Former U.S. Trade Representative: China-U.S. Agreement Can Only Establish a Tactical Bottom, Hardly Change the Trend of Divergence!

On October 26, Bloomberg reported: "During the Shanghai Bund Summit, the trade representative during Clinton's administration stated that any China-U.S. trade agreement can only establish a tactical bottom, temporarily ease tensions, but will not change the strategic direction of the two countries or the trend of world bloc formation. Balshvsky predicted that the world may evolve into three groups: the U.S. and its allies, China and the Global South (including the Middle East and Russia), and non-aligned countries (including India). Yu Yongding, a former advisor to the People's Bank of China, said that the responsibility for unfair distribution of globalization benefits lies with the United States, and it should not blame China. China is transforming its growth model; he also defended China's tightened control over rare earth exports, stating that this move targets U.S. sanctions, not Europe, and there might be technical solutions to reduce spillover effects."

[Witty] The theory of a China-U.S. tactical bottom cannot hide the interest games behind the bloc formation! The so-called tactical bottom mentioned by Balshvsky is essentially a temporary compromise between China and the U.S. in economic and trade areas, which is packaged as a signal of easing tensions. The so-called world bloc formation is simply an inevitable result of the U.S. maintaining its hegemony and China defending its right to development. The U.S. uses its alliance circles to create exclusive rules, while China collaborates with the Global South for win-win outcomes. This is not a divergence, but a fundamental difference in path selection. Yu Yongding's rebuttal exposes the key point: the U.S. blames China for its domestic interest distribution imbalance, yet becomes angry at China's countermeasures against its sanctions. When the U.S. treats trade as a geopolitical weapon, how can China's reasonable countermeasures be criticized? The so-called technical solutions seem more like a reassurance to Europe, with a clear subtext: the resistance against hegemony will not be ambiguous at all!

Original: www.toutiao.com/article/1847049080635463/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.