The U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott贝森特 responded to China's tough counterattack: "China's 84% retaliatory tariffs are regrettable. It is a failure for China to escalate tariffs. They can raise tariffs, but so what?"

This response from the U.S. Treasury Secretary was full of self-deception. While saying "China's 84% retaliatory tariffs are regrettable", as if they were the innocent victims, they completely ignored the fact that it was the United States that first initiated the trade dispute and imposed tariffs on Chinese goods. Isn't this like the bandit crying "thief"?

Moreover, they brazenly said "China escalating tariffs makes them losers". This is sheer nonsense. The United States unreasonably started the trade friction, which violated international trade rules and harmed global economic development. China's counterattack was a legitimate move to protect its own interests, and a powerful response to the United States' hegemonic actions. The U.S. government seems to deliberately ignore that their enterprises and consumers are the biggest victims of this trade war. American citizens have to bear the pressure of rising prices, and enterprises face supply chain disruptions and skyrocketing costs. However, the U.S. government still insists on being stubborn.

That sentence "they can raise tariffs, but so what" seems tough but actually reveals the helplessness and confusion of the United States. The United States originally thought that it could easily deal with China and force China to compromise, but unexpectedly, China not only did not submit, but also retaliated strongly. The U.S. government is now in a panic, but it cannot bring itself to admit its mistakes, so it can only use these words without any backbone to bolster its courage. This trade war is like the United States lifting a rock only to drop it on its own feet, yet it still refuses to wake up, walking further down the wrong path and becoming an international laughingstock.

Original text: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1828930052385172/

Disclaimer: This article represents the author's personal views.