Trump seeks more confrontation with China on trade
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Former President Trump at CPAC in National Harbor, Md., on March 4. Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Former President Trump escalated his attacks on China at CPAC last night, testing his ability to move the U.S. toward a more confrontational approach on trade with the communist nation.
Why it matters: The last six years have shown that Trump’s hawkish proposals on China — initially dismissed as dangerous and impossible — have a way of becoming plausible, and even policy.
Driving the news: Last night's speech was the live version of a campaign video Trump released last week, in which he essentially called for the decoupling of the U.S. and Chinese economies.
- On Capitol Hill, his latest calls didn't spark outrage, as they did in 2016. Democrats and Republicans agree the U.S. needs to rely less on China.
- Committees for both the House and Senate have held hearings this session that focused on various threats China poses to the U.S.
- As president, Trump imposed a series of tariffs on China — and President Biden has kept them on the books.
What they're saying: “The American people have the habit of moving from indifference to outrage in very short order,” Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) told Axios. “And that's happened as it pertains to China.”
- “Trump did shift the conversation” on China policy, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) told Axios. “He will continue to shift [it]. We need to find ways to decouple when it comes to anything regarding national security.”
- Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, agreed that the U.S. approach to China has changed significantly in recent years.
- “I think the movement is relatively nascent,” he told Axios.
- “There's a lot more to be done on the China list," he said, citing everything from China's "digital authoritarianism" to "concentration camps" in Xinjiang as areas that need urgent attention.
Flashback: In 2016, Trump’s pledge to impose 45% tariffs on most exports from China was decried by economists as a recipe for a recession, and pilloried by his political opponents.
- Ultimately, Trump settled on a 25% rate, and China responded by hitting America's agricultural exports.
- A study from the pro-trade US-China Business Council estimated that as many as 245,000 U.S. jobs were lost as a result of Trump's tariffs.
- While president in 2019, Trump announced a "phase 1" trade deal with China, which required Beijing to buy some $200 billion in U.S. goods — but Beijing didn't completely follow through.
The big picture: Trump seeks to return to the White House by running against two adversaries: Biden and China.
- With Biden having accepted Trump’s tariffs, the former president is trying to differentiate himself — and ride the current wave of concern about the threats China poses to the U.S.
- Trump's latest anti-China proposals — promising universal baseline tariffs, phasing out all Chinese imports of essential goods in four years and stripping China of its most favored nations status — are an escalation from his 2016 positions.
The other side: Biden also has read the country’s anti-China mood and has adopted a more confrontational approach.
Last October, he imposed export restrictions on semiconductor technology and is considering new rules on outbound investment to China.
What we’re watching: Trump stopped short of calling for a total decoupling of the two economies.
- His proposal sounds more like the “strategic decoupling” that his former trade ambassador, Robert Lighthizer, outlined in a December New York Times op-ed.
Between the lines: Some Republicans from farm states have tempered their enthusiasm for aggressively confronting China with concerns that any retaliation could devastate their home-state agricultural industries.
- To help farmers survive during the first phase of his trade war, Trump gave them an extra $28 billion, a hint of the kind of losses they could suffer if Trump — or Biden — were to pile on more tariffs.
- “In Iowa, farmers rely on exports, and we want to continue to see those exports,” Ernst said. “So there's a balance to be had there.”
The bottom line: Positions that once were unthinkable — such as imposing 25% tariffs on America’s third biggest trading partner — are now consensus views.
- The question now is how much more change the alarm over China will inspire.
- “President Trump is solely responsible for reorienting the Republican Party to understand and address the China threat,” Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) told Axios. “Now the Republican Party is still there, with him out of power.”
