Tariffs Archives - Friends of Socialist China

War of position vs. war of manoeuvre: China’s Gramscian trade strategy

The article below, written by CJ Atkins for People’s World, analyses the recent Trump–Xi summit in Busan, South Korea, noting that while both leaders announced modest compromises – with the US easing tariffs and approving limited chip exports, and China resuming agricultural purchases and delaying rare earth export regulations – the meeting “represents a truce, not a treaty”.

The ambitions of the U.S. corporate oligarchy to derail China’s growth and hobble their competition have not been set aside. Nor have China’s desires to continue developing its economy and raising living standards for its 1.4 billion people… There is still a contest underway between the world’s biggest capitalist power and the world’s biggest socialist country, and the leaders of the two nations are following very different strategies as they seek to bring the rest of the globe onside.

To interpret this ongoing struggle, the article draws on Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci’s distinction between a “war of manoeuvre” and a “war of position.” A war of manoeuvre is a rapid, frontal assault to disrupt the status quo; a war of position is slower, focused on building long-term consensus and influence within institutions and public opinion. “Neither strategy was inherently right or wrong, Gramsci said; it was a matter of surveying the battlefield, so to speak, and determining which was appropriate given the political situation at the time.”

Trump’s trade war embodies the war of manoeuvre: abrupt tariffs, bans on technology exports, and pressure on allies to cut trade with China. His aim is to force quick concessions and signal dominance to domestic political supporters and corporate interests.

China by contrast is engaged in a war of position. The Chinese leadership emphasises cooperation, multilateralism, and shared prosperity. Rather than retaliating aggressively against the US’s unilateral measures, China strengthens regional institutions and trade networks – upgrading the China–ASEAN free-trade agreement, deepening APEC cooperation and upgrading trade partnerships. As a result, China is seen as a predictable and responsible global partner.

The article argues that Trump’s aggressive tactics have largely failed: US tariffs raised domestic inflation, damaged the agricultural sector, and highlighted China’s success over the course of recent years diversifying suppliers and trade partners. “By trying to enforce subservience to his demands, Trump’s strategy has actually generated further legitimacy for China’s model of multilateral cooperation in the eyes of much of the world.” CJ concludes:

Trump’s war of manoeuvre has depended on flashy claims and regular assurances of victories that are yet to materialise. But as China is showing in practice, and as Gramsci concluded in his Prison Notebooks, “In politics, the ‘war of position,’ once won, is decisive definitively.”

Fresh off his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, President Donald Trump hailed the summit as “amazing,” a “12” on a scale of 1 to 10. Xi’s assessment was also positive but more measured in tone. “In the face of winds, waves, and challenges,” he said, “we should stay the right course, navigate through the complex landscape, and ensure the steady sailing forward of the giant ship of China-U.S. relations.”

Headlines in the media, meanwhile, rattled off details of the agreements reached in Busan: A delay of Chinese rare earth export controls, the lowering of the U.S.’ supposedly fentanyl-linked tariff rates, the resumption of Chinese purchases of American soybeans, U.S. approval for the sale of some advanced microchips to Chinese firms, the mutual lowering of port fees, further talks about the future of TikTok, and more.

BRICS countries seek common stand on ‘tariff wars’

On the evening of September 8, 2025, (Beijing Time) Chinese President Xi Jinping attended a Virtual Summit of the ten full members of the BRICS cooperation mechanism and delivered a speech entitled “Forging Ahead in Solidarity and Cooperation.”

The summit was convened and chaired by Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, whose country holds the current rotating Chair of BRICS. Lula’s initiative was largely triggered by the economic, political and psychological warfare currently being waged by the US Trump administration against many BRICS members, including Brazil, South Africa, India, Russia and China. Besides Presidents Xi and Lula, it was also attended by Russian President Vladimir Putin, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi Khaled bin Mohamed representing the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the representatives of India and Ethiopia. India was represented by Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, with the absence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi being widely interpreted as indicating his continued vacillation between the interests of the Global South and those of the imperialist camp headed by the United States.

In his speech, President Xi noted that transformation unseen in a century is accelerating across the world. Hegemonism, unilateralism, and protectionism are getting more and more rampant. BRICS countries, standing at the forefront of the Global South, should act on the BRICS Spirit of openness, inclusiveness and win-win cooperation, jointly defend multilateralism and the multilateral trading system, advance greater BRICS cooperation, and build a community with a shared future for humanity.

To this end, President Xi made three proposals:

Upholding multilateralism to defend international fairness and justice. Multilateralism is the shared aspiration of the people and the overarching trend of our time. It provides an important underpinning for world peace and development. The Global Governance Initiative that President Xi recently proposed is aimed at galvanising joint global action for a more just and equitable system. Active efforts should be made to promote greater democracy in international relations and increase the representation and voice of Global South countries.

Upholding openness and win-win cooperation to safeguard the international economic and trade order. BRICS countries should promote a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalisation, place development at the heart of the international agenda, and ensure that Global South countries participate in international cooperation as equals and share in the fruits of development.

Upholding solidarity and cooperation to foster synergy for common development. BRICS countries account for nearly half of the world’s population, around 30 percent of global economic output, and one-fifth of global trade. The more closely they work together, the more resilient, resourceful and effective they are in addressing external risks and challenges.

Other participating leaders said that unilateralist and bullying acts are disrupting the international order, international law and international rules are under threat, and trade is being used as a tool to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, which severely jeopardises world peace and development. BRICS countries need to strengthen solidarity and collaboration, jointly respond to crises and challenges, safeguard multilateralism, uphold the international system of free and open trade, and protect the common interests of the Global South.

The Bloomberg financial news service further reported Lula as stating that, “Tariff blackmail is being normalised as an instrument to seize markets and interfere in domestic affairs… Our countries have become victims of unjustified and illegal trade practices.”

Calling for unity, he added: “It is up to BRICS to show that cooperation overcomes any form of rivalry. We have the necessary legitimacy to lead the renewal of the multilateral trading system on modern, flexible foundations geared to our development needs.”

South African President Ramaphosa said developing nations are facing “great hardships and danger” and that South Africa has already experienced negative economic effects from the trade upheaval. He called on BRICS to “play a critical role in strengthening the multilateral system.”

The following articles were originally published on the website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Trump’s tariffs against Latin America: part of a global battle

In the following Morning Star article, Francisco Domínguez (Secretary of the Venezuela Solidarity Campaign and member of Friends of Socialist China’s Britain committee) situates Donald Trump’s escalating tariff war against Latin America within a broader US imperial strategy to block the emergence of a multipolar world — particularly one shaped by China’s growing influence.

While Trump’s tariffs and other coercive economic measures often appear chaotic, their underlying goal is to “slow down, reduce and if possible, eliminate altogether” China’s alternative vision of global order, based on solidarity and mutually beneficial cooperation rather than “weaponisation of the dollar, economic sanctions or military aggression.”

Washington views the increasingly close relationship between the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) and China as intolerable. China has become South America’s main trading partner and Central America’s second largest, expanding beyond raw materials into infrastructure, electric vehicles, telecommunications and renewable energy. Thus China is helping the countries of the region to break out of centuries of underdevelopment imposed by North America and Europe.

Francisco argues that the US–China relationship is often misrepresented as an inevitable conflict between superpowers (a ‘Thucydides Trap’), when in reality it reflects “two different conceptions of how to organise the global economy.” The US insists on a zero-sum model that creates winners in the developed North and losers in the Global South; China promotes a model based on multipolarity, sovereignty and common prosperity.

The article concludes: “The US considers itself the ‘indispensable nation’ which has always engaged in zero-sum games whose outcome produces winners (the US and its economically developed accomplices) and losers (the vast majority of humanity who reside in the global South). Trump’s tariffs intend to keep it that way, while Latin America’s orientation towards Asia, China and the Brics is correctly pushing in the opposite direction: to a fairer, multipolar world.”

Francisco elaborates on these points in a recent interview on the Global Majority for Peace podcast, which we embed below the article.

Trump’s threat of imposing a crippling 50 per cent tariff on all Brazilian imports to the United States took everyone by surprise, especially, considering the US enjoys a trade surplus with the South American giant (surplus it has enjoyed since 2007). Lula made it clear that Brazil would reciprocate in kind.

Trump tariffs against Brazil are in line with his overall policy of applying tariffs on all countries in the world. Under Trump US imperialism seeks to establish a global system that it suits itself such that it can impose or change any rule any time it wants and attack any country it dislikes.

As with many other global institutions, Trump, following in the footsteps of previous US administrations, is prepared to run roughshod over World Trade Organisation rules that US imperialism itself was central in establishing in 1995.

Thus, his attack on Mexico is not surprising either, country with which it has a substantial trade deficit caused by its southern neighbour’s incorporation into US supply chain arrangements ever since the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta).

The US has had a trade deficit with Mexico ever since 1995, exactly one year after Nafta.

To Trump’s chagrin, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has vigorously defended her country’s sovereignty and has skilfully navigated US provocations.

To the charge of Mexico being a drug-trafficking hub, she has pointed out to US negotiators that the “the US itself harbours cartels, is the largest narcotic consumer market, exports the majority of armaments used by drug barons and hosts money-laundering banks.” She has also resolutely refused the deployment of US troops on Mexican soil.

Trump’s tariffs and the New Cold War on China

The article below is based on a speech by Friends of Socialist China co-editor Carlos Martinez to a webinar held by the Black Liberation Alliance on the subject of ‘Trump’s Tariff Wars on the Global South and the New Cold War’, held on 8 May 2025.

Carlos positions the tariff war within the broader US-led New Cold War on China. The tariffs are essentially “a continuation and a deepening of Obama’s so-called Pivot to Asia, designed by Hillary Clinton and first announced in 2011”.

The Trump administration’s justifications for its tariff war – that it will result in re-industrialisation of the US and increase in income – are patent nonsense. “In fact, US treasury secretary Scott Bessent stated openly last month that the objective for the tariffs is to persuade Japan, South Korea and India to participate in a ‘grand encirclement’ strategy to isolate and weaken China.”

Carlos writes that “the US is seeking to punish China for its success in building a modern economy, for developing its sovereignty, and for its refusal to bow down to US hegemony… China’s rise disrupts the whole imperialist system. It gets in the way of the relationship the US wants to have with the rest of the world, whereby it can design the global economic and financial system in its own interests.”

The article observes that the tariff war has no chance of being successful: “The US ruling class wants to isolate China, but actually it will end up isolating itself.” However, with the failure of the tariff war comes the possibility of further dangerous developments:

The obvious concern following on from that is that US imperialism’s next weapon against China may be not be a metaphorical one; that the New Cold War will turn hot. Anti-war movements in the West need to be highly vigilant on that score.

The other speakers on the panel were Radhika Desai (International Manifesto Group), Margaret Kimberley (Black Agenda Report) and Myriam Kane (Black Liberation Alliance).

The first thing to say about the Trump administration’s tariff war is that it is primarily designed to weaken, undermine and isolate the People’s Republic of China.

It’s part of a broader program of “decoupling” from China and a broader New Cold War on China – a system of hybrid warfare incorporating economic measures, diplomatic measures and propaganda measures, along with a significant military component: the deployment of hundreds of thousands of troops to the Pacific region; the US military bases in the Philippines, Guam, Okinawa, Japan, South Korea, Australia; the deployment of sophisticated weapons systems to the region; and the various attempts to create some sort of Asian NATO.

Mark Carney’s anti-China posture will not benefit the Canadian people

Canada held its federal election on April 28.

The ruling Liberal Party won 169 seats, up by 17, and leaving it just short of the 172 seats needed for a majority. The Conservatives won 144 seats, an increase of 24, but their leader Pierre Poilevre, who before ‘Hurricane Trump’ struck Canada could have pretty confidently looked forward to leading the next government, lost his seat.

The nationalist Bloc Québécois took 33 seats, a loss of 11. The social democratic New Democratic Party (NDP) won just seven seats, a loss of 17, with party leader Jagmeet Singh not only losing his seat but coming third in his riding (as electoral districts are termed in Canada). The Greens lost one of their two seats, with co-leader Jonathan Pedneault becoming the third party leader to lose his place in the federal parliament.

The Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada (MLPC) fielded 35 candidates and the Communist Party of Canada (CPC) fielded 24. MLPC is the registered name for electoral purposes of the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) (CPCML). No other left parties stood candidates.

As a result of this election, Mark Carney has now received his own mandate to serve as Prime Minister. The former Goldman Sachs banker, who went on to become Governor of the Reserve Bank of Canada and then the Bank of England, but who was completely lacking in previous political experience, was shoe-horned into the leadership of the Liberal Party, and hence the office of Prime Minister, after the unpopular and arrogant Justin Trudeau was forced to resign.

As indicated above, the fortunes of the Liberal Party had reached a nadir, leaving the Conservatives confident of a return to office. The Liberals’ change in fortunes came in part from the transition from Trudeau to Carney, but more especially from Donald Trump’s punitive ‘tariff wars’ and his insulting, boorish and aggressive threats to annex Canada, which have stirred a patriotic reaction from the ice hockey rink to the ballot box.

Carney skillfully rode this patriotic wave, with strong rhetoric that appeared to stand up to Trump, whilst Poilevre struggled in vain to shed his previous whole-hearted embrace of MAGA and of his own designation as the ‘Canadian Trump’. It was also this political polarisation and perceived national crisis that squeezed the votes of smaller parties, with many Bloc Québécois, NDP and Green voters doubtless holding their noses while they lent their vote to the Liberals.

Asked to comment on the result at the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s regular Beijing press conference the next day, spokesperson Guo Jiakun said that China is willing to develop its relations with Canada based on mutual respect, equality and mutual benefits. Asked to comment on Carney’s victory and bilateral relations, he said that China has noted relevant reports, and that China’s position on its relations with Canada has been consistent and clear.

The perfunctory tone of Guo’s remarks, devoid of even the most formal diplomatic expression of congratulations, indicates that the once relatively warm relations between Ottawa and Beijing, for now at least, remain decidedly chilly. This is consistent with Carney’s continued hostile rhetoric towards China, even as he strikes a pose of defending Canadian sovereignty from US threats. At the same time, Guo makes clear that China is open to better relations, but that the ball is firmly in Canada’s court.

In the build up to the elections, TML In The News, an online publication of CPC(ML), carried an article by Peggy Morton, “setting the record straight about Canada’s trading relations with China” and citing it as an “example of how a Carney government will manage the economy”.

Peggy begins by explaining that, “Following the lead of then-US President Joe Biden’s administration which imposed 100 per cent tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles in August 2024, the federal government under Justin Trudeau announced in September 2024 that the following month it would impose an import tax of 100 per cent on electric vehicles (EVs) produced in China… Note that Donald Trump had yet to enter the picture with his tariff wars. Nonetheless, paying no attention to World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules which govern the trading relations between trading nations around the world, Canada accused China of ‘distorting global trade’ by exporting EVs at ‘unfairly low prices’ and imposed its draconian tariffs.”

China did not respond with tariffs of its own until March 2025, when, following an investigation, it announced that it would impose a 100 per cent tariff on Canadian canola oil and canola meal and peas, along with 25 per cent tariffs on pork, fish and seafood, as of March 20.

Prime Minister Carney responded that: “The Government of Canada is deeply disappointed by this decision, which will hurt Canadian farmers, harvesters and businesses, and will raise prices and diminish choice for Chinese customers, as well as in the agriculture, fish and seafood, retail, restaurant, and food-preparation industries.”

Chinese Ambassador: Haiti’s future should not be sacrificed to US strategic interests

China has launched a sharp attack on the role of the United States in creating and perpetuating the political chaos and humanitarian disaster gripping the Caribbean state of Haiti and in the immiseration of its people.

Addressing a meeting of the United Nations Security Council in New York, called to hear briefings on the work of BINUH (the United Nations Integrated Office in Haiti) on April 21, Chinese Ambassador Geng Shuang made three points:

First, Haiti must shoulder its own responsibility. As a sovereign state, Haiti bears the primary responsibility of governance. “We call on all parties in Haiti to prioritise the interest of the nation and its people, enhance dialogue and consultation, demonstrate flexibility, and work together to advance a political process that is Haitian-led and Haitian-owned, with the goal of establishing a legitimate, effective, and responsible government at an early date.”

Second, external support must be effective. “On the political process, we need to support CARICOM [the Caribbean Community] and BINUH in continuing their good offices to accelerate the implementation of a transitional arrangement that is aligned with the realities of Haiti and is widely recognised… On humanitarian assistance, it is necessary to mobilise the resources of the international community and encourage all parties to continue to provide more assistance to the Haitian people to alleviate their sufferings.”

However, by far his strongest and most substantive comments addressed the role and responsibility of the United States:

“Third, the instigator of the crisis must shoulder its responsibility. Haiti was the first Latin American country to declare independence. However, it has then suffered many hardships due to a long period of military occupation, external interference, and economic exploitation. Throughout this process, the United States has been the greatest external factor affecting Haiti’s security, stability, and development.

“The US has always been the mastermind behind the political landscape in Haiti. For over a century, it has blatantly deployed troops, installed puppet governments, and manipulated Haiti’s constitution, entrenching itself in Haiti’s political affairs.”

He went on to say that the United States has always been a major source of interference in Haiti’s development. While it claims to support the Haitian people, it has significantly cut foreign aid and continued deporting Haitian immigrants on the pretext of national priorities precisely when Haiti is in dire need of support. What is even more shocking is that not long ago, while the US defied world opinion by imposing sweeping tariffs on all trade partners, it also extended its so-called baseline tariff of 10% to Haiti, one of the world’s least developed countries as defined by the UN. This display of unilateralism, protectionism, and economic bullying is not just aimed at the so-called competitors like China. It has also inflicted damage on a nation teetering on the edge of collapse, such as a fragile country like Haiti, where the people are in dire straits. This is not only cruel and absurd, but also profoundly heartbreaking.

“We hope that the US will reflect on all of the above. Haiti’s future should not be sacrificed to the US pursuit of its own strategic interests, nor should ‘being too close to the US’ become a curse for Haiti.”

Reporting on the meeting, Peoples Dispatch quoted Maria Isabel Salvador, Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary General for Haiti and Head of BINUH, as saying that, in February and March alone, 1,086 people were killed, 383 were injured, and more than 60,000 were forcibly displaced. Since December of last year, one million people have been displaced.

“The humanitarian crisis in Haiti has reached critical levels… Cholera outbreaks and gender-based violence – especially in places of displacement – are widespread; insecurity has closed 39 health facilities and more than 900 schools in [the capital] Port-au-Prince,” she told the meeting.

Haiti has yet to establish diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China. However, the two countries maintain representative and trade offices in their respective capitals.

The following articles were originally published on the website of China’s Permanent Mission to the UN and by Peoples Dispatch. The Peoples Dispatch article was first published by Brasil de Fato in Portuguese.

Remarks on BINUH by Ambassador Geng Shuang at the UN Security Council Briefing

President,

I thank Special Representative Maria Isabel Salvador and National Security Advisor Monica Juma for their briefings. I welcome the representatives of Haiti and the Dominican Republic at today’s meeting. I have also listened carefully to the statement made by the civil society representative.

Behind Trump’s wishful thinking on ‘reindustrialisation’: Why China can do it and the US can’t

We are pleased to republish the following article by Sara Flounders, analysing the Trump administration’s proposed strategy to reindustrialise the US. Sara notes that Trump is not the first president to talk about the need for reindustrialisation; “Reindustrialisation was a huge promise of the Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan administrations in the 1970s and 1980s… Trump promised this eight years ago during his first term and former President Joe Biden promised a vast program to ‘Build Back Better’ and reindustrialise the US economy and modernise infrastructure.”

Action has never lived up to rhetoric, and US manufacturing continues its protracted decline. Trump’s tactic is to essentially pin the blame on China, imposing tariffs as a means of reordering the international economic system and forcing manufacturing to return to the US. “This is wishful or magical thinking”, writes Sara.

“The US, as a capitalist country, really can’t and won’t reindustrialise, because that is a fabulously expensive process involving many years of investment of the capitalists’ own money… Corporate CEOs know they will only survive by maximising profits and guaranteeing hefty returns every quarter. Any attempt to reindustrialise requires a rethinking of, and massive investments in, infrastructure and education needed for such an economy. This takes decades of investments.”

In reality, domestic investment in the US is directed to where private companies can make a quick buck: the military-industrial complex. “Investment money gravitates relentlessly to the highest guaranteed profits, and that is usually the military budget with its huge, guaranteed, multibillion-dollar annual subsidy”. Hence Donald Trump’s record-breaking trillion-dollar Pentagon budget.

China, by contrast, “has a socially planned economy where the greatest sources of wealth in society are owned by the whole nation”. As such, economic strategy and investment policy are controlled by the people, led by the Communist Party. Socialist economic policies and reorganisation of society “have ended dire poverty for 800 million people and transformed one of the poorest countries on the planet into today’s modern marvel”.

Sara concludes:

The interests of workers and oppressed people in the US are bound up with the development of the people of the whole world. Only through increased cooperation and solidarity will our class here develop the ability to solve the enormous global problems.

The ability to rationally plan and invest socially created wealth into rapidly improving technology and infrastructure is decisive. This requires socialism.

This article first appeared on Workers World.

In the 1950s, when Japan and much of Europe was in ruins, the U.S. accounted for 50% of the world’s global production. By the 1960s, this was 35%, declining to 25% by the 1980s. By 2025, the U.S. share of global production had fallen to 12% as production grew elsewhere. (itif.org, Feb. 18)

The capitalist class in the U.S. has grown frantic about this reversal. Its focus is on China, and it blames China for its spectacular level of modern industrial development. In advanced technology manufacturing the future is clear: China holds 45% of the global share to 11% for the U.S.

Higher levels of production need a high-tech infrastructure to move what is produced to global markets. China dominates the global commercial shipbuilding market, producing over 50% of the world’s new ship orders, while the U.S. share has dwindled to less than 1%. China’s shipbuilding industry is backed by a vast industrial base with government support, allowing it to compete on a larger scale than the U.S.

China’s high-speed railroads connect 500 cities and reach through Central Asia into Europe. Meanwhile in the U.S., freight and passenger railroads are in decline.

Can this precipitous decline of U.S. capitalist hegemony be stopped? Can it be reversed? President Donald Trump would have us believe so, but evidence points to a negative answer. The corporate media presents the competition between the U.S. and China as a contention between two nation states, falsely accusing the Chinese government of not playing fair. In reality, China’s advantage arises from the sharp difference in two wholly different forms of organizing society.

Fears of global financial collapse haunt capitalists

The head of the world’s largest hedge fund, billionaire investor Ray Dalio of Bridgewater Associates, recently warned of a global financial system collapse. Trump’s aggressive and erratic tariff policies and ballooning debt could trigger a breakdown of the global financial system. “I’m worried about something worse than a recession if this isn’t handled well,” Dalio said on Meet the Press on April 13.

Spanish PM: US tariffs “unjustified, unjust and harmful for everybody”

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez recently visited China, becoming the first foreign leader to meet President Xi Jinping since US President Donald Trump dramatically intensified his ‘tariff war’ against the global economy and against China in particular.

Among current Western European leaders Sánchez stands out as being particularly friendly to China and has visited the country three times in the last two years.

Reporting his most recent visit, an article published by the financial news service Bloomberg clearly outlined how the Spanish leader has defied and stood up to US pressure and bullying:

“Earlier this week, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned the EU against seeking to pivot toward China and away from the US, singling out Sánchez’s push to deepen ties with Beijing. ‘That would be cutting your own throat,’ he said.”

Sánchez, for his part, called the US levies “unjustified, unjust and harmful for everybody.” Speaking at a press conference following his meeting with Xi, he announced that Spain’s head of state, King Felipe VI, will make a state visit to China this year.

Meeting Sánchez on April 11, Xi Jinping pointed out that transformation not seen in a century is accelerating across the world with multiple risks and challenges piling up. Only through solidarity and coordination can countries maintain world peace and stability and promote global development and prosperity. As the international situation gets more complex and volatile, it is increasingly important for China and Spain to develop sound and stable relations. This year marks the 20th anniversary of the comprehensive strategic partnership between China and Spain. China stands ready to work with Spain to build a more strategically resilient and dynamic comprehensive strategic partnership, to better serve the well-being of both peoples, inject impetus into the China-EU relations, and make greater contributions to world peace, stability, and development.

He stressed that the China-Spain friendship is a wise choice made by the two peoples based on traditional friendship, practical needs, and long-term interests. Both sides should continue to consolidate the political foundation of mutual support, trust and respect each other, and support each other on issues concerning core interests and major concerns. China is ready to work with Spain to leverage their mutually beneficial and complementary cooperation advantages, make good use of the economic and technological cooperation mechanisms, tap the potential in areas like new energy, high-tech manufacturing and smart cities, and produce more outcomes of mutually beneficial cooperation.

Xi Jinping pointed out that China always sees in the European Union an important pole in a multipolar world. China is a major country that explicitly supports the unity, development, and growth of the EU. In the current context, it is of great practical significance to strengthen the China-EU partnerships of peace, growth, reform, and civilisation. China and the EU should see each other as partners and embrace open cooperation. There are no winners in tariff wars. Going against the world will only lead to self-isolation. China’s development over the past seven decades is a result of self-reliance and hard work, not favours from others. China does not flinch from any unjust suppression. No matter how the external environment changes, China will remain confident, stay composed, and concentrate on managing its own affairs well.

Sánchez said that over the past 20 years since China and Spain established a comprehensive strategic partnership, the two countries have always respected each other and engaged in friendly cooperation. The relationship has been steadily deepening and growing. Under the leadership of President Xi Jinping, China has achieved remarkable accomplishments in its development and made significant contributions to global prosperity and stability. Spain values its relationship with China and firmly upholds the one-China policy. There are no winners in trade wars. In the face of a complex and challenging global environment, Spain and the EU would like to enhance communication and coordination with China to safeguard international trade order, jointly meet challenges like climate change and poverty alleviation, and preserve the common interests of the international community.

Prior to his China visit, Sánchez had visited Vietnam, the first visit by a Spanish head of government since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries in 1977.

The Spanish Prime Minister affirmed that Vietnam is one of Spain’s top priority partners in Southeast Asia and agreed on the need to elevate the bilateral ties to a comprehensive strategic partnership.

The following article was originally published on the website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

On the morning of April 11, 2025, President Xi Jinping met with visiting Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing.

Xi Jinping pointed out that transformation not seen in a century is accelerating across the world with multiple risks and challenges piling up. Only through solidarity and coordination can countries maintain world peace and stability, and promote global development and prosperity. As the international situation gets more complex and volatile, it is increasingly important for China and Spain to develop sound and stable relations. This year marks the 20th anniversary of the comprehensive strategic partnership between China and Spain. China stands ready to work with Spain to build a more strategically resilient and dynamic comprehensive strategic partnership, to better serve the well-being of both peoples, inject impetus into the China-EU relations, and make greater contributions to world peace, stability, and development.

Xi Jinping quoted the Chinese proverb “Range far your eye over long vistas.” He stressed that the China-Spain friendship is a wise choice made by the two peoples based on traditional friendship, practical needs, and long-term interests. Both sides should continue to consolidate the political foundation of mutual support, trust and respect each other, and support each other on issues concerning core interests and major concerns, especially in safeguarding sovereignty and territorial integrity. China’s consumption upgrade for 1.4 billion people and industrial transformation potential will provide strong momentum for the world economy. China is ready to work with Spain to leverage their mutually beneficial and complementary cooperation advantages, make good use of the economic and technological cooperation mechanisms, tap the potential in areas like new energy, high-tech manufacturing and smart cities, and produce more outcomes of mutually beneficial cooperation.

China strengthens neighbourhood ties in response to US economic coercion

The following article by Dirk Nimmegeers, which originally appeared on the China Square website, seeks to understand the rationale for the Trump administration’s seemingly bizarre tariff war, noting that it is a component of the US’s long-term strategy of containing China.

The US is using assorted means – persuasive and coercive – to win other countries to its side in its campaign of aggression against China. China meanwhile is “is forming or strengthen coalitions with continents, countries, regions and international organisations”, particularly among its Asian neighbours. “Correct relations, the strengthening of mutual trust and regular contacts between China and those neighbours, and among those same countries, are conducive to peace and prosperity.”

The article provides valuable context for President Xi Jinping’s visit to Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia this week.

The article was translated into English from the original Dutch by the author.

Madness?

Most people believe President Trump’s erratic policies will harm the US’s economic interests and alienate its allies. However, it is conceivable that, as Polonius said of Hamlet, ‘though this be madness, yet there is method in’t’. In other words, that there exists a rationale for Trump’s behaviour beyond simple folly and deranged impulsiveness.

In Europe, for instance, the US president has already succeeded in getting his demands for increased financial contributions to NATO accepted by allies. His team has doubled down on distrust of China and has escalated tensions even further than team Biden. In Europe, many influential groups and individuals would rather strike a deal with Washington than cooperate with Beijing.

By means of a global import blackmail, and somewhat later granting a 90-day reprieve to all countries except China, Trump and his ministers and advisers are trying to hit the People’s Republic hard. They want to undermine China’s growth and force China to accept US trade terms. Further, their aim is to punish China for its success in building a modern economy and technology and for its refusal to bow to US rule.

Targeting China and its neighbours

Moreover, Trump and co plan to entice other countries to side with the US against China, and if that fails, to force them to do so. The US elite successfully fought the socialist countries of Europe through an ideological Cold War, imperialist warfare worldwide, fomenting divisions, and a major arms race. Today, in the renewed Cold War, Generation Trump is deploying different tactics against the world’s largest socialist country. In this, financial and economic tactics play an important role.

The Chinese government says it is not seeking a fight with the US, but is ready to take it “to the end” if Washington forces it to do so. This is not grandstanding. The People’s Republic of China has a political leadership that enjoys strong political support from the people and is proving that both with economic growth and technological innovation, it has firmly established its policies and the means to defend them. The Chinese government, under the leadership of the Communist Party, primarily represents the interests of the vast majority of Chinese citizens.

Two-track policy

In doing so, however, it also champions economic globalisation that may benefit all countries. China favours an international system monitored and protected by institutions such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) or the World Health Organisation. China takes initiatives for groupings that offer the countries of the Global South in particular new development opportunities and help them to pursue an independent course. The combination of taking care of domestic interests on the one hand and concern ‘for a shared future for humanity’ on the other is reflected in an economic and a geopolitical programme. Economically, this is called a dual circulation strategy. Geopolitically, China makes the case for its sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as for multipolarity and peace policy. Driven by President Xi Jinping, Beijing is taking global initiatives such as the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilisation Initiative.

To maximise the chances of success, the People’s Republic is forming or strengthen coalitions with continents, countries, regions and international organisations. Preferential countries for this are its Asian neighbours. It is quite obvious why. First of all, there is the importance of their friendship for national defence, but also for the number of people and social strata in China that live and benefit from trade. China no longer depends on imports and exports to the extent that it did at the beginning of the century; nevertheless these sectors remain essential and have a strong input in the domestic debate.

Which neighbouring countries?

China has land borders with no less than 14 states: Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar, Bhutan, Nepal, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Russia and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea). In addition, there are neighbouring countries in Asia from which the People’s Republic is only separated by maritime areas, such as the Philippines, the Republic of Korea (South Korea) and Japan. Some more distant countries such as Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Brunei, East Timor also belong to the Southeast Asian neighbourhood region of China.

Correct relations, the strengthening of mutual trust and regular contacts between China and those neighbours, and among those same countries, are conducive to peace and prosperity. That’s why China has resolved most border issues with its neighbouring countries. In the region, Beijing seeks peaceful agreements between countries with divergent interests in the South China and East China Seas. A roadmap towards peaceful reunification with China’s Taiwan province is also vital for China’s territorial integrity in that context.

Needless to say, peace and prosperity are further served by China’s excellent economic and political relations with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The same goes for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), in which China plays a leading role as a co-founding member. Measured by GDP, RCEP is the largest free trade agreement in the world. It unites the 10 countries of ASEAN, as well as Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, in addition to China itself. Cambodian expert Thong Mengdavid speaks of a “mega-trade pact, covering about 2.3 billion people, which has shown its ability to boost regional economic growth, promote trade liberalisation and foster deeper integration among members”. According to Thong, this is “proof of the power of economic integration. It proves that cooperation, not isolation, leads to prosperity.”

Two visions on international politics

Western views and approaches to global politics are based on ‘prosperity through self-interest and neo-colonialism’ and ‘peace through domination and conflict’. Trump’s Make America Great Again is currently the most extreme example of this. China refuses to submit to it and, within the framework of its socialist project, offers an attractive alternative to it.

Contradictions in neighbouring countries

Many of China’s neighbours experience contradictions between, on the one hand, supporters of closer relations with the People’s Republic and, on the other, supporters of submission to the US or a continued alliance with it. In addition, there is always a current that refuses to make a choice, but is often forced to do so by the course of history. In the Republic of Korea (South Korea), for example, the political world is torn between a Democratic Party that wants rapprochement with China and peace with North Korea, and a party of politicians who believe that the country’s interests are best served by continued obedience to the United States. In Japan, some politicians are more open to the alliance between Washington, Seoul and Tokyo, while others prefer a trilateral with Beijing.

Indian ministers and other policymakers aspire to become a rival to the People’s Republic as an Asian superpower, so they are offering the West their services, and participating in projects like the India – Middle East – Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). IMEC would like to be a rival to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Hostility with Pakistan, a prominent participant in the BRI, is one of the reasons for this. These Indian nationalists hinder their political opponents who want to go forward on the logical path of peace and progress between two Asian giant civilisations. Vietnam has a political system and economic policies closely akin to China’s, and a history of socialist brotherly relations with the People’s Republic. But even there, there are apparently groups that, for various reasons, seem to advocate accommodation with the United States, the historical imperialist enemy.

To be continued

Understandably, then, Chinese President Xi Jinping wants to ‘strengthen strategic ties with neighbouring countries’. China plans to do this ‘by taking differences into account appropriately and strengthening supply chain ties’. These remarks were made at a central working conference on diplomacy with neighbouring countries held by the CPC in Beijing on Tuesday and Wednesday of last week.

With the following terms China’s foreign ministry announced Xi Jinping’s trip to important neighbouring countries this week. ‘At the invitation of General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam to Lam and President of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam Luong Cuong, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and President of China Xi Jinping will pay a state visit to Vietnam from 14 to 15 April. At the invitation of the King of Malaysia, His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, and King Norodom Sihamoni of Cambodia, President Xi Jinping will pay a state visit to Malaysia and Cambodia from 15 to 18 April.’

We look forward to learning what opportunities the negotiators agree on for countering MAGA man Trump.

Sources: Xinhua, Min. BuZa China, Friends of Socialist China, Pascalcoppens.com, China Daily, Global Times, Unachina.org, Clingendael.org, South China Morning Post, Asia Times, Morning Star, Geopolitical Economy Report

China Daily editorial: the US is not getting ripped off by anybody

We are pleased to republish below a brief editorial in China Daily about the US administration’s hysterical claims that China and other countries are “ripping off” the US via their trade policies. The editorial notes that such claims are being used to justify the US’s unilateral imposition of tariffs, which in turn “provides leverage for the US administration to extract concessions in terms of the real trade war it is waging against China and in reshaping the bilateral relations with the US’s other trade partners in favour of the US by extorting undue concessions”.

The author writes that the US’s trade deficit is not the result of unfair trade practices pursued by other countries, but rather the US’s own economic policies of several decades, pursued in the specific interests of the US capitalist class. What’s more, even if the unilateral tariffs result in more companies investing in manufacturing in the US, this will not create the vast wave of employment being touted by the White House. “The cost of labour in the US means it is more economically viable for machines to do the work than humans.”

In reality, “the US is not getting ripped off by anybody. The problem is the US has been living beyond its means for decades. It consumes more than it produces. It has outsourced its manufacturing and borrowed money in order to have a higher standard of living than it’s entitled to based on its productivity. Rather than being ‘cheated’, the US has been taking a free ride on the globalisation train.” These comments were sufficiently persuasive that they were reported more-or-less neutrally in the Guardian, which is notable given the paper’s usual anti-China stance.

The editorial concludes:

The US should stop whining about itself being a victim in global trade and put an end to its capricious and destructive behaviour. Instead, it should commit itself to working with its trading partners to establish a fair, free and WTO-centred multilateral trading system that is in line with the times.

The US administration has long accused foreign countries of taking advantage of the United States at the expense of domestic jobs and US industries. In US President Donald Trump’s view, the US has received less return value and resources for what it has given the world in terms of the amount of money, trade preferences and other resources. “They’re ripping us off” is his constant refrain.

It is this fabricated premise of a long-standing grievance that has been the launchpad for his administration’s sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs targeting almost all foreign imports, and which have set up a global trade war and promise to upend the decades-old global trading order.

Though the US leader hit a 90-day pause button on many of the tariffs after his radical power play resulted in US stocks volatility, bond yields surging and recession fears intensifying, his administration’s haughty demolition job on the global trade system is far from over, not least because there is still a 10 percent tariff on virtually all exports to the United States. This provides leverage for the US administration to extract concessions in terms of the real trade war it is waging against China and in reshaping the bilateral relations with the US’ other trade partners in favor of the US by extorting undue concessions.

One of the aims of the US administration is to use the tariffs to close, if not reverse, the trade deficits with nearly all of the US’ trade partners. The preoccupation with trade deficits stems from a warped idea that they are proof that the US has been exploited by other countries. This has also made the US president and his trade advisers wrongly claim that the current rules governing global trade have put the US at a distinct disadvantage.

This is contrary to the belief of mainstream economists that a trade deficit simply means a country is importing more goods and services from a given country than it is exporting to that market, and has nothing to do with the state of a country’s economic health.

While bemoaning surging deficits in the US’ trade of goods with other countries, the US administration has deliberately ignored the fact that the US sells far more services than it buys from other countries, which means the US’ service sector enjoys a trade surplus with almost every trading partner around the world, including those at the center of the ongoing trade war such as China and the European Union. The service sector includes retailers, software, internet and telecom providers, movie studios, as well as health care providers, law firms and accounting agencies. According to the US Commerce Department, the US’ trade surplus in services rose to $293 billion in 2024, up 5 percent from 2023, and 25 percent from 2022.

Trade in services, especially finance, legal, entertainment, and high-tech services, has become a major source of US economic strength. In 2023, US services exports were worth more than $1 trillion, accounting for 13 percent of the global total, and they expanded a further 8 percent last year, according to the World Trade Organization. “Global trade in services … is booming. And there is a clear winner on this front: the United States,” wrote Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, WTO director-general.

Moreover, Trump’s claim that foreign countries steal US manufacturing jobs through unfair trade practices, and that only sweeping tariffs will help the US reverse the decades-long decline in manufacturing and create related jobs is out of step with historical realities.

This is because service sector jobs have long driven the US economy — the sector employed 57 percent of private sector nonfarm workers in 1939, when the US Labor Department started tracking US employment, and today, service sector businesses account for 84 percent of those jobs.

The modern manufacturing reality suggests that, even if US companies do reshore, the cost of labor in the US means it is more economically viable for machines to do the work than humans.

The US is not getting ripped off by anybody. The problem is the US has been living beyond its means for decades. It consumes more than it produces. It has outsourced its manufacturing and borrowed money in order to have a higher standard of living than it’s entitled to based on its productivity. Rather than being “cheated”, the US has been taking a free ride on the globalization train.

The US should stop whining about itself being a victim in global trade and put an end to its capricious and destructive behavior. Instead, it should commit itself to working with its trading partners to establish a fair, free and WTO-centered multilateral trading system that is in line with the times.

Statement: Say no to Trump’s tariffs and anti-China policy

The following statement has been issued by the Friends of Socialist China US Committee in response to the Trump administration’s announcement of new tariffs on Chinese imports.

The Trump administration’s decision to slap additional tariffs on the People’s Republic of China is something that should be condemned by every person who cares about peace and progress. These moves are making the world a more dangerous place and are part of a larger anti-China policy being pursued by the Trump administration – a policy begun under the Obama administration and deepened during the Biden administration.

These tariffs are in effect a tax on working people here in the United States and will result in rising prices for our necessities and wants. They will have no impact whatsoever on the lifestyles of the billionaires. Indeed, the money raised from increased prices will be used to fund the Trump regime’s tax cuts for the super-rich. Furthermore, these tariffs will harm the U.S. economy more than China’s. People’s China has a more diversified economy, more trading partners, and a greater share of world trade.

To quote Mao Zedong, “Lifting a rock only to drop it on one’s own feet is a Chinese folk saying to describe the behavior of certain fools.” This certainly applies to Trump and his wealthy backers.

The tariffs against China exist in a larger context. The U.S. empire is in a state of stagnation and decline, while People’s China is developing at an incredible speed. Wall Street and the Pentagon are working to “contain” and encircle China. They are increasing the spending for war preparations, attempting to draw countries in the region into hostile alliances aimed at China, and encouraging separatist forces in Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang. The tariffs supplement the hundreds of U.S. sanctions against China in textiles, solar energy, computers and more.

For the past decade, U.S. policy makers have talked about “decoupling” the U.S. economy from that of China. Washington DC’s trade war is a part of that process, and it cannot be separated from preparations for other kinds of war in the Pacific, including those fought by military means.

Socialist China has made incredible achievements. China has waged a real war on poverty, while the U.S. government is waging a war on working people. China is by far the world leader in renewable energy production, electric transport, biodiversity protection and afforestation. China takes public health seriously. That’s why its life expectancy consistently goes up. Here in the U.S., we have measles outbreaks, and vaccine “skeptics” running the show. China wants peace. No serious person can say that about the U.S. today.

We demand that the tariffs directed at China be rolled back. We oppose the Trump administration’s anti-China policy, including any and all preparations for war. And we stand in solidarity with socialist China as it heads into a bright future.

Trump’s tariff tantrums

With the Trump administration’s increasingly aggressive tariff measures, economists are warning of the risk of an international trade war, with the US and China as its major antagonists. To provide some much-needed clarity on this issue, we are pleased to republish below two recent articles from British Marxist economist Michael Roberts.

Michael describes the core of Trump’s tariff strategy as aiming to “make America ‘great again’ by raising the cost of importing foreign goods for American companies and households and so reduce demand and the huge trade deficit that the US currently runs with the rest of the world”. According to the US government, this will boost incomes and jobs in the US. Furthermore, the extra tariff revenues will boost Treasury coffers, supporting the administration’s plan to cut income tax and corporation tax.

What will the actual effect of the tariffs be? Michael argues that the tariffs will not reduce the US trade deficit, but will instead raise prices for US consumers and reduce the competitiveness of US companies. Inflation will rise, taxes will be cut, federal spending will be gutted – meaning that the consequences for the US working class will be dire. At a global level, “increased tariffs and other protectionist measures by all sides in retaliation will weaken world trade and economic growth. World trade growth showed some recovery in 2024 after contracting in 2023. Trump’s tariffs will stop that recovery in its tracks.”

Countering those economists who argue that tariffs have always been a valuable tool for nurturing domestic industry, Michael writes: “The US in the 21st century is not an emerging industrial power that needs to protect burgeoning new industries from powerful competitors. Instead, it is a mature economy with a declining industrial sector that will not be restored in any significant way by tariffs on Chinese or European imports.”

Further:

American capital did not invest to sustain its manufacturing superiority because the profitability of that sector had fallen too mcuh. Instead, they switched to investing in financial assets and/or shifting their industrial power abroad. In the last couple of decades they hoped to sustain an advantage in hi-tech and information technology including AI. Now even that is under threat. But this is not the fault of China running an ‘unfair’ industrial trade policy that is based on suppressing the living standards of its people; on the contrary, it is the failure of US capital to sustain its hegemony, just as Britain did in the late 19th century.

The two articles were first published on The Next Recession blog.

Trump’s tariff tantrums

Feb. 4 (The Next Recession) — Over the weekend President Donald Trump announced a batch of tariff increases on US imports of goods from the closest partners of US trade, Canada and Mexico. He proposed a 25% rise in tariffs (with a lower rate for oil imports from Canada). Then he announced a 10% rise in tariffs on all Chinese imports. Thus Trump started his new trade war.

And yet as soon as he started it, he stepped back. Trump announced that he was postponing the tariff increases with Canada and Mexico for a month because their governments had agreed to do something about the smuggling of fenatyl drugs into the US, which he claimed was killing 200,000 Americans every year. This figure is nonsense, of course, because under 100,000 Americans die from drug overdoses from all chemicals each year. As it is, the smuggling of fenatyl over the US-Canadian border is miniscule – certainly compared to the drug cartel operations on the Mexican border. Moreover, as Mexican President Sheinbaum pointed out to Trump, the cartels are able to operate their violent methods because of gun running operated by Americans in the US.

The Canadian and Mexican governments rushed to do a deal with Trump, promising batches of troops on the borders to stop trafficking and more joint anti-drug forces with the US etc. This seems to be enough for Trump to postpone his tariff move, although the tariffs on China will go ahead (no drugs there?). Also small package imports that have been free of import tax up to now will be brought into the customs system – and that will hit internet online purchases made by Americans for goods from abroad.

So what are we to learn from these shenanigans? Are the threatened tariff increases merely being used to browbeat other countries into concessions to Trump? Or is there a coherent economy policy in all this?

There is method in this madness. On the external front, Trump aims to make America ‘great again’ by raising the cost of importing foreign goods for American companies and households and so reduce demand and the huge trade deficit that the US currently runs with the rest of the world. He wants to reduce that and force foreign companies to invest and operate within the US rather than export to it.

He reckons this will boost incomes and jobs for Americans. And with the extra tariff revenues, the government will have sufficient funds to cut income taxes and corporate profit taxes to the bone (indeed, Trump says he wants to abolish income tax altogether). If this is the plan, then the tariffs will eventually be applied fully, with China probably getting an even bigger increase.

Trump, tariffs and the working class

The two articles below address the tariffs recently announced by the US against China, Canada and Mexico.

The first article, written by Friends of Socialist China advisory group member and International Manifesto Group convenor Radhika Desai, republished from CGTN, points to the cynical economic motives for these tariffs: to rob from the poor to pay the rich. Since the cost of tariffs is passed on to consumers, they constitute a stealth tax on ordinary Americans, and will help make up for the loss of revenue resulting from the Trump regime’s tax cuts for the super-rich.

The cost of the tariffs will be paid by ordinary US consumers. And they will pay in order that the richest US taxpayers can enjoy greater tax cuts, which is the key reason why Trump needs the tariff revenues.

Tariffs will also drive up inflation, further impacting living conditions of the working class.

The putative aim of the tariffs is to bolster US manufacturing. However, “for US capital, given its decades-long reluctance to invest productively at home, it’s going to take a lot more than tariffs. US capital needs to be turned away from the unproductive, predatory and speculative financial ventures in which it is engaged and towards serious productive investment.”

The second article, republished from Workers World, details the likely negative impact of the tariffs on the US economy, and denounces the Trump administration’s threats against the BRICS countries.

Attacks against BRICS are detrimental to workers in G7 countries… BRICS countries are displaying self-sufficiency and independence from Western imperialism and settler colonialism. Relations between China and Russia have also strengthened because of BRICS. Many countries in the Global South have less of a need to trade with the U.S. than they did in previous decades, and therefore they have more leverage to maintain sovereignty.

The article concludes:

Trump’s promotion of tariffs is harmful to workers all over the globe. Imperialist protectionism and isolationism are an obstacle to working-class unity, and they should be opposed. International solidarity is necessary in resisting anti-worker tariffs and defeating the racist, xenophobic “America First” agenda. Workers and oppressed peoples of the world, unite!

Trump’s empty tariff brinkmanship

After days of keeping the world guessing whether he would commit to such a disastrous course, U.S. President Donald Trump has started his trade wars against his country’s three most important trade partners, Canada, Mexico and China.

In announcing the tariffs on exports from these countries, Trump was self-contradictory, claiming they were a negotiating tool designed to deal with U.S. trade deficits, and then that they were not. Their true extent remains unclear: From the apparently blanket tariffs of 25 percent on Canada and Mexico and 10 percent on China, he has already reduced tariffs on oil, natural gas and electricity from Canada to 10 percent, and uncertainty prevails over exactly which goods they will hit, how, and by how much.

The Financial Times called it “a trade war on steroids” while the Washington Post declared it “the dumbest trade war in history.” Many others said these sky-high tariffs could not be expected to last forever.

So, as the world tightens its seatbelt for a bumpy ride through the Trump quadrennial, let’s parse the real wheat from the rhetorical chaff so we can better anticipate the course of the trade wars Trump has started. The key is that Trump’s tariffs are incoherent in conception and applied for the wrong reasons.

Trump is certainly using them as negotiating tools. He claims they are superior to sanctions, which scare other countries from the dollar system he wishes to save. Exactly how adding the weaponization of trade to the weaponization of the dollar is going to help the U.S. is anyone’s guess.