Trial Time

Around the Chinese Lunar New Year, the trade interaction of the four major economies of China, the United States and Japan is worthy of attention.

First of all, the Sino -US trade consultation made important progress (Trump). Second, the EU and Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) officially took effect on February 1.The favorable signals of the four major economies of the release of the release seem to have issued spring information for global trade, and also provided optimistic expectations for the global market.

However, through the phenomenon, the essence can also be seen.

On the one hand, Sino -US trade negotiations are not the results of the two strongers to deepen globalization, but the compromise under the forced force of US trade protectionism.Moreover, the 90 -day trade battle between China and the United States is also full of suffering from US trade bullying.If it is difficult to reach an agreement on March 1, the United States will increase the tariffs levied by US $ 200 billion in US dollars in China from 10%to 25%.Even if the two countries reached a phased agreement, they could not solve the structural problems of Sino -US trade.Because the United States' trade thinking with China is no longer a deeper interest relationship, but China is regarded as the main opponent.

Washington has almost no rationality and peace, only the hustle and bustle of the hawk.Moreover, the Sino -US trade war is only a manifestation. The United States curbing China has extended to a comprehensive level of science and technology and geopolitics.Therefore, the comprehensive game between China and the United States is still full of uncertainty.In addition, US President Trump will not give up the US priority policy, and US trade protectionism and unilateralism will still be the main theme of the White House.The United States has become the biggest threat of global and multilateralism.

On the other hand, EPA EPA is effective, and the establishment of the world's largest free trade zone is also the result of US trade protectionism.During the Obama era, the United States dominated the cross -Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), which aims to build the world's highest level of free trade zone with the highest level in the world and dominates global trade rules in the United States.

After Trump came to power, the United States exited the TPP, and Japan took over the narrow version of TPPMDASH; mdash; the so -called comprehensive progress TPP (CPTPP, a comprehensive progress agreement for cross -Pacific partners), but CPTPP shrinks 60%in trade volume, and the level of free tradeAlso greatly reduced.

In addition, the negotiations between the China -Japan -Korea Free Trade Zone were stagnant, and the 10 countries in Asia were initiated, inviting regional comprehensive economic partnerships in China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and India (10+6, RCEP).CPTPP is stagnant.Asia -Pacific's expected free trade cooperation has both the blocking of US trade protectionism and the selectivity of Japanese factors. Therefore, Asia -Pacific Free Trade Cooperation is also in trouble.

The Trump administration is not interested in the multilateral framework. In the trade frictions of the three major economies of Hezhong, Europe, and Japan, it also seems to have achieved priority in the United States.More importantly, the United States, Canada, and Mexico North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was broken by the United States and replaced by the New North American Free Trade Agreement (USMCA), which will also encourage Trump to move towards unilateralism.

Trade consultations between China and the United States seem to have made progress, and the EU and Japan have also established the world's largest free trade zone.The four major economic and trade bodies seem to interact with benign, but the heating of Japan and Europe's hugs, and the trade consultation between China and the United States, are all the results of trade protectionism.Because the United States has not abandoned the U.S. priority goal and strengthened the limit of trading partners, there is still uncertainty in the global trade prospects, and it is difficult to break the dilemma of unilateralism.

It is worth mentioning that even if the Sino -US trade friction reached an agreement in February, Sino -US trade has changed from interest to structural contradictions.Sino -US mutual trust is seriously lacking. The United States is no longer a purely demand for trade balance in China. It also hopes that through the method of scientific and technological warfare, China threatens new technology in the United States in the 5G era.

In addition, the United States is also full of doubts about the manufacturing strategy of the Chinese government under the leadership of the Chinese government. It also accuses China of stealing technology and infringement of intellectual property rights. It requires China to be more open to foreign capital and adopt verified ways to make the United States convinced that the Chinese government's commitment has achieved practical results.EssenceThe United States puts on a tight curse for China to block China's development, so the Sino -US game will be a long -term difficult process.The long -term and complexity of the Sino -US game not only allows globalization to be limited to the fight between China and the United States, but also allows other economies to fall into it.

In addition, the United States is promoting reforms that have excluded China beyond the World Trade Organization (WTO), and it seems that some responses from EU countries and Japan.If the Sino -US game is unbalanced, it will trigger the reorganization and disorders of the WTO multilateral framework mechanism, which will trigger unimportant global risks.At the same time, China has also created a new type of globalization through the Belt and Road Initiative, and the Western world is full of complex emotions such as observation, anxiety, and doubt.In this situation, it also makes the world face difficult choices.

From CPTPP to EPA, Japan has almost become the leader of global free trade, but Japan is obviously not an active promoter of globalization.Japan dominates CPTPP, one is because of the helplessness of the United States retreat, and the other is to check the needs of China.The European and Japanese EPA is caused by the US withdrawal from TPP and is also a secondary choice for Japan.After all, establishing a free trade zone with the European Union is obviously more in line with Japanese interests than the China -Japan -Korea Free Trade Zone.

Japan is a dominant country in foreign trade. The domestic market is narrow. It can only maintain the sustainable development of the Japanese economy through establishing a trade zone with trade partners.From the perspective of Japan's different attitudes towards CPTPP, EPA, RCEP, and the China -Japan -Korea Free Trade Zone, Japan's multilateralism is selective.

The European Union faces the trouble of Brexit, domestic populism, Merkel's political mission is about to end, Macron encounters yellow vest movements, and other troubles. The US and European trade is also trapped.The EU's choice and signing EPA with Japan are also based on cautious interests. On the one hand, it can buffer the pressure of US trade protectionism; on the other hand, it can relieve the anxiety of China's economic and trade strength growth.

China, the United States, Europe, and Japan are the main points of global trade. The interaction between China and the United States and Europe and Japan does not mean that the haze of trade protectionism is dispelled, but globalization has fallen into a more complex game pattern.Unilateralist dilemma is also difficult to crack in the short term.

The author is a senior researcher at the China Chahar Society Passenger researcher at Renmin University of China Chongyang Financial Research Institute