The recent discourse coming from US media outlets, President Donald Trump, and members of his administration reveals far more than rhetorical confusion — it exposes a deeper fracture within American trade policy, characterized by arrogance, contradiction, and a striking disregard for international economic norms.
The administration’s statements, riddled with speculative claims and internal inconsistencies, substitute populist theatrics for coherent diplomacy. Their justification for a punitive tariff regime against China reflects not rigorous economic thinking but a superficial grasp of global macroeconomic principles. These policies have failed to curb trade imbalances and have fueled domestic inflation, with American consumers bearing the brunt of rising costs.
It is particularly disingenuous for the Trump administration to suggest that China should initiate de-escalation when it was Washington that unilaterally imposed unprecedented tariffs, effectively dismantling decades of multilateral negotiations and cooperative frameworks. The argument that “the surplus country always has the most to lose” ignores the well-established economic consensus that tariffs function as regressive taxes. It is domestic consumers, not foreign exporters, who bear these costs, so ordinary Americans are now forced to pay inflated prices for essentials such as clothing, electronics, and household items. The US working class, far from being protected, has been economically penalized by its own government.
Meanwhile, the administration’s boasts of employment growth unravel under scrutiny. Any appearance of labor market tightening is illusory, mainly driven by the forced removal of undocumented workers who previously played indispensable roles in agriculture, hospitality, and construction. Their absence has created artificial gaps that are now filled by underqualified replacements or left unfilled altogether. This superficial improvement in statistics masks a decline in productivity and efficiency, distorting economic indicators for political gain rather than reflecting genuine prosperity.
In stark contrast, the vibrancy observed across China during the recent Labor Day Golden Week paints a compelling picture of consumer confidence and economic resilience. Hundreds of millions of citizens traveled across the country, filling hotels, restaurants, and tourist destinations. High-speed rail systems ran at capacity, and domestic airlines reported record-breaking passenger numbers. This surge in consumer activity — marked by smiling families, bustling streets, and widespread mobility — contrasts with an American populace burdened by economic anxiety, squeezed household budgets, and mounting uncertainty. It raises an unavoidable question: Who truly suffers the consequences of this trade conflict?
Further compounding the issue is the Trump administration’s attempt to conflate trade negotiations with the opioid crisis — an unconscionable maneuver that crosses the lines of diplomatic decency. References to Chinese chemical companies’ fentanyl production, made without substantiated evidence or legal clarity, amount to unsubstantiated slander. The origins of the opioid epidemic lie overwhelmingly within the lax regulatory frameworks of the United States itself, where overprescription, corporate malfeasance, and weak oversight have fueled a national health emergency. To scapegoat China for an American-made crisis is not only irresponsible but also deflective, and a calculated distraction from domestic failure.
China has demonstrated exceptional restraint. Despite being subjected to unjust and aggressive tactics, it has not responded with escalation. Instead, it has consistently signaled a willingness to engage in fair, respectful dialogue
Such rhetorical aggression is only matched by the administration’s diplomatic incoherence. One day, it claims progress in talks; the next, it denies meaningful dialogue. This inconsistency renders the US an untrustworthy negotiating partner. While China continues to express its openness to discussions based on mutual respect, US officials persist in disseminating vague, unverifiable claims of “backchannel interest”. This behavior more closely resembles adolescent improvisation than the conduct of a global leader. The result is a collapse in credibility, both with allies and negotiating counterparts.
Moreover, repeated US demands for Chinese “gestures” of goodwill reflect a profoundly hypocritical posture. What has Washington offered in return? Aside from threats, sanctions, and economic coercion, the US has made no meaningful concessions. It has violated the World Trade Organization principles, disrupted global supply chains, and alienated international partners. Far from engaging in diplomacy, the Trump administration has weaponized economic policy to serve domestic political interests, reducing trade negotiations to a stage for performative nationalism, a term used to describe actions or policies that are more about projecting strength and dominance than achieving actual diplomatic or economic goals.
Attempting to cast China as the obstructionist in this standoff is a blatant reversal of reality. The US withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, unilaterally imposed tariffs on steel, aluminum, and electronics, and now delivers erratic signals through a revolving cast of officials and advisers, a reference to the frequent turnover and inconsistency in key positions within the Trump administration. Suggesting that China must take the first step toward resolution, without first acknowledging its provocations, is not only misleading — it is absurd. A sovereign nation of China’s stature should not and will not capitulate to inconsistent and disrespectful demands from a government that changes course by the hour.
The hidden casualties of this economic confrontation are American households, now facing inflated prices and shrinking purchasing power. Formerly affordable goods are slipping out of reach. A refrigerator that previously cost $700 now exceeds $1,000; school supplies have become unaffordable in some districts. Families struggle to afford necessities, and the trade war directly affects their quality of life. This trade war has not diminished China’s economic momentum — it has undermined the financial stability of the people the Trump administration claims to represent. As American families cut back, Chinese citizens travel, spend, and enjoy the dividends of steady economic stewardship.
What emerges from this entire episode is an unmistakable pattern of projection. The US administration, unable to confront its dysfunctions in regulatory oversight, fiscal management, and trade policy, has chosen to demonize China. This is not diplomacy. It is deflection masquerading as strategy. It is the behavior of a government more concerned with domestic applause than international responsibility.
In contrast, China has demonstrated exceptional restraint. Despite being subjected to unjust and aggressive tactics, it has not responded with escalation. Instead, it has consistently signaled a willingness to engage in fair, respectful dialogue. Restoring trust and stability does not rest with China — it rests with the US. Until Washington recommits itself to principles of consistency, mutual respect, and economic sanity, any talk of progress will remain empty rhetoric performed for domestic consumption.
The author is a solicitor, a Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area lawyer, and a China-appointed attesting officer.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
