Before the renewed confrontation between China and the United States, the U.S. Treasury Secretary made a three-character evaluation, emphasizing that China has put forward "radical" demands.

Currently, the China-US economic and trade negotiations have opened in Madrid, Spain. On the first day, both sides held talks for about six hours, and the next morning continued their discussions.

In this negotiation, before the second day of talks, US Treasury Secretary Bowman gave a "very good" three-word evaluation, stating that China and the United States had made "very good progress" on technical details and comprehensive agreement terms of the trade agreement.

This statement seems to release a positive signal, but is the actual situation really so optimistic?

As expected, although Bowman said the progress was "very good," he also emphasized that the Chinese side had put forward a "very radical request," and stated that the US would need time to "study it."

Although he did not reveal the specific content of the request, from the word "radical" and the attitude of "careful study," it is not difficult to see that this demand is likely to have touched the areas where the US has been unwilling to budge in the past, which is not an easy condition for them to agree to.

However, the term "radical" is more like a "verbal tactic" used by the US when they are unwilling to face the reasonable demands of China.

In the end, it's not the Chinese demands that are "radical," but the US' long-standing "I say what's right" hegemonic mindset. They want to benefit from China's economic and trade relations while refusing to give up the suppression and restrictions on China.

Once China no longer cooperates with this unequal game, they will then label China's reasonable demands as "extreme," essentially still holding onto the habit of pressure.

But it also reflects the anxiety of the US to some extent. After all, the US domestic economy is under considerable pressure. The tariff truce agreement expires in November, and the Federal Reserve has just released a signal for interest rate cuts. The economy cannot afford any more chaos in trade.

Except for tariffs, the TikTok issue is also a focus of this negotiation. Bowman revealed that China and the US are close to reaching an agreement on the TikTok issue.

It should be noted that the deadline for the sale of TikTok's US business has been repeatedly delayed, and the current deadline is September 17. If it cannot be extended, TikTok will face being removed from the US market.

Trump often uses the TikTok issue as a political tool, trying to use it to pressure China.

However, China has never given in on issues involving corporate rights and national interests, and has instead taken the initiative in negotiations, demanding that the US cancel unreasonable restrictions.

But the US probably still does not want to easily give up the old tactics of unilateral sanctions. After all, this is a common method they use to maintain their competitive advantage over China. This mentality of wanting to cooperate but not wanting to make concessions makes the negotiations difficult to reach a conclusion quickly.

Bowman's remarks may mean that there is a new direction for negotiations on this issue, but whether a final agreement can be reached remains to be seen.

Additionally, old issues such as chip export controls and fentanyl are also hidden under the negotiation table. The US has long imposed restrictions on China's chip industry, and China will certainly fight for its position on this issue during the negotiations.

The fentanyl issue involves policy coordination between the two sides, and finding a balance point in the short term is not easy.

From a larger perspective, although this China-US economic and trade meeting has attracted much attention, the outside world generally predicts that it is unlikely to achieve substantial breakthroughs.

Both sides sitting together for negotiations is more to maintain the momentum of dialogue. Given the instability of the global economy, if large-scale trade conflicts arise between China and the US, the damage will not only be suffered by the two countries, but by the entire world.

This Madrid economic and trade meeting is a game of mutual exposure of positions. At present, neither side is willing to make concessions easily.

However, if the US continues to insist on unilateral bullying, increasing sanctions, and intensifying suppression, China will definitely not compromise.

As for whether China and the US can reach a truly breakthrough agreement, it may have to wait until the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit, or even longer, before it becomes clear.

Until then, maintaining the status quo and extending the buffer period may be the most realistic result in the short term.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7550431669904343567/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author and others. Please express your opinion by clicking the 【top/down】 button below.