Trump Administration
Trump Administration
Trump Administration
Advertisement
Supported by
Whether it’s Tiktok, Fentanyl or Trade, Beijing can accommodate a commitment to buy the time for techniques of its struggling economy and its position on a global scale.
By David Pierson
Hong Kong reports
As for the first savings, the risk of President Donald J. Trump of a 10% rate on Chinese goods in retaliation for the role of China in the United States Fentanyl crisis can be interpreted in Beijing as encouraging.
Not only is it lower than the 60 percent duties Mr. Trump had said he would impose on key Chinese goods during his campaign, it also reaffirmed signals that the president was in the mood to negotiate with China. In his first two days in office Mr. Trump has also floated the idea of tying tariffs to the fate of TikTok. He has said he expects to be invited to China for a visit.
Trump’s obvious willingness to conclude deals with China may give Beijing time and area to meet its most pressing needs. This includes exit from exit to topple a stagnant economy and ease tensions with trading partners on a record of non-registration in China of about $1. Beijing has also worked to arrange links with U. S. allies such as Japan to verify to weaken security alliances forged through Biden Management to restrict China.
Advancing on these fronts will help China to their position in what has been a punishing superpower rivalry with the United States. Beijing despite everything needs Trump’s management to restore relationships. He argued that the United States deserves to suppress the restrictions on Chinese imports of American technology, avoid the support of Taiwan, the autonomous island claimed through Beijing and establish China as peer power.
Beijing can calculate that he can appease Mr. Trump, with a sale of Tiktok, a repression opposite to the manufacturers of fentanyl precursors, or an update of the agreement of the industry of Mr. Trump and the first Chinese leader, Xi Jinpinggarray signed in 2020, analysts said. .
“From an economic perspective, it’d be in Washington’s and Beijing’s interests to come up with some kind of a pseudo grand bargain that met both sides’ immediate political needs without sacrificing too much,” said Scott Kennedy of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
We have recovered the content of the article.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thanks for your patience while we determine access. If you are in reading mode, leave and log in to your Times account or subscribe to all time.
Thanks for your patience while we review access.
Already signed? Connect.
Do you want all the time? Subscribe.
Advertisement