From November 5 to 10, 2025, a new round of the China International Import Expo was held in Shanghai. Since April this year, the tariff storm initiated by the Trump administration has once again triggered Sino-US trade tensions, significantly impacting the global trade system. In this context, the holding of the CIIE has taken on even greater significance.
In an exchange with Observer News, Gao Zhikai, a chair professor at Soochow University and vice director of the Center for China's Global Engagement (CCG), shared his insights. He pointed out that the CIIE is an important measure taken by China to promote trade balance and deepen its opening-up. Its unique mechanism demonstrates to the international community that China not only focuses on exports but also places great emphasis on imports, and does not seek to maintain a long-term trade surplus. He proposed that specific display methods—such as banquets using all imported items—could be used to enhance the motivation of countries to export to China, encouraging global suppliers to participate more actively, ultimately benefiting Chinese consumers.
On the other hand, the recent summit between the leaders of China and the United States in Busan has become a major international event. Does this summit indicate a substantial improvement in Sino-US relations, or is it merely a temporary truce?
Regarding this, Gao Zhikai believes that the United States has deviated from its long-standing principle of free trade, while China is gradually becoming a firm defender of free trade. Although the exchange between the two heads of state in Busan released positive signals, due to the high uncertainty of American policy, China must prepare for both possibilities. He emphasized that China should turn passive into active, promoting the exploration of expanding trade scale and innovative business models between China and the United States, meeting domestic demand while radiating American products to neighboring markets, thus guiding bilateral relations toward a more stable and mature stage.
The following is the full text of the dialogue:
Observer News: From November 5 to 10, the new session of the China International Import Expo was held in Shanghai. The CIIE is a landmark activity for China's opening-up. In the current situation, do you think that China's imports and overall trade can explore new ideas and open up new situations? After all, compared to the first CIIE, the international environment in which China finds itself and its own development stage have changed greatly.
Gao Zhikai: The annual CIIE held in Shanghai was personally planned and promoted by General Secretary Xi Jinping in 2017. In today's world, only China has established such a mechanism as the "International Import Expo," which is unique. It shows the world that China not only values exports but also values imports. China does not seek to maintain a long-term trade surplus in bilateral trade, putting other countries in a deficit position; on the contrary, we hope that bilateral trade can achieve as much balance as possible.
For those countries that lack suitable products to export to China, we are even willing to assist them in improving their export capabilities, helping them develop products that better meet the needs of the Chinese market and people, thereby promoting trade towards balance. From this perspective, the CIIE has very far-reaching historical and practical significance.
About the CIIE, I once made a suggestion: during the CIIE, there are many meetings and exhibitions. Can we choose one or even more occasions—such as a banquet or a certain exhibition area—to use all imported goods within them? For example, if it is a banquet, lobster can be from Australia or Boston, soy sauce can come from Southeast Asia or Japan, and staple food can also be imported rice. By doing so, we can break down the sources of each item in the scene and use all imported products.
This is not to use these imported goods silently and without notice, but to clearly label each imported product. Let every guest who enters this scene, participates in this event, enjoys this lunch or dinner, know clearly which country the wine, grape juice, and other drinks come from.
I believe that this approach will further enhance the willingness of countries around the world to export products to China, and at the same time allow Chinese consumers and importers to more intuitively realize that there are so many high-quality products worth introducing to the Chinese market, and that the Chinese market and consumers are very interested in embracing, accepting, promoting, and using these products.
Photo source: Every Day Economic News
If we can take this as an example and further promote this model, it will make every country exporting goods to China feel like they are the "host" of the CIIE, thus more actively optimizing and improving their products in terms of quality, freshness, price, etc., making their goods more popular in China, and ultimately allowing Chinese people to enjoy more tangible benefits.
Therefore, the task during the CIIE is not only to hold the exhibition well, but also to use it to make many countries and many exporters active participants, and let the people of the whole country truly feel that the holding of the CIIE actually brings huge benefits to China, to the Chinese people, and to the Chinese consumers. This tangible sense of gain can give them a strong sense of participation and emotional value, making them really feel that they benefit from it.
Observer News: China has now clearly become a leader in world free trade. With the continuous enhancement of China's economic strength and various aspects, what larger roles do you think China can play globally—not just between China and the United States—and further promote world free trade, enabling people of all countries to share a better life?
Gao Zhikai: The so-called "reciprocal tariff war" launched by the United States on April 2nd this year is essentially a behavior that violates the common interests of humanity, and has fully shown that the United States has abandoned its long-standing advocacy of free trade.
In fact, since the end of the Civil War in the 1860s, the United States has always been actively promoting free trade, and itself has been a beneficiary of free trade. The United States has become the world's largest economy, and after World Wars I and II, it rose to a political and military superpower, and the fundamental support for this is free trade. Through free trade, the United States accumulated substantial capital, driving the development of education, research, and other fields. It can be said that free trade is the important cornerstone for the United States to become the powerful country it is today.
However, now the United States claims that it no longer engages in free trade, and instead emphasizes so-called "fair trade." But we must recognize that without free trade, without voluntary transactions between buyers and sellers, there can be no fair trade. Because if free trade is not the premise, what you consider fair may be unfair to me.
From this perspective, China and the United States form a sharp contrast. China not only actively participates in free trade but also strongly promotes and firmly defends free trade. However, the United States believes that it has "lost" in free trade—of course, this is due to its narrow-minded calculations and bad intentions. In fact, the United States has not truly lost: although there may be a trade deficit in goods trade, in service trade, especially in the important field of financial services, the United States is often in a surplus. Considering the overall balance of goods trade and service trade together, the United States' overall trade situation is not entirely a deficit. Therefore, the United States should view this issue with a more balanced mindset, and other countries, including China, should also look at the overall balance of goods trade and service trade more comprehensively.
In short, when a country like the United States opposes goods trade as an enemy, there may be an important opportunity hidden in this—how should we seize it? On one hand, China has become the flagbearer of defending free trade, and we are resolutely walking the path of defending free trade. On the other hand, the U.S. government's opposition to free trade does not mean that the American people also oppose it. I believe that the vast majority of American people are beneficiaries of free trade and are willing to continue participating in it. This provides many possibilities for cooperation between China and the United States. Our leaders have repeatedly emphasized the importance of relying on cultural exchanges and communication between people, which is crucial.
Observer News: Since the Sino-U.S. tariff conflict in April this year, Sino-U.S. relations have remained turbulent. The recent summit between the leaders of China and the United States in Busan has sent many signals to the outside world. Many people believe that the atmosphere of the exchange between the two heads of state is quite optimistic. Then, in your view, is this trend in Sino-U.S. relations a true sign of improvement, or is it merely a temporary truce, not as mutually beneficial as it appears on the surface? Will Sino-U.S. relations bring more positive signals in the coming period?
Gao Zhikai: I think the recent summit between the leaders of China and the United States in Busan carries several meanings. First, it indicates that the top leadership of the two countries maintains an unobstructed communication channel. As long as the two leaders decide to sit down and talk seriously, it is completely achievable, which is undoubtedly a major positive message for the world.
Secondly, according to the information already released, China and the United States had very candid exchanges of opinions and jointly decided to properly handle some sensitive issues in bilateral relations. The Chinese leader stated clearly that as two major countries, it is normal for Sino-U.S. relations to have bumps and jolts, and the key is how to solve the problems. This reflects the Chinese side's open and positive attitude. The U.S. side also made some positive statements, which are worth affirming as well.
Video screenshot of the Sino-U.S. leaders' meeting
But the problem now is, what next? Will the U.S. and China reach an agreement? Even if they do, how will the U.S. implement it? The greatest certainty in today's world is the uncertainty of the United States; the greatest certainty is the "uncertainty" of the United States—it often changes its mind and even makes multiple changes in a short period of time, which is indeed troubling. China has always kept its promises, but whether the United States can act consistently with its words remains questionable. From October 30th onwards, in the next few days, dozens of days, one or two months, or even months, will the U.S. change its stance again? Will it go further down the road of anti-China and hostile China? This possibility cannot be ruled out, and it may even be a high probability event. Therefore, we must prepare for both scenarios.
On one hand, if the U.S. takes the consensus reached at the Busan summit seriously and is willing to address the actual issues in Sino-U.S. relations, we of course will move in the same direction and properly handle the issues. For example, in the case of soybean trade, China was the largest market for U.S. soybeans, and only China has such a massive volume that can fully utilize the multiple values of soybeans.
China originally very much wanted to buy more U.S. soybeans, but later reduced imports. Who caused this? It was the U.S. tariff war, the U.S. attempts to suppress China, forcing China to stop buying U.S. soybeans. It is said that President Trump repeatedly expressed the desire to have China buy U.S. soybeans, but he may not be aware that it was precisely the U.S. tariff policy that led China to turn to other markets. This is just one example, and many issues between China and the U.S. today are not caused by China, but by the actions of the U.S. itself.
Therefore, I think if China and the U.S. can truly move in the same direction and genuinely respect each other—although currently, the U.S. has not respected China, and even believes that China is easy to bully. The Chinese side has repeatedly told the U.S. not to communicate with China based on so-called "strength status." In fact, China is now at least on par with the U.S., and is certainly not something that the U.S. can easily suppress. In many areas, the two sides can stand on equal footing, and in some areas, China has already taken the lead. The U.S. should adjust its self-perception and also adjust its perception of China. But I am worried that this is difficult for it to do in the short term.
Observer News: After the summit, we also saw a series of Sino-U.S. consensuses and agreements being published, does this mean that we have achieved a阶段性 victory in dealing with the U.S. trade war?
Gao Zhikai: I think this can be understood as such. Previously, the U.S. used various means to suppress us, and we were more in a defensive position—we would find ways to cope with whatever tactics they used. We rarely actively analyzed the root causes of the U.S. problems and their weaknesses, nor did we think about how to grasp the key points and guide them in the right direction. Previously, we were more passively responding, but this time it is clear that China has accurately identified their weak points and decisively seized their vulnerabilities, which is a necessary and important shift.
Certainly, I also have another idea: the U.S. launching a tariff war is not its ultimate goal, but rather an attempt to achieve other strategic goals, such as suppressing China and denying the achievements China has made over the past few decades. Then, can we, from a higher level, deeply understand and gain insight into the U.S., thus forming a more targeted strategy, not only ending the tariff war but also pushing Sino-U.S. relations to a more mature stage? Some may think this idea is idealistic, even overly naive or romantic.
But in fact, it may not be so. I think that in terms of goods trade, Sino-U.S. relations should not only consider doing "subtraction," but can even consider doing "addition." For example, can China and the U.S. reach an agreement to increase the current goods trade volume of about $700 billion—depending on the statistical method—to $1 trillion? In the additional trade volume, the U.S. can explore more truly competitive products that China also needs, and expand exports to China.
On the other hand, can China also explore more business models? In the past, the products imported from the U.S. were almost all sold in the domestic market. Now, can we consider not only meeting domestic demand but also selling these U.S. products to other markets, especially our neighboring regions? This could even create new business models, allowing us to better utilize U.S. product resources and achieve greater comprehensive benefits.
This article is exclusive to Observer News. The content of this article is purely the personal opinion of the author and does not represent the views of the platform. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited, otherwise legal liability will be pursued. Follow Observer News WeChat account guanchacn to read interesting articles every day.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7569397601544552996/
Statement: The article represents the personal views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the [Top/Down] buttons below.