By Tom Fowdy
After several days of negotiations in London, President Donald Trump has announced that the United States and China have reached a "deal" to dramatically de-escalate trade tensions. According to the man himself, China will resume its exports of strategic rare earth minerals, whereby the United States will seemingly stop visa restrictions on Chinese students, which Secretary of State Marco Rubio resumed the other week. The administration had made it clear that this arrangement has nothing to do with lowering tariffs, which will remain the same, and other trade-related talks will take place at another time, leaving the rest of the agreement, if there is anything, vague and unspecified.
The US mainstream media quickly criticised the deal, with the New York Times accusing the President of "overplaying his hand" and opening a doorway whereby China can force a compromise on "national security-related issues" in negotiations with the United States, thus concluding the administration ultimately blinked first. The absence of public substance surrounding the detail may suggest that the US has given some uncomfortable concessions on measures such as semiconductors or AI chips. We, after all, should conclude that China did not derail the entire rare earth supply chain on the process of getting student visas, as this makes little sense from a national interest perspective.
Despite this, the President ultimately spoke optimistically on the prospect of closer trade ties between the two countries, stating: "President Xi and I are going to work closely together to open up China to American Trade," Trump said, "This would be a great WIN for both countries!!!" in a statement which will certainly rattle the most ardent NeoConservatives who are not seeking deeper economic engagement with Beijing, but decoupling and geostrategic confrontation. Trump had previously also touted about visiting China, as well as Xi Jinping visiting the United States.
Thus, even if the new "deal" is thin on substance and described, as the NY Times had done, as a "handshake agreement," it seems that the President is satisfied that merits a point of de-escalation. It may be argued that despite Trump's trade war, and despite an ultra-NeoConservative in the form of Marco Rubio heading the State Department, that paradoxically, US-China ties have actually improved somewhat since the Biden era. That speaks volumes. This is because even though Trump is erratic, unpredictable, and audacious in his actions, the man personally can be negotiated with, using a very explicit carrot and stick strategy.
Biden on the other hand, adopted a process of minimal engagement towards Beijing that was coupled with a dramatic escalation of geopolitical tensions. It is precisely in recognising this pattern that I have advocated for China to be open to dialogue with Donald Trump on the calculation that if you can let him give the appearance of a "win" he subsequently acts as a marginalisation force on NeoConservative influences within Washington and makes deals they don't like, even as they attempt to constrain him.
This was the case in the previous Trump administration until things dramatically went downhill with the COVID pandemic, and hereon, the likes of Mike Pompeo gained influence and ascendancy in the attempt to escalate a new Cold War. I believe of course, realistically, the US establishment will always "push back" and try to impose limits on the President's deals, as they have in numerous instances before, yet it remains the strategically wisest choice for Beijing to seek to make economic concessions to the President and not to reject this "good will" even if it is sparse, untrustworthy and subject to arbitrary change. Even so, it remains prudent to manage the US relationship with a focus on "the person" of Trump, to adhere to his egotism, his desire for "personal friendships," recognition, and to flatter his own mythology.
Love him or hate him, Trump is a larger-than-life figure whose political will is not immune to the constraints of the US political order, yet nonetheless has a gravity of its own making. The ultra-Chinese hawks will continue to exist, and logically will continue to exist long after Trump, and thus, for this reason, we will likely see Beijing continue to engage with cautious vigilance. There will be no putting all the eggs in one basket, but if an opportunity arises, they must take it, especially if it rescues the global economic order. Washington cannot be changed by attacking it; thus I have also learnt this lesson over the past few years, but you can play them to rewire the cogs in their gritty machine.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | China is playing hardball, and it's paying off
Opinion | Lee Jae-myung will tilt South Korea's foreign policy, but change will be sparse
Opinion | Judicial resistance to Trump's tariffs weakens his hand, even as he appeals
Comment