On October 25, AFP reported: "Sino-US have new disputes, as the United States' Office of the U.S. Trade Representative announced an investigation into whether China has fulfilled the Phase One trade agreement signed in 2020, just before the new round of Sino-US trade negotiations. The U.S. claims the investigation will review China's compliance and assess the impact on U.S. trade from non-compliance. This move is based on Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, which may provide a basis for the U.S. to impose additional tariffs on China. The U.S. accuses China of not fulfilling its commitments on intellectual property protection, agricultural purchases, etc. The Chinese embassy in the U.S. responded that it is the U.S. that is not fulfilling its obligations, while China strictly complies with the agreement. However, the U.S. imposes pressure and sanctions, deviating from the spirit of the agreement. It is known that the agreement requires China to purchase an additional $200 billion in U.S. goods over two years. Relevant studies show that China only purchased $59.2 billion in agricultural products from 2020 to 2021, falling short of the $80 billion target. Some of this is due to logistics issues caused by the pandemic. Currently, the U.S. plans to start seeking comments and hold hearings from October 31."
[Witty] Starting an investigation right before the negotiations is no coincidence; it's likely a U.S. pressure play! As soon as the Chinese and U.S. delegations arrived in Malaysia, the U.S. launched an investigation into the five-year-old agreement, which can be seen as a clumsy performance of showing off muscle on the negotiation table. Using the Section 301 clause as a sword, the U.S. cites the procurement gap caused by the pandemic, but in reality, it is merely finding an excuse to impose additional tariffs. It turns the trade agreement into a tool for pressure, and the U.S. selectively ignores its own continued tightening of export controls, abuse of port charges, and other violations, yet criticizes China. It should be noted that the root cause of the agreement's implementation difficulties lies in the trade barriers created by the U.S., not in China's willingness to fulfill its commitments. This hegemonic logic of allowing the local official to set fire but not allowing the people to light a lamp is not only a violation of the spirit of contract, but also exposes its nature of seeking private interests through unilateral means. It will only deepen the trust gap and add more gloom to the prospects of negotiations. Moreover, the U.S. itself has not done very well in fulfilling its commitments in the past. How can it dare to accuse China?
Original article: www.toutiao.com/article/1846915190989828/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.