and then looks at how you sing.
Paragraph 6: Extension of Mutual Tariff Suspension
Although the title is boring, it is a "shock absorber" for Sino-US trade.
Since Trump took office this year, if the tariffs imposed by the two countries are actually implemented, it will mean the cut-off of trade between the two countries. But now the enterprises of the two countries are still doing business, relying on the "suspension order".Once every six months, it’s like giving a strong pin to a seriously ill patient.
If the Trump administration wants to stabilize the ticket warehouse of agricultural products and the price of consumer goods, it cannot let the tariffs turn over again.
China also needs a window period - exports decline, domestic demand to vibrate, can pay a little less tax, enterprises can breathe more.
Therefore, the two sides tacitly agreed: first, continue the "pause", delay the thunder explosion time as much as possible, and leave enough time for possible demolition.
So we see “constructive” again—no one wants to light up now.
Paragraph 7, the reality and reality of "expanding trade"
The official draft has only six words: "Further expand trade".
Translation: The United States said,"You buy more soybeans, natural gas, Boeing"; the Chinese side said,"You buy more new energy, electromechanical, and small commodities."
But the reality is that the United States does not sell the high technology that China wants to buy; China does not want the arms and chips that the United States wants to sell.
Finally, it can only be expanded by "agricultural products + energy" as old.
So, behind these words, in fact, is the "quantity game": next year I buy you more than $ 20 billion in soybeans, you less than receiving me $ 10 billion in shipping fees, the account looks good, each has a relationship with the domestic.
As for structural imbalances? Leave it to future generations to be wise. The so-called "preliminary consensus" is generally the case.
Paragraph 8 – Internal Approval
The diplomatic stage was lit up and the curtain call ended, and the real Shura field had just begun.
U.S. to pass the mountain of Congress, a group of anti-Chinese lawmakers are waiting for a "shattered agreement"; China must pass the ministerial committee, industrial association, safety review, environmental protection list, not one.
Historically, in 2009, during the Sino-US tire special protection program, Obama promised Hu Jintao to "handle it with caution" and imposed a 35% tariff less than a week after returning to China.
In 2015, the bilateral investment agreement between China and the United States was negotiated for a decade, replacing the government directly with zero.
You can see the "preliminary consensus" to the "final landing" between hundreds of thousands of A4 papers and countless night trials.
As long as you don't see the official revision of the customs code, take "constructive" as the weather forecast-for reference only, just remember to bring an umbrella when you go out.
****
The negotiations between China and the United States, without smoke, but gradually astonished; without a declaration, but the dark flow.
One sentence "constructive" is a sedative to the global market; the other sentence "tough + firm" is a reassurance to each country.
We don't have to revel because of the "preliminary consensus", nor do we need to be pessimistic because of the "separate approval".
The game between great powers is originally a spiral of long-term pulling, phased easing, and re-pulling.
What really needs to be done is to realise the improvement of our own industry, science and technology, and the domestic demand market.
As long as there is meat in the pot, the opposite side is harder, you also have to sit down and hang a chopsticks first.
Otherwise, even talking about a hundred “consensus” is just a layer of towel paper.
“Constructive” is not the end, not even the starting point, it is just an emergency light in a long tunnel.
"Hard" and "solid" are not the slogans, but the deep breath before the next round of confrontation.