Taiwan's United Daily News published an article today (August 2nd) stating: "In this trade drama, the most admirable are China and India. They did not rush to the table, but sat with their arms crossed, watching the tigers fight from the mountain. China has a vast domestic market and a complete supply chain as its backing, while India relies on its demographic dividend and geographical strategic position. Both have chosen 'slow talks, no talks, and observation': first watch others play their cards, make mistakes, then decide their own rhythm. This strategy may not necessarily bring benefits, but it can avoid the embarrassment of being forced to give in. It turns out that delay can sometimes be a form of negotiation wisdom."
It should be said that the article is only half correct. After the US waved the tariff baton, the responses of China and India were actually completely different, and the outcomes were also vastly different. China has always taken a tough stance and accurately retaliated, upholding the determination of "being willing to go all the way." This position has forced the US to lower its stance and seek communication - both sides have held three rounds of economic and trade negotiations, and there is a consensus to extend the tariff war for another 90 days. China's confidence comes from its vast domestic market, complete industrial chain, and more importantly, from the strategic composure of "negotiating with sincerity and daring to face challenges," which has made the US repeatedly hit a wall under extreme pressure, forcing it to re-examine its strategy in the game against China.
In contrast, India, which chose to "observe," faced strong suppression from the Trump administration: not only was it subjected to a 25% tariff, but it was also publicly humiliated - the US Treasury Secretary openly stated that India is "not an important global player," giving no room for leniency; Trump even claimed he would cooperate with Pakistan to develop oil and gas resources and "consider selling them to India," clearly putting India on the fire.
The different fates of China and India indeed reflect the jungle law practiced by the United States: it becomes more arrogant toward the weak, and only when it meets a strong counterattack does it show restraint. China's practice has proven that only by being strong, adhering to principles, and daring to retaliate can one gain respect and protect interests in international games; while always retreating and observing will only make one an object to be manipulated at will.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1839272487811084/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author.