Trade negotiations between the US and China in London mean a cautious step to release tension, but not a new beginning. It is a short-term strategy to avoid further deterioration-shirt ceasefire that can be reversed at any time.
The core is a deeper problem: national security. Both sides are now looking at the store through this lens and Handshakes will not fix it. Washington must acknowledge that Beijing is looking for respect and does not accept a one -sided long -term trade. China must understand that this will not be a business as usual-that the US will expect more concessions and access to the market to the second largest economy in the world. An alternative is continuing hostility, causing more chaotic global trade and a more dangerous world.
The London climb is positive but uncertain. Routence has previously changed into recrimination. After the initial euphoria of a trade war agreed in Geneva in May, both parties accused the second of the surrender to the agreement to temporarily reduce tariffs that climbed above 100%.
The negotiators now claim that they have basically achieved an agreement on the deescalate tension of trade on the basis of a consensus created in Geneva. The delegation from both sides shall return the proposal to its relevant leaders after almost 20 hours of interviews for two days. “As soon as the presidents approve it, then we will seek to do it,” said US trade Minister Howard Lutnick. All details of the agreement were not immediately available, but American officials said that they “absolutely expected” that problems concerning consignments of minerals and rare soils will be resolved.
There are no winners or losers of this, remarks Steve Okun, founder and CEO of AC Advisors. Basic questions are much greater than any round of conversations. “Trump’s administration must decide whether to perceive Beijing as a strategic competitor or an existential threat,” he told me. “Washington can do an economic intervention from a trade war, but Xi JinPing can suffer a hit longer than Trump can. One party has an economic leverage and another political lever effect – that is stopping.”
Despite the slow economy, the Chinese president denies his time. In the last sign of how the trade war hurts, exports grew less last month than expected. The worst decline in shipments from the US since February 2020-Pandemie-fleeing has caused a strong demand from elsewhere. Nevertheless, sales on other markets provide much needed support for the economy stuck in deflation and fights with weak domestic demand.
Beijing adheres to its narrative that this trade war is Washington’s problem and that China is unfairly focused. A recent commentary Xinhua warned that an American view of security on economic problems risks to undermine global cooperation.
There is a way to peaceful coexistence, but compromises are required, remarks Ryan Hass of the Brookings Institution. To break Trump with XI, he will have to admit that both countries are the main powers. Nor can it be dictated to another. Both would be injured by high tariffs for each other – but they are not enough to force surrender.
The American public does not want a wider conflict with Beijing. Disagreement with Chinese behavior may be high, but the highest priority is still to avoid war. The Americans are clear in their desire to manage competition without escalating the open conflict.
To do this, Washington must acknowledge that Beijing longs for respect. The US would be wise to pay attention to the Chinese concept of Mianzi or “Face” -xi will only agree with the long-term agreement that he can build as a victory at home and abroad. Beijing took over the lessons from Trump’s first trade war and assessed that the agreement was unilateral in favor of Washington. It won’t do this error anymore.
China does not always like face reciproce, but officials would be wise if he also gave Trump. His tariffs were eccentric, but his supporters also demand to show strength, not a concession. Beijing should be able to understand what happens if politicians have to take care of public pressure.
No side has the upper hand for the other to force the obvious loser. London’s interviews could at the most can achieve enough to help shape the future on a less certain basis. This in itself is progress – but it would be a mistake to call this moment a reset.
More of Bloomberg’s opinion:
This column reflects the author’s personal views and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Karishma Vaswani is a publicist Bloomberg, who deals with Asian policy with a special focus on China. Previously, the BBC Asia was a lecturer and worked for BBC through Asia and South Asia for two decades.
This article was generated from an automated news agency without text modifications.
(Tagstotranslate) trade negotiations between US and China
