Responses of Australian Importers to the 2018‐2019 US‐China Trade War: Decoupling From China?

The US–China Trade War: Deal or No Deal?

Noor Aini Khalifah, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia: With the backdrop of the decreasing hegemony of the United States and the emerging of two Asian giants, China and India, the article “Trump's Trade War: An Indian Perspective” succinctly captures the current scenario with references to history and the possibilities that the future may hold. From the perspective of leaders and domestic politics, it is always “better” to blame foreigners (“others”) for one's lack of competitiveness.The article highlights Trump's trade war and India's protectionist sentiment via the “Make in India” strategy, which does not bode well for either a liberalized world trading system or a liberalized FDI environment. The asymmetry of capital flows and labor flows between developed and developing countries is another source of contention in Trump's trade war. Both India and China's trade surplus with the United States led Trump to think that there exists “unfair trade practices” in these relationships. The U.S. trade deficit with China is about 20 times that of India in 2018.This article also addresses concern about China's growing geopolitical ambitions whereby both the United States and India aligned their interests in combatting the rise of China. Prior to Trump's tariffs, the strategic partnership between the United States and India was in tandem with Trump's vision of a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” region. India's prior concern of “cheap” Chinese imports has gained momentum following Trump's trade war against China. India's allegation of “unfair competition” from “cheap” Chinese imports led India to resort to antidumping provisions under the auspices of WTO with the recent imposition of antidumping duties on imports of Chinese steel products. China in turn was the sole or one of the complainants of over two-thirds of the Indian antidumping cases (839 cases) brought to the WTO during 1995–2016, out of a total of 5,286 cases reported to the WTO.The United States is an important export destination for India with about double the amount of exports (US$ 42.2 billion) compared to source of imports (US$ 22.3). On the other hand, India's imports from China were US$ 62.3 billion and exports were US$ 10.2 billion, making India's trading relation with China more significant than that with the United States. It is difficult, however, to estimate the amount of China's trade with India that is conducted by U.S. affiliates domiciled in China.The chronology of events relating to U.S.–India trade by Prema-chandra Athukorala was quoted from many sources including Prime Minister Modi's article in the Wall Street Journal (2017), U.S. Department of State, U.S. Trade Representative (2018; 2019) as well as WTO reports. Data exhibited in the tables were mainly from USITC databases. The commodity composition of U.S. imports from India include semiprecious stones and jewellery (20.5 percent), chemical products (18.28 percent), cut and polished diamonds (16.48 percent), textiles and textile products (15.05 percent), machinery and mechanical appliances (9.31 percent), and mineral products (6.04 percent) amounting to 86 percent of imports in 2018. Overall, U.S. imports from India are based on India's comparative advantage in the production of final goods portraying minimal involvement in production networks. However, Foxconn Technologies’ and Wistron's plans of opening plants in Chennai amid Trump's trade war with China could help India regain missed opportunities from global production sharing. Hence, Trump's trade war with one Asian giant has a spillover effect on another Asian giant.

After trying to nurture positive diplomatic relationships among two major economies in the world, a cold war has been converted into a trade war between China and the United States of America. Massive tariffs have been imposed on Chinese imports by Trump administration due to which china stroked back with its tariff policy for American products. Different Chinese companies like Huawei and Haier must face unforeseen circumstances due to trade war. The market for Chinese products seems to shrank post trump policy; on one side, it is a major setback for the Chinese market as an emerging market. On the other hand, it is a golden opportunity for other emerging markets like India, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, and the Philippines. US-market is a vast market for Chinese electronics, technology, agriculture, leather, furniture, and many more household products since china entered in the race of globalization. A rise in tariff triggered a trade war, resulting in a decrease in Chinese share in US-market. This trade war has offered a golden opportunity for emerging markets to take over Huawei and Haier's market due to trade barriers and bans on them from the US. This paper will study deep-rooted causes of the US-Sino trade war by examining the impact of a trade war on Huawei technologies and Haier; big Chinese firms dealing worldwide and have a large share in the US-market. The research type will be exploratory, and most of the data is based on secondary data sources. It has been found in this article that the US-Sino trade war is causing losses to both economies on international trade forum. The products from other Asian countries are replacing the Chinese products in the USA. On the other hand, the emerging markets like India, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Taiwan benefit from the absence of Chinese products from the international market. Hence, the winner of the US-Sino trade wars is emerging economies.

Trade wars and Tariff policies have become serious concerns defining and affecting global trade and economic relations in the 21st century. These policies characterized by the use of tariffs and other trade barriers have impacted the world beyond just the economic or financial effect between countries involved. The paper focuses on the long-term effect of trade wars and tariff policies on global trade and economic relationship between countries. Using historical and modern trade war scenarios such as USA-China trade war, the study indicates that disruption of global supply chain, volatility of financial market, and impact on specific sectors of the country economy such as agriculture are some of the long-term impacts of these policies on global trade. In terms of the impact on economic relationship between countries, the study highlights creation of new trade agreements and diversification of trade partnership as possible effects on economic relationship between countries. It is therefore imperative for countries to diversify their trade relationship by adopting initiatives against the effects of trade war. The study concludes that while national measures could bring some political and economic results in the short term, it is important to note that global prosperity cannot be long-lasting without cooperative and stable international trade policies.

Issues in Australian Foreign Policy

A Global Perspective on the US-China Trade War: Causes, Consequences, and Implications. The US-China trade war, ignited by the protectionist rhetoric of former President Donald Trump, has had profound implications for global economic relations. This paper seeks to examine the chronological development of the trade war, its underlying causes, and the far-reaching consequences it has had on the relationship between the two superpowers. Additionally, it explores the potential ramifications for the Indo-Pacific region and the dynamics of the US-Russia relationship.The trade war has emerged as a complex issue, with both the US and China resorting to retaliatory measures, resulting in a vicious cycle of tariffs and sanctions. Through a thorough investigation, this paper aims to shed light on the impact of these measures on the competitive advantage of American companies compared to their Chinese counterparts. Furthermore, it delves into China's countermeasures and their effects on the country's economy and industrial development.To ensure a comprehensive analysis, the paper draws on a thorough literature review, referencing various studies that explore the root causes and economic impact of the trade war. It places the trade war within its historical context, drawing parallels with past conflicts such as the US-Japan trade war, and examines the political motivations behind the current tension between the US and China.The analysis incorporates relevant statistical data, including trade deficit figures and the composition of imports and exports between the two nations. By doing so, it aims to paint a clear picture of the economic ramifications of the trade war on both countries and the global economy.In conclusion, the paper underscores the necessity of adopting a pragmatic and rational approach to address the US-China trade war. It advocates for both nations to seek common ground while setting aside their differences to achieve mutually beneficial cooperation. Moreover, it emphasizes the significance of innovation, industrial upgrading, and international collaborations for China's economic development amid the ongoing trade war.By presenting a comprehensive examination of the US-China trade war and its implications, this paper contributes to a deeper understanding of the global economic landscape and the critical need for constructive engagement between major economies.

The modern comparative paradigm includes a multidimensional and comprehensive study of significant phenomena of structural, functional and linguo-pragmatic order of the world's languages. The phenomenon of military-political discourse and US-China trade wars in two languages is being analyzed in the article. The research subject is language expressive means in media texts on the issues of Donald Trump's US-China trade war in 2025 with a functional approach (in media and military-political discourse). The US-China trade war continues to be the focus of global news, with Chinese and American media scrutinizing its implications for the global economy. With the recent increase in tariffs from the US to the rest of the world, the situation is becoming increasingly tense. Donald Trump, the leader of the American nation, as a publicly speaking politician in the current geopolitical environment, must endeavor to effectively use the expressive possibilities of language in order to convince the audience of the correctness of his course, ideas and create a positive image of his personality. The study of Donald Trump's language functioning and discursive practices in political rhetoric is the most urgent direction of modern fundamental and applied linguistics. The aim of the article is to study the linguistic means of expression in Donald Trump's speeches during the US-China trade war of 2025, as well as the phenomenology of linguo-axiology of US-China political-military discourse. The main content is concentrated around analyzing the concepts of ‘linguistic means of expression’, ‘linguo-axiology’, ‘Donald Trump's political rhetoric’, and ‘trade wars’ precisely from a linguistic point of view. The digital media text acts as a unit of analysis in the study of contemporary Chinese-language and English-language (digital) media. This study examines such authoritative sources as 《环球网》,《搜狐》,The South China Morning Post, The New York Times, Fox News, The Washington Post, CNN, USA Today, The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal Guardian, and others. The choice of these digital media resources is conditioned by the fact that they cover a wide range of news agenda of international and domestic political character, which affect both geopolitical and social and economic agendas. It seems that such thematic diversity of material will allow us to comprehensively study the issues of China-US trade wars and linguistic means of expression in Donald Trump's political rhetoric.

This article employs Jonathan Holslag’s concept of offensive mercantilism as a framework to reinterpret the recent shifts in the U.S.-China economic relations, specifically the Trade War initiated in 2018 by Donald Trump Administration’s decision to increase tariffs against imports from China, as a cataclysmic step for the trajectory of the Liberal International Order (LIO). The article asserts that trade war should be considered not as a mere departure from liberal norms, but as a strategic policy aimed at power projection through coercive economic diplomacy, given the broader structural erosion of U.S. hegemonic capabilities and the rise of alternative economic powers, albeit China. As such, in which ways the resurgence of protectionism and economic nationalism implicates on the U.S.-China economic relations, as well as the international order, guides the research. The findings of the paper suggest that trade protectionism, far from being an anomaly, is increasingly becoming a normalized strategy of economic competition within the multipolar international order. Accordingly, waging trade war as an offensive mercantilist option to contain China’s expanding economic, as well as military, clout, can be identified as a long-term strategy, rather than a short-term tactic, which would likely to be carried on, regardless of the ideological background of the U.S. governments, against perceived threats to the LIO and the U.S. hegemony within it.

The biggest problem facing the world economy today is the intensification of neomercantilist policies reinforced by aggressive industrial policies. The USA has declared a trade war on the whole world, and most aggressively on China. The main objective of this article is therefore to find out what the consequences of this trade war for the countries attacked and the US economy are in view of the theory of tariff protection, claiming that in trade wars there are no winners, that all states lose, including the economy of the country that began the war. Among the countries attacked, we are particularly concerned with China and the EU and which policy options they may have available to react to, this trade war. Since this is not the first trade war in history, given that we already had one during the Great Depression in the 1930s, it is necessary to determine whether we have learned from these wars or are merely repeating the mistakes made at that time. It is clear that history has not taught us much. Although this trade war heralds tectonic shifts in the world economy, we conclude that better than reacting in panic is to design a wise, long-term reaction strategy. This is supported by an evaluation of the negotiation profile of the trade war’s initiator, President Trump, characterised by initial dramatizing and blackmailing. The analysis provides arguments concerning why the trade war is not expected to be carried out in such a dramatic way as it was started. All the negative consequences and unrealised objectives for the initiator’s economy will eventually become the basis for the gradual watering down of the most aggressive policy elements. Keywords: Trump, tariffs, trade war, effects, retaliation, Great Depression, negotiations, European Union, China, USA.

Comment on “Evaluating the Impact of the US–China Trade War”

The trade war between the US and China in the Trump era has become a momentous event in the world economy. It is necessary to see how trade relations between them have played out within the WTO from a historical perspective. Since the Opium Wars, both economic and political concerns have changed the relationship between these two countries. The escalation from a trade conflict to trade war shows the rivalry between the US and China for hegemony in the twenty-first century's regional and world politics. The economic, technological, and manufacturing competition that is a part of hegemonic rivalry is not totally new; this is borne out by the history of the US-China economic relations. The escalation of this 'trade war' now has spill-over effects on other countries, being beyond the normative framework of the WTO. There is an impasse in this ongoing saga, but the silver lining is that there will be a re-construction of the multilateral trading system.

This essay examines the international trade policies of Joseph Biden and Donald Trump, the two presumed candidates for President of the United States in 2024. I first analyse the trade law revolution effected by the Trump presidency, 2017–2021. During these years the Trump administration adopted a protectionist policy rooted in nationalism and populism. As a direct result of Trump administration trade policy there occurred: (1) a significant retreat from globalization; (2) paralysis of the World Trade Organization (WTO); (3) a revival of US unilateralism in trade policy; and (4) the US-China trade war. When Joseph Biden became president in 2021, he did not reverse the Trump trade policies. Declaring his favour of a ‘worker-oriented’ trade policy, the Biden administration defended Trump’s tariff policies while continuing his hostility to both new free trade agreements and the multilateral trading system. Biden’s distinctive addition to Trump’s trade policy is a protectionist industrial policy featuring subsidies and a ‘buy American’ mandate. Despite these similarities, Trump and Biden propose very different international trade policies for 2025 and beyond. Trump intends to adopt across the board protectionist tariffs of at least 10% on all imports and tariffs of at least 60% on all Chinese imports. The former tariffs will provoke numerous tit-for-tat trade wars; the latter tariffs will economically ‘decouple’ China and the United States. Both policies will raise prices and slow global economic growth. On the other hand, Biden eschews new tariffs. American policy will be rooted in industrial subsidies and ‘buy American’ protectionism. Critics of both Trump and Biden propose a ‘third way’ set of international trade policies that avoid protectionism. This ‘third way’ would feature new free trade agreements with Asian- Pacific, European, and Western Hemisphere nations, a revival of multilateralism and the WTO, and a more constructive trade relationship with China.

This is the first comprehensive study by the world’s leading scholars about the political logic of the U.S.-China trade war that started during the Trump administration. The book is divided into three parts. The first part looks at changed leadership styles of the two countries in the last few years. It also examines the liberal international order since World War II in which the trade war emerged. It then explores the theoretical perspectives from both the United States and China that are related to the trade war. The second part is about the domestic factors that impacted on the trade war from China’s perspective. These factors include China’s institutional adaptation of the new international environment, the radicalization of the Chinese political discourse, and Big Power Diplomacy. The third part explores the U.S. domestic factors that impacted the trade war, such as the Trump administration’s different China policy in general, the role played by the U.S. Congress, business lobby, and the transition of foreign policy from a Wilsonian World Order to Jacksonian Nationalism.

This is the first comprehensive study by the world’s leading scholars about the political logic of the U.S.-China trade war that started during the Trump administration. The book is divided into three parts. The first part looks at changed leadership styles of the two countries in the last few years. It also examines the liberal international order since World War II in which the trade war emerged. It then explores the theoretical perspectives from both the United States and China that are related to the trade war. The second part is about the domestic factors that impacted on the trade war from China’s perspective. These factors include China’s institutional adaptation of the new international environment, the radicalization of the Chinese political discourse, and Big Power Diplomacy. The third part explores the U.S. domestic factors that impacted the trade war, such as the Trump administration’s different China policy in general, the role played by the U.S. Congress, business lobby, and the transition of foreign policy from a Wilsonian World Order to Jacksonian Nationalism.

Presidential candidate Joe Biden's team declared President Trump's trade war with China a failure when Democratic nominee Senator Kamala Harris told Vice President Mike Pence at the U.S. vice presidential debate that “You lost that trade war.” Half a year has passed since Biden took over the White House, the U.S.-China trade war is still going on, though in a much less pompous manner than what President Donald Trump once liked it to be. President Biden refused to make significant change to Trump's tough stance on U.S.-China trade relations on the ground of the accusations of China's “stealing” intellectual property (IP), state subsidies to enterprises, forced technology transfer from foreign companies, among others. On the other hand, China has not backed off from the trade war, though it arguably made many concessions in the so-called “Phase 1 trade deal” signed by the United States and China on January 15, 2020, in which China pledged to buy US$ 200 billion more of American goods and services in 2020 and 2021, in addition to the commitments to strengthen protection and remove forced technology transfer. Evidence suggested that China was still far behind prorated targets of a full year when Biden assumed presidency in January 2021. More significantly, Chinese President Xi Jinping has been taking the opportunities offered by the trade war to remake the Chinese economy toward state capitalism. Additionally, as the trade war was happening, the Trump administration intensified its assault on the multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization (WTO) and effectively paralyzed the Appellate Body, a crucial part of the WTO's Dispute Settlement System.