Learning is the recognition of the models, identifying an image before all its constituent points are explicitly connected. What is the model formed by the following “points” – all the international commercial events that have occurred over the eight years between two American presidential inaugurations on January 20, 2017 and 2025?
First, President Donald Trump imposed 25% tariffs on goods of Chinese origin under article 301 of the 1974 law, as modified. Throughout his mandate, US President Joe Biden maintained the prices imposed by his predecessor and successor, and has increased 100%.
Second, Biden hardened export controls on sensitive technology (for example, advanced semiconductors). The People’s Republic of China responded in a tit-for-tat, in particular imposing limits to rare land expeditions to the United States.
Third, in his first and second mandates, Trump promised a “America First” trade policy, which, in the Biden Interregnum, has become the euphemism “commercial policy adapted to workers”. In perhaps the biggest commercial difference between them, Biden negotiated the Indo-Pacific economic framework of Big, the yawn (IPEF) after Trump was stupidly withdrawn from the best trade agreement to contain China-the transpacific partnership (TPP).
Fourth, during the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump threatened with an additional 10%, even 100-200%, prices on China, plus 25% prices in Canada and Mexico if they did not control their borders against fentanyl and undocumented migrants. He also proposed a universal rate of perhaps 10 to 60% on goods from all other countries. These threats continued after taking office. He refined the universal tariff threat: perhaps it would be 25%, gradually gradually by increase of 2.5%, to rectify the trade deficit of the United States and protect American jobs. In response to such threats, President Xi Jinping de China, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum promised to priced American manufacturing goods in retaliation.
Fifth, throughout this disruption, the World Trade Organization of 166 members (WTO) was and continues to be a non -factor. His “Supreme Court” (the appeal organization), devoid of new members necessary to replace limited terms, because the United States opposes all candidates as a judiciary, is a zero ensemble. Thus, the first world commercial body was largely helpless in the police of its fundamental rules promoting trade liberalization, those dating from the General Agreement on prices and trade (GATT).
These points were added the spectacular events of the end of January – at the beginning and in February 2025, namely: the threats of imposing 25% of prices at all reciprocal prices, threats from all countries, threaten to hit all the goods of all countries, of reciprocal tariffs, threats, threats to fight 10% of prices on all Chinese goods.
The diagram connecting them, and many other points, is an “aggressive neo-mercantilism”. The image formed is a paradigm shift in the theory and the practice of world trade, of a provision to free trade, with a tolerance for managed trade, to an adoption of protectionism justified by national security.
Trade no longer concerns economic opening for harmony among nations. From now on, from the point of view of the United States, trade is to repel “the other” – read, China – to extend the pre -eminence of Washington after the Second World War. In the post-colonial account of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), trade is an operator, as for the middle kingdom after the wars of opium 1839-1842 and 1856-1860.
Therefore, for the United States and China, trade is not just a matter of trade, and prices are not only prices. Trade also encompasses cargoes of non -important characteristics, in order to reach an ostensible safe wearing, the beacon of which is not efficiency, not friendship and certainly not generosity – but national security. This port flag says: “Aggressive neo-mercantilism”.
The means and small powers have no choice but to imitate or drown.