It’s worth repeating that a trade war with China isn’t sustainable over the long run.
As American and Chinese delegations wrap up trade talks Thursday in Washington, the official word is that U. S. negotiators have articulated where they want China to make reforms. Unofficially, though, questions remain over how the White House perceives the future of U. S.-China economic relations, and how this might upset trade negotiations.
So where are the U. S. and China in this trade dispute, as the teams led by U. S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He conclude their talks?
Despite almost 18 months of efforts, the White House has yet to bring fundamental change to China‘s trade practices.
This should come as no surprise given the scale of the issues involved, including subsidies, treatment of state-owned enterprises, coerced technology transfer, and intellectual property rights.
Lighthizer simply can’t deliver a comprehensive deal that
resolves all these issues before March 2, when the additional tariffs on $200
billion worth of goods Americans buy from China increases from 10 to 25 percent.
In fact, some doubt whether the U. S. trade representative can
deliver a comprehensive and sustainable deal before 2020. China is limited in
what it can give the U. S. – constrained by both domestic and international
obligations.
It’s worth repeating, however, that a trade war with China
isn’t sustainable over the long run, either. Now is the time to make a deal
with China, even if it’s limited for the time being.
American exporters may never fully regain market share in
China. But American manufacturers would at least see less uncertainty and boost
investment in China and at home. American importers would get to stop paying
billions in taxes to the Treasury Department.
If over the next 30 days, Lighthizer can achieve a light
trade deal with China, the real winners will be those Americans who are still
being hurt by the trade war.
