logo
Xi Jinping goes on charm offensive as Asia reels from tariff whiplash

Xi Jinping goes on charm offensive as Asia reels from tariff whiplash

NBC News15-04-2025

HONG KONG — Chinese President Xi Jinping is turning on the charm as he looks to sweep up the shards of America's shattered economic relationships.
As the world's markets and leaders try to absorb the impact of the market chaos unleashed by the Trump administration's announcement and softening of sweeping tariffs on almost all U.S. trading partners, Xi embarked on a trip through Southeast Asia. After a visit to Vietnam, he landed in Malaysia on Tuesday.
'A trade war and tariff war will produce no winner, and protectionism will lead nowhere,' he wrote in the Vietnamese newspaper Nhan Dan. 'Our two countries should resolutely safeguard the multilateral trading system, stable global industrial and supply chains, and an open and cooperative international environment.'
President Donald Trump has interpreted Xi's words, as well as his Chinese counterpart's meetings with the leaders of the major economies in China's backyard, as Beijing getting together for a 'lovely meeting' with one of the countries worst hit by tariffs 'to figure out, 'how do we screw the United States of America?''
The message Xi is sending on his tour is loud and clear. China is seeking to capitalize on the Trump administration's truculence to cast itself as the world's preferred trading partner.
That Xi's rare Southeast Asian tour started with Vietnam is no accident. Trump's punishing 46% tariff on the country will hammer the economy of a country that is the sixth largest source of U.S. imports and a third of whose gross domestic product relies on trade with the U.S.
After Malaysia, which received a 24% levy from the U.S., Xi is expected to visit Cambodia — hit by 49% duties. He will do so after telling his Vietnamese counterpart, To Lam, that Beijing and Hanoi must 'jointly oppose unilateral bullying and safeguard the global free trade system,' according to China's state-run broadcaster CCTV News.
Xi's junket is just the beginning of a broader response to Trumponomics, analysts say.
The Chinese leader 'happily sees Donald Trump destroying, undermining, discrediting, deliberate international order in order to make it easier for him to push for the transformation of the international order into something 'better,'' says Steve Tsang, director of the China Institute at the SOAS (School of Oriental and African Studies) University of London.
Winning over Southeast Asia, with its developing economies already largely dependent on Beijing, will be the easy part.
Slightly more difficult for Xi will be supplanting the U.S. as the biggest trading partner of the European Union.
Last week, Xi told Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez that the bloc should join forces with China to oppose 'unilateral bullying' and defend the 'international rules and order' — words almost identical to ones he used this week in Hanoi.
While Beijing followed that up Monday with a statement emphasizing Sino-European unity, Washington has made things easy for Xi, says Wang Dong, executive director of Peking University's Institute for Global Cooperation.
'China doesn't have to 'drive a wedge' between the U.S. and its allies,' Wang told NBC News. 'Rather, the bullying and cruel manner the Trump administration rolled out the punitive tariffs, along with the unpredictability and selfishness manifested by the U.S., have already driven US allies and partners closer to Beijing.'
A thaw in relations has already begun. E.U. leaders last week agreed to revive negotiations on the prices of electric vehicles — they imposed a 45% tariff on low-emission Chinese cars in October — despite fears that Chinese products may flood the European market if the U.S. keeps in place its 145% levy on Chinese imports.
But that softening comes amid a raft of economic disputes between the world's second- and third-largest economies. It may also be difficult to achieve more due to China's one-party rule and concerns over human rights allegations.
'Lots of people don't share China's political values,' said Kerry Brown, professor of Chinese studies and director of the Lau China Institute at King's College London.
More difficult still will be warming up long-standing U.S. allies in Asia — specifically Japan and South Korea — whose economies will suffer the effects of 24% and 25% tariffs respectively, despite them scrambling teams of trade envoys within days of the tariff announcements.
The U.S. is both countries' main guarantor against security threats from China and Russia, and Tokyo's and Seoul's reactions are best summed up by the South Korean Foreign Ministry's comment Monday that 'bilateral dialogue with the United States is the most effective way to resolve the issue of U.S. tariff measures.'
But with China both countries' largest trading partner and Washington's increasingly spotty loyalty mean South Korea and Japan are essentially 'caught in a quandary,' Brown said. 'China is still practically a power you have to deal with.'
And if the carrot doesn't work, there's always the stick. Beijing holds at least one key piece of leverage over Washington and its allies.
China held more than $700 billion in U.S. government bonds — the proceeds from which the U.S. Treasury finances public expenditure — making it among the largest holders of such bonds.
If China sells those bonds, it will threaten America's ability to finance its debt, Brown said.
Between that, and Beijing wearing the reassuring face of a reliable trading partner, 'China's got itself into a relatively good position,' he added. 'And it annoys the hell out of America.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The fundamental battle which unites Donald Trump and Nigel Farage
The fundamental battle which unites Donald Trump and Nigel Farage

The Herald Scotland

time33 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

The fundamental battle which unites Donald Trump and Nigel Farage

There is a fundamental contest under way - with those who purport to be on the side of the people pitching themselves against those whom they decry as the failing Establishment. Look at the recent elections in the UK and the USA. Sir Keir Starmer did not enter Downing Street on a tide of love. Rather, he benefited from loathing directed at the departing Tories. A revulsion he helped foment. That does not mean that his election was illegitimate. Rather, that it is predicated upon disquiet and discontent, rather than optimism and hope. Read more by Brian Taylor In the USA, Donald Trump regained the White House by positing himself as the voice of a disgruntled people. A siren yelling at an Establishment which he chose to depict as anyone opposed to him. This political turmoil has common origins on both sides of the Atlantic; a sluggish, static economy. It can thus be traced back to the banking crash of 2008. Folk feel unsettled and discontented. Looking for scapegoats, they blame – or are exhorted to blame – those who have held power over a prolonged period. In EU countries like Germany and France, that has resulted in the rise of the populist Right, held off – just, so far – by more mainstream offers. In the USA, that has meant the election of a President – whose supporters previously stormed the Capitol building and who is now in direct conflict with counter-balancing elements of the Constitution he is pledged to uphold. Donald Trump won by decrying the entire political structure in the US. He won by pitching a populist appeal against elements he claimed had weakened America in search of self-interest. While corporate America sought calm constraint, he surrounded himself with individualistic, oligarchical figures whose chief talents lie in disruption, in challenging the status quo. Elon Musk has now left Team Trump, with a whimper of disquiet. He was never a team player, happier issuing orders rather than compromising. But, more, he fears that Trump's 'big beautiful bill' will counter his own cost-cutting efforts by devoting far too many dollars to defence spending. But, as we wish so long to Elon, there is now a far more significant controversy. A federal court has ruled that President Trump exceeded his powers on trade tariffs. Nigel Farage (Image: free) That is out to appeal. But President Trump's initial response is intriguing. He seeks to depict his rivals and the judiciary as part of an Establishment rump which he blames for undermining him – and, by extension, the America for which he purportedly stands. It is a quite deliberate and specific challenge to the entire structure of countervailing power upon which America is founded. President Trump summons up a crisis – then offers himself as the sole, incontestable solution. A tactic not unknown elsewhere down the decades and centuries. Generally associated with despots. Not that such a term should be applied to the elected 47th President of the United States of America. Across the US northern border, there is turmoil of a different kind – and the positing of an intriguing solution. While President Trump identifies and excoriates his enemies within, the Canadians are angry and unhappy over an external challenge. From Donald J. Trump who wants to annexe Canada as the 51st American state. Enter, briefly, King Charles. Opening the Canadian Parliament. Delivering the Speech from the Throne, as his mother did in 1977. The task usually falls to the Governor General, a term that speaks of times past. But the King sought to look to the future, from this troubled present. And his choice of language echoed our age of anxiety. A diplomatic nod to the annexation issue, vaunting Canada as 'strong and free'. His audience will not have missed the significance of the freedom reference. But he went further, adding: 'The Crown has for so long been a symbol of unity for Canada. It also represents stability and continuity from the past to the present.' In essence, the King was responding to a decidedly North American political conflict by offering a regal hand across the ocean. Equating monarchy with permanent reassurance. But what of the sovereign's regular home, this United Kingdom? Here too there is disquiet. But, more than that, there are signs of fragmentation in the political system, exemplified above all in the rise of Reform UK. Nigel Farage may attract adulation and loathing to varying degrees – but he is reading contemporary politics well. To be frank, that is scarcely difficult. Folk are thoroughly unhappy and, indeed, angry. They are upset over the cost of living, energy bills, taxation. They are discontented with the familiar political system, feeling it pays no heed to their concerns. Enter Nigel. He discloses a hitherto understated concern for those on benefits by offering to reverse Labour government constraint. Read more Mr Farage presents established parties with a conundrum. Do they ignore him and hope he fades away? Or do they, like the Prime Minister this week, assail his policies as unfunded, damaging drivel? Then there is Scotland. Firstly, that row with Anas Sarwar. Mr Farage plays innocent. He was only quoting the Scottish Labour leader who had hoped people of Asian heritage might enter politics. The Reform version had Mr Sarwar prioritising the Pakistani community. Mr Sarwar stresses he intended no such thing – and calls Mr Farage a spiv for good measure. This particular controversy will subside – although canine whistles can persist, faintly. But there is a broader issue, which has featured in the Hamilton by-election. Does Reform represent an enduring challenge to the already fractured Scottish political system? Scots are very far from immune in the age of anxiety. Plus, as The Herald disclosed, they now count immigration among their chief concerns. Each of the major political parties knows the response. They need to focus upon delivery, upon popular concerns. But they need to do so through measured, thoughtful discourse. The people will tolerate no less. Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre - and Dundee United FC

China hits back at Trump, saying U.S. actions 'severely undermine' trade truce
China hits back at Trump, saying U.S. actions 'severely undermine' trade truce

NBC News

timean hour ago

  • NBC News

China hits back at Trump, saying U.S. actions 'severely undermine' trade truce

HONG KONG — China on Monday accused the United States of breaching the 90-day trade truce agreed by the world's two largest economies, after President Donald Trump said it was Beijing that had 'totally violated' the agreement. Last month, the U.S. and China announced a 90-day pause on most of their tit-for-tat tariffs, which had reached higher than 100%. Trump initially hailed the truce as a 'total reset' but said Friday in a post on his Truth Social platform that China had 'TOTALLY VIOLATED' the deal. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce struck back at Trump's remarks Monday, saying that while China had implemented and actively upheld the deal, the U.S. had introduced a series of 'discriminatory and restrictive measures against China' that 'severely undermine' the agreement. The ministry said those measures included AI chip export controls, a reported pause on the sale of chip design software to China, and the announcement of U.S. plans to revoke the visas of Chinese students. 'Instead of reflecting on its own actions, it has falsely accused China of violating the consensus, which is a serious distortion of the facts,' the ministry said in a statement. 'China firmly rejects these groundless accusations.' The ministry urged the U.S. to 'immediately correct its erroneous practices' and vowed to take 'strong and resolute' measures if Washington 'insists on acting unilaterally and continues to harm China's interests,' without providing details. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sunday that China was 'holding back' exports of rare earths that it had agreed to release as part of the truce. 'That is not what a reliable partner does,' he said on the CBS news program 'Face the Nation.' Rare earth minerals are a crucial component of products that cut across the U.S. economy, including the tech sector, the energy industry and automobile manufacturing. China supplies 60% of the world's rare earth elements and is responsible for the refining of 90% of them, according to the International Energy Agency. Bessent, who said last week that U.S.-China trade talks were 'a bit stalled,' said he was 'confident' that rare earths exports and other details could be 'ironed out' in a call between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. 'Maybe it's a glitch in the Chinese system, maybe it's intentional. We'll see after the president speaks with the party chairman,' Bessent said, referring to Xi. Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, also suggested Sunday that the two leaders could speak as early as this week. 'President Trump, we expect, is going to have a wonderful conversation about the trade negotiations this week with President Xi,' he said on the ABC news program 'This Week.' Hassett said he was unsure whether a specific date for that conversation had been set. The last publicly known conversation between the U.S. and Chinese presidents was on Jan. 17, days before Trump's inauguration.

Trump attacks conservative judges, Federalist Society. Why?
Trump attacks conservative judges, Federalist Society. Why?

The Herald Scotland

timean hour ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Trump attacks conservative judges, Federalist Society. Why?

"I was new to Washington, and it was suggested that I use The Federalist Society as a recommending source on Judges," Trump said on Truth Social. "I am so disappointed in The Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous Judicial Nominations." With that, Trump shifted from being a Republican president with a strong legacy of appointing conservative judges to a Republican president with a growing legacy of attacking conservative judges. That's a bad sign for any of his upcoming judicial nominations. Trump turns on conservative legal movement he helped build Trump and former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, helped deliver Republicans a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court. A significant part of that effort was The Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization that advocates for an interpretation of the Constitution that adheres to its original meaning. During his first term, Trump's judicial picks were tightly curated by adviser Leonard Leo, then the executive vice president of The Federalist Society. Most notably, all three of Trump's Supreme Court picks - Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett - all had ties to the organization. Opinion: Vance is doing his best to help Trump tear down the Supreme Court These three justices had a hand in overturning Roe v. Wade, striking down unconstitutional firearm restrictions, striking down racist affirmative action practices, curbing the power of administrative state bureaucrats and blocking much of the illegal Biden agenda. Even beyond the Supreme Court, Trump nominated 226 federal judges during his first term, many of those nominations guided by Federalist Society advisers. When did Trump start to turn on conservative judges? While the beginning of this spiral happened when the Supreme Court refused to entertain his 2020 stolen election claims, things have accelerated in his second term. Now, originalist judges have halted Trump's unconstitutional trade policy and have ruled against parts of Trump's mass deportation attempts. Even so, Trump until now was reluctant to outright condemn The Federalist Society. After all, one of the high points of his conservative agenda was his redecorating of the American courts with top-tier judges. The track record of Federalist Society judges is nothing short of a resounding victory for conservatives and the single best accomplishment of Trump's first term in office. Opinion: Elon Musk is frustrated with Republicans wasting DOGE's effort to cut. So am I. None of that matters now. Trump despises those judges because their loyalty is to the Constitution, not to him. He cannot fathom the discipline or honor required to be committed to preserving America's founding documents, rather than his own self-interest. The partnership between the conservative legal movement and Trump was always a temporary one, and Republicans in Congress had to have known that. While Republicans used Trump to reach their goals within the conservative legal movement, they made the mistake of allowing him to undermine the very accomplishments they made in his first term. Trump's future judicial nominations have judges worried Data from Notre Dame Law professor Derek Muller shows that federal judges are retiring at a record-slow pace at the beginning of Trump's second term. Just 11 vacancies have opened up since January, likely because judges are thinking twice about retiring in the face of who may replace them. Trump's first slate of judicial nominees is taking longer than it did in his first term, with confirmation hearings to take place on June 4, according to Axios. There are also fewer vacancies compared with Trump's first term, when he was handed more than 100 on Day 1 as a result of a stubborn Republican Senate majority in President Barack Obama's second term. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. Trump appears to be prioritizing his supporters in his early slate of judicial picks. Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, who has previously represented Trump personally, has been nominated to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Courtof Appeals and sparked some concern even among conservatives. Trump's early judicial picks will determine how comfortable more aging federal judges are with retiring under his second administration. Those committed to the Constitution are understandably worried about who may replace them, and his recent rhetoric does not help me feel better. As Trump's brand of the Republican Party drifts from most of the conservative values it once claimed to support, so too does his support for conservative legal philosophy. Now, anything that stands in the way of Trump is bad, even if it is conservative in ideology. Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store