|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Apr25/09) Geneva, 11 Apr (D. Ravi Kanth) — The White House on 10 April stated that the composite tariff to be imposed on Chinese exporters would be 145%, and not 125% as originally announced, in a dramatic escalation of the trade war targeted primarily against China more than any other country in the global trading system, according to analysts and media reports. China, however, reiterated that its position is “clear and consistent. If the US wants to talk, our door remains open, but dialogue must be conducted on the basis of mutual respect and equality.” “If the US wants to fight, our response will continue to the end,” said China’s commerce ministry spokesperson He Yongqian on 10 April, adding that: “Pressure, threats, and coercion are not the right way to deal with China.” Amidst the turmoil in stock and currency markets on 10 April, when stocks fell by a huge margin coupled with a steep drop in the US dollar’s value, a White House official told media outlets that “the 125% tariff that President Trump announced on Wednesday afternoon referred only to reciprocal tariff levels,” adding that it did not take into account the 20% tariffs that he had previously levied on China over the alleged illegal supplies of the drug fentanyl, according to media reports. Once the so-called fentanyl-related tariffs of 20% are included, then the composite tariff comes to around 145%. Besides, the Trump administration has also imposed a 25% tariff on steel and aluminium, and a 25% tariff on cars and auto parts. Apparently, the White House has still not published its executive order on the tariff shift announced on 9 April, which ostensibly would include the official tariff rates, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal on 10 April. CHINA HITS BACK As regards China making any overtures to the Trump administration for resolving their differences, the Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian stated on 10 April that the US is still imposing tariffs wantonly against China. He emphasized that China firmly opposes and will never accept such overbearing and bullying behaviour, according to a report in the Global Times. Pressure, threats, and blackmail are not the right way to deal with China, the spokesperson suggested, pointing out that “If the US truly wants to engage in dialogue, it should demonstrate an attitude of equality, respect, and reciprocity.” “But if the US ignores the interests of both countries and the international community and insists on provoking a tariff and trade war, China’s response will continue to the end,” the spokesperson stated. Meanwhile, several reports by analysts suggest that the tariff and trade war launched by the Trump administration is primarily targeted against China. In a report in the Wall Street Journal on 9 April, titled, “Trump Transforms Tariff War Into High-Stakes Showdown With China,” it is suggested that “by pausing global tariffs against dozens of countries and raising them on China, President Trump has set up a high-stakes showdown in hopes he can pressure Beijing into a face-saving deal after weeks of global turmoil.” However, “there is little sign so far, though, that Chinese leader Xi Jinping is ready to buckle,” the report suggested. In an authoritative analysis over the US punitive tariffs on China, the economic historian Adam Tooze wrote on Chartbook on 10 April that “in the fevered atmosphere of the West Wing [of the White House], trade policy and anti-China policy have converged.” He said, “The extraordinary denouement of Wednesday was no doubt driven in its timing by market reactions and what Trump referred to as “people getting yippy”.” According to Tooze, the statement by Trump contains “a certain logic: shake the world, flush out and isolate China.” More ominously, he said that “at the next stage, in the negotiations with those who are willing, there is nothing to prevent the White House from demanding conditionality on trade with America’s other partners, to further target China. Remember the Penguins and closing the door to indirect imports from China.” +
|
||
