Liu Juti: Five Chinese experts in the United States have almost remarks that punitive tariffs will be the permanent factor in Sino -US relations in the visible future.

When will the punitive tariff disappear?On May 21, the annual seminar of the National Committee of the United States and China Relations was based on the current status of Sino -US relations, and invited five Chinese experts who worked in the US government under different presidential leadership.The answer to this question is almost unique: In the visible future, punitive tariffs will be the permanent factor in Sino -US relations.

Why do these Chinese Tong think that punitive tariffs will be a new normal for habit?Although the removal of tariffs is related to whether the trade negotiations have reached an agreement, my understanding is that even if the trade negotiation has reached a specific agreement, the punitive tariffs may also exist in the agreement in several forms.

As we all know, Chinese negotiating representatives strongly believe that as the basis of reaching, punitive tariffs must be completely canceled after reaching an agreement.The US negotiating representatives also strongly believe that, as a guarantee of the actual execution agreement, a punitive tariffs in a form of form should continue.In other words, the United States regards tariffs as the guarantee of the agreement, and China believes that this is an unequal clause.

This shows that if the United States insists on removing punishment tariffs 100 % when signing a contract, the most likely is to cancel some tariffs or reduce the percentage of tariffs. In additionSexual tariffs, as a handle that allows China to implement commitments, and China is not allowed to retaliate.This angle makes China unacceptable, because its premise is that the United States monitor the internal execution of China like a policeman, which involves China's sovereignty.

It is worth noting that these five Chinese issues have questioned Trump's Chinese policy, so their estimates of punitive tariffs may reflect the current political reality of the United States, rather than a specific to ChinaAttitude.

Why is it difficult to eliminate punishment tariffs?

Former National Security Council's senior director of Asian Affairs Evan Medeiros believes that in the next few years, punitive tariffs will continue to exist, which will be the new normal of Sino -US trade.Even if a new president was selected in the United States in 2020, it is difficult to eliminate punitive tariffs in politics.

Douglas Paal, deputy dean of Carnegie International Peace Research Institute, President of Reagan and President Bush Bush, believes that in three, six months, or even 12 months laterThe commentators will say that the tariffs are not so bad, and the tariff will become like a wallpaper, which is becoming more and more difficult to eliminate, because no one feels special pain, and there is no political motivation to remove it.

Stephen Orlins, president of the State Committee of the State Committee of the US -China Relations, believes that tariffs will still cause pain in the United States, especially for farmers. Maybe before the 2020 presidential election, the tariff issue will form the Trump administration for formationIncreasing political pressure must be eliminated.

Daniel Russe, Vice President of the Institute of Policy Research, International Security and Foreign Affairs; Daniel Russe believes that the story of tariffs is a bit like a frog in boiling water: if a frog is suddenly put in boiling water, it will beJump out, but if it puts it in warm water, and then slowly boil until it is burned, it will not detect the danger.

Russell believes that the problem of tariffs may not be a bipolar opposition, or it may be reduced from 25%to 5%, or exempt certain products.However, Olens believes that once retaliatory tariffs are attracted, this will make American goods lack competitiveness in price. The US Soy Farmers will believe that the United States has lost the market MDASH; mdash; not only the phenomenon in 2019, but also permanentlyLost the market sexually.

I think that interpretation of these experts can use some data as a reference.According to a report from the US television network CNBC on May 7, when Trump threatened a new round of tariffs on China on May 5, although the global stock market was turbulent, the leaders of major American companies at that time did not regard tariffs regarding the tariffs depending on the tariffs at that time.One of the most important issues in the trade war.

CNBC investigated its global chief financial officer council from April 23rd to 30th. These council members represented some of the world's largest listed companies and private companies to jointly grasp the market value of nearly $ 5 trillion.Of the 45 of the 124 global members responded to the survey (20 in North America, 15 in Europe, 10 in the Middle East, Africa and Asia -Pacific regions), only 5%of the US chief financial officer believed that the tariffs would be reduced before 2016 to 2016The level is a question they want to see a trade agreement with China.Only 5%of the US chief financial officer mentioned that cancellation of tariffs is urgently needed to solve.

40%of the chief financial officers believe that the largest issue in the Sino -US trade agreement is to strengthen the implementation of US patents and trademark protection. Another 30%of the chief financial officers interviewed said that they hope to increase the opportunity to enter the Chinese market in the Chinese market.

The resident scholar of the American Institute of the American Business Institute and the international trade expert, Derek Scissors, analyzes the data: Despite various noise, the tariffs (at least so far) are not the economy outside the US agriculture.important.Once a new round of tariffs become a reality, it may change the level of attention of the enterprise, depending on the industry's difference.

At that time, Shi Kendao said: If we have a 25%tariff on Chinese goods that have been $ 200 billion for a long time, China will definitely retaliate Hellip; Hellip; China cannot match us in import tariffs. Their most likely goal is American companies operating in China.Therefore, the next segmentation is likely to be those companies that do not account for a large proportion of sales revenue in China, they will continue to pay attention to the issue of intellectual property rights and market access;(Such as Apple, Boeing, Caterpillar, etc.), tariffs will become their biggest problems.

This shows that the response caused by punitive tariffs in American society is still fermenting, and it cannot be estimated that it will play the role it will play in the US election next year with the reaction of certain industries.However, if trade tensions have dragged down global economic growth, especially threatening the investment and growth of the United States, and increasing consumer burdens, the American internal political assessment may change.

Why is it difficult for China and the United States to reach a trade agreement?

At the Seminar of the National Committee of the United States and China Relations, these China Tong also expressed pessimism to reaching an agreement in the short term.Mai Awen believes that even if the United States has chosen a new president in 2020, it will not change the current tone of China policy.Many people think that China is a very tough and difficult negotiating opponent, but Mai Aiwen believes that in order to reach an agreement with China, there must be five factors: both parties must feel the urgency of time, and both parties must think that negotiations treat themselves to themselves to themselves.Infinite, those responsible for negotiations are authorized to negotiate, and the two parties often meet (because the political space and time are very limited), and the highest leaders of the two sides unanimously determine to reach an agreement.

However, according to Mai Aiwen's experience, in reality, it is very difficult to have five factors at any time.During the Obama period, the United States was annoyed by not actively discussing and solving the problem of North Korea and the South China Sea, so it would openly accuse China to create urgency.The impression of the United States is that China has the motivation to fight for negotiations when he is under pressure, but once the pressure is rising, the negotiation process will be disturbed.

Former U.S. State Department spokesman and Asia -Pacific Affairs Assistant Secretary of State Susan Thornton said: There is a popular saying that unless it is facing a crisis, it is difficult to achieve results when negotiating with the Chinese;And this becomes a self -evidence prediction, forcing the negotiating opponent to create crisis to promote the two parties to reach an agreement. However, in this case, it will inevitably make China feel that the United States is coerced by the United States, causing internal opposition in China, making the agreement reaching an agreement moreIt's difficult.

Why did the Sino -US trade negotiation suddenly reverse?

The sudden reversal of the Sino -US trade negotiations increased the US tariffs on 200 billion Chinese goods on May 10 to 25%.The U.S. government's speech belongs to the Chinese side, and China believes that the United States is impermanent.How does Ollen ask the speaker here to think of this?Does it echo the experience of negotiating with China before?

From the perspective of Russell, the real problem is: If the Sino -US trade negotiations reach an agreement, what will the future Sino -US relations look like?He believes that before the recent round of negotiations, the senior leaders of Zhongnanhai may see the full text of the agreement and Trump's Twitter of victory.For this reason, it takes historic responsibilities.This made them wrapped in.

Kenneth Lieberthal recalled that during China when China joined the WTO, during the negotiation of the China -US bilateral trade agreement, the text was English and never translated into Chinese, so China has never seen the decision -making leaders.The first time Chinese senior leaders knew the content of the agreement, when Zhu Rongji arrived in Washington to prepare to sign an agreement, a staff member of the White House put the entire text on the White House webpage; when Chinese leaders read this agreement in the country, Zhu Rongji had a good job.Trouble, so the two sides must restart the negotiations.

Li Kanru pointed out that it is obvious that as a representative of the negotiation, there must be the authorization of the highest leader, but in the process, everything may change before the signing of the agreement.Opinion.

Bao Daoge pointed out that once in the early days of the trade war, Trump changed his position overnight, because the night before, he saw a host criticizing the US Treasury Minister Mnuchin on TV the night beforeresult.

Regarding the statement that Chinese opposition to reflect the trade agreement through legislative procedures, Bao Daoge believes that this is a pseudo -proposition.In his opinion, what role can the legislation play under the one -party system?If you can get the administrative order of the State Council of China, it is already the best result; whether there are legislative procedures will not affect the true execution ability of the court or local governments.Bao Daoge even doubted that this requirement is that someone with ulterior motives treats it as a seemingly seductive and in fact that it will only cause failure to fail, so as to make the two sides unreasonable.

Who is a revised country?

In the first national security strategy report released by the White House in December 2017, China defines China as a revisionist country and China is a strategic competitor in the United States.The origin of the definition of the speaker here, and when and when the United States starts to regard China as a strategic competitor?

Bao Daoge said that the Chinese often asked him about this question. His answer was that we should treat such a report as what he always saw from the car mirror from the car.Bao Daoge believes that this concept regards both Russia and China as a revisionist country. However, when the drafters of this report recently gave a public speech in Pennsylvania, the audience here asked him what the revisionist country meant, and he couldn't say that he couldn't say it.Come.So from the perspective of Bao Daoge, this concept is just proposed. It seems to need to enter a new context. It sounds theoretical and strategic, but lacks organizational and practical strategies to make this term really meaning.

Dong Yunshang explained that the report was drafted by a small circle, and it was introduced after a fast internal review process.She did not think that this was a top -down process, nor was it a topic that Trump himself was very concerned.But this strategy was later held by others in the government.

Dong Yunshang believes that the Chinese have never liked others to make articles based on their internal documents. Therefore, she explained to the Chinese that although this strategic report is publicly public, it is also an internal document of the US government.It does not mean the unified caliber of various US departments.

Li Kanru believes that he has never read or heard Trump himself applied this term, but as China rises, China does want to re -set up something, but Trump also wants to re -consider the previous rules, so who argues who are arguingIt is not significant to modifyism.

Russell believes that there is a document about strategy does not mean that the United States really has strategy.More importantly, is the president and government departments cooperating together and moving towards the common goal?Do you communicate with each other?This is available in the Obama administration, but if there is no real consensus between the president and various departments, then such a so -called strategic document cannot form a real strategy.

What is the purpose of the United States as an opponent and even the enemy?What can I get?Russell also said that the less communication channels between the United States and China, the more motivated China has won a decisive advantage on issues such as global governance, even to protect its own interests.

Mai Awen believes that if you want to make the Chinese policy in the United States, you must meet several basic requirements: there must be a good program. This program must be both bottomed or top -down. The government mustAll departments must have a mechanism for debate and discussion, and set the order in order to determine which matter is prioritized, and then the person in charge of the main department makes suggestions to the White House.This process requires government officials who have established concerns about Chinese policies, and the National Security Council is such a mechanism.

Is it a revisionist country to China, and Mai Aiwen's answer is: Yes.Mai Awen believes that from 2019, China is one foot, and the other is outside. In terms of the South China Sea, human rights, and fulfilling the WTO commitment, China will challenge international rules, but in other respectsWhen your own interests, you will be willing to abide by international rules.

Therefore, in Mai Awen's view, China is now in a transition period, and it is exploring what is in line with its own interests and what is not in line with.But the most dangerous thing is that the United States itself looks more like a revisionist country, which will make this consideration more complicated; this is not just to say that the Trump administration has weakened international norms in many ways.For example, Mai Awen pointed out that national protection responsibility is a very modified concept, because it weaken traditional national sovereignty, but on the other hand, Mai Awen believes that he has enough reasons to worry about what China will be like.Rise power.

At the Future Security Forum held in Washington in early May, Kiron Skinner, director of Policy Planning of the United States, said in his speech that China is a unique long -term threat, and the US government faces a struggle with a truly different civilization.She said: This is the first time we have a powerful competitor with non -white people.Olens asked the experts here on this civilized conflict exposition.

Dong Yunshang believes that unfortunately, the frequency of this speech among 1.4 billion Chinese people is far exceeding the circulation of 330 million Americans.But she believes that this does not reflect the views of most Americans, nor is it enough to reflect the relationship between China and the United States.

But does this exposition reflect the internal ideas of the US State Department and even the National Security Council?

Mai Awen believes that explaining some of the Trump administration's speech is difficult because there is no formal procedure.It is difficult to see if the State Council departments support the Secretary of State, or whether the Secretary of State can integrate the power of the department.Taking Sino -US relations as a conflict between civilization is not good for anyone, which hintsYou will move towards a very competitive relationship, which does not conform to the interests of the United States.Russell believes that, in addition to racial discrimination, with such glasses to see the world, and suddenly the competitors become enemies at once, it will cause the negative effect of hysteria.

Conclusion

From these information shared by China, we can feel that the removal of punitive tariffs cannot be determined by the trade agreement in the short term alone.In addition to the trade agreement may retain part of the tariff mechanism, the more important reason is that the current trade war has extended to the scientific and technological war and ideological wrestling.Under such circumstances, tariffs are likely to be re -proposed from time to time. As a negotiating chip, creating crisis scenes, and even becoming a punishment or incentive mechanism for defining the relationship between the two parties.

Over time, if the two parties or any party feel that the trade agreement itself cannot essentially solve the most critical conflict between the two parties, it will be more and more difficult to reach an agreement in the short term.

Therefore, the important inspiration of these experts gives us that when considering the strategy of dealing with the trade war, China cannot restrain too much hope on the sound of tariffs against tariffs in the United States.The economy has a negative impact, and more companies, groups and consumers will stand up to oppose tariffs, but whether these objections are sufficient to cause a complete political direction change, it remains to be observed.

I think the biggest revelation of the trade war is that the motivation, purpose, or strategies of both parties cannot be changed. In the process of recruiting, receiving, and recruiting, each party will react, which will affect the interaction between the two parties and redefine the relationship between the two parties.Essence

(Note: This article only represents the author's personal point of view. Responsible for the mailbox [email protected])