&w=3840&q=100)
China GDP grows 5.2%, Xi gets a boost for hammering out final trade deal with Trump
Chinese President Xi Jinping makes a toast at the beginning of the welcoming banquet at the Great Hall of the People during the first day of the Belt and Road Forum in Beijing, China on May 14, 2017. (Source: Reuters)
China's better-than-expected quarterly GDP growth of 5.2 per cent has strengthened President Xi Jinping's hand in trade negotiations with the United States.
However, there are crucial strings attached with the above-expectation gross domestic product (GDP) growth in the April-June quarter.
The economic data published today shows that the Chinese economy remained resilient amid tariffs — even though there are caveats to such resilience. The GDP growth surpassed economists' expectation of 5.1 per cent growth and China's target of 5 per cent growth.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
China already has an upper hand in trade negotiations with the United States. Leveraging its near-monopoly in global rare earth supplies, China forced US President Donald Trump to blink in the trade war and offer concessions to secure rare earth supplies — the blockade threatened to choke virtually every industry from household electronics to automobiles and defence equipment. The latest data is further set to strengthen China's position in the trade war.
China gets a boost in US trade talks
With the quarterly results, China has got a boost in trade talks with the United States in more than one ways.
Firstly, the better-than-expected GDP growth has showed that Chinese economy remains resilient.
Secondly, despite Trump's 145 per cent tariff, exports remained largely resilient and China found new markets in Southeast Asia and European Union (EU) to offset any US-related losses. So far this year, while Chinese shipments to the United States fell by 10.9 per cent, Chinese shipments to Southeast Asia and EU have grown by 13 per cent and 6.6 per cent respectively, according to CNBC.
Thirdly, coupled with the rare earths leverage, China has demonstrated that the United States needs China much more than China needs the United States.
With such advantages, China can press for favourable terms in ongoing trade talks with the Trump administration.
But China's economy is not that good
Even as China's GDP grew more than expected and that has strengthened Xi's hand, the situation is not entirely rosy and there are areas of concern.
For one, even as the GDP growth was above the economists' expectation of 5.1 per cent, it was down from the GDP growth of 5.4 per cent in the first quarter.
Moreover, retail sales and investment remained lower, showing that the domestic economy remains week and people don't perceive the economy as growing.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
'Industrial production remains the key growth driver, but it's highly automated and doesn't generate jobs. Q3 [third quarter] growth is at risk without stronger fiscal stimulus. Consumption is weaker than expected — momentum from the trade-in programme has faded, and housing remains a drag with low transaction volumes. Trump's tariffs hit exporters hard, triggering SME bankruptcies and damaging sentiment. Both consumers and businesses have turned more cautious, while exporters are increasingly looking overseas for growth,' Dan Wang, the China Director of Eurasia Group, Singapore, told Reuters.
For many, the economy does not 'feel' like growing and that perception will have consequences, according to Nick Marro, the Principal Economist for Asia at the Economist Intelligence Unit.
'For many, this doesn't 'feel' like an economy growing at around 5 per cent. That sentiment factor has implications for how sustainable future retail spending is, as well as considerations for businesses about future investment expansions, as well as hiring and wage growth,' Marro told CNN.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
17 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Ideas on trial, critical thinking in retreat
'Freedom only for the supporters of the government, only for the supporters of one party — however numerous they may be — is no freedom at all. Freedom is always and exclusively the freedom of the one who thinks differently.' — Rosa Luxemburg In an era marked by heightened geopolitical tensions and global scrutiny, nations are compelled to not only safeguard their territorial integrity but also uphold their moral foundations. For countries, characterised by their profound diversity of languages, cultures, and faiths, such moments present an opportunity to reaffirm their commitment to democratic principles and pluralistic values. The projection of national strength tempered by restraint and public reassurances, stands out as indispensable components of this endeavour. However, the alignment of democratic values at home with the image projected abroad is equally crucial, necessitating the nurturing of freedom and open discourse domestically. An erosion of intellectual freedom Regrettably, a growing chasm exists between this ideal and the prevailing realities on the ground across the world. The sanctity of intellectual freedom is being steadily eroded across institutions, particularly universities and academic spaces, due to pressures of conformity and control. The consequences of this trend are far-reaching, with professors facing reprimand or dismissal over minor comments, and students being subjected to punitive action for raising critical questions. This phenomenon constitutes a pressing global concern, albeit one whose repercussions are particularly pronounced in nations that have historically valorised open discourse and intellectual freedom. The United States, during Donald Trump's presidency, exemplifies this trend. Philosophers such as Hannah Arendt have warned against these dangers of banality in oppressive regimes and the slow numbing of thought, where citizens retreat into private lives and abandon the public realm. Understandably, the assault on freedom is not only about censorship but also about inducing this kind of silence, where fear replaces inquiry, and conformity takes the place of imagination. In such a climate, society's capacity for critical self-reflection and growth is severely impaired, leading to stagnation and intellectual rigidity. For instance, when curricula are rewritten to reflect ideological imperatives rather than pedagogical or historical rigour, when scholarly work is attacked for political reasons, and when free speech on campus is framed as sedition, we are witnessing the slow erosion of academic advancement. We have witnessed this phenomenon on campuses across the U.S., particularly in the context of pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Democratic backsliding is visibly accompanied here by an assault on intellectuals and independent media. In such times, it becomes easy to imagine that freedom of speech is a luxury or a liability, something to be curtailed for the sake of national unity or cultural pride. But, this is a false choice. An intolerance of voices that question At the heart of this crisis lies a growing intolerance with voices that challenge prevailing narratives, offer nuanced historical perspective, or simply ask inconvenient questions often painted as suspect. It must be taken for granted that democracy, by definition, demands disagreement and requires the ability to listen to those who think differently, to be challenged, and to evolve. The silencing of scholars, intimidation of writers, and discouragement of free inquiry do not merely target individuals; they diminish the society as a whole. Noam Chomsky, whose work on propaganda and power remains seminal, noted that the destruction of independent culture is among the gravest abuses of authority. When knowledge itself is politicised, when truth is decided by decree, and when the university becomes a site of ideological performance rather than learning, we find ourselves perilously close to what he called 'manufactured consent', or in other words, a democracy in appearance but not in substance. Historically, universities have served as spaces where civilisational questions are posed, where the past is interrogated, and where future possibilities are imagined. To reduce these institutions to sites of ideological policing is to betray their very essence. The danger today lies not only in the curbing of dissent but also in its systematic delegitimisation. When critical voices are branded as 'anti-national', when scholars are seen as threats instead of resources, and when academic inquiry is stifled by fear, society drifts toward intellectual repression. The result is a thinning of public discourse, a narrowing of thought, and a culture of self-censorship. The geopolitical irony of this situation cannot be overstated. At a time when nations face real external threats, internal cohesion is undeniably vital. However, cohesion cannot be achieved through the suppression of thought. Unity born of fear is not unity; it is coercion. What the world respects is not only a nation's economic or strategic clout but also its ability to be a vast, diverse, and argumentative civil society. This vitality, rooted in disagreement, debate and intellectual freedom is what defines a truly robust democracy. The erosion of this vitality has long-term consequences, including the alienation of a generation of students who once believed in the university as a space of exploration and growth, but now the evident discouragement of public intellectuals from speaking their conscience, and the undermining of the moral seriousness with which a nation historically addresses its internal complexities, has set in the steady decline of the very idea of democracy. Moreover, it sends a chilling message that intelligence must be policed, that critical thinking is unwelcome, and that freedom is conditional on obedience. But there is hope And yet, there is hope. History reminds us that the tide of suppression, however forceful, is always contested. Whether through protest movements, or the courage of individuals who refuse to be silenced, the spirit of free inquiry has always found ways to endure. Václav Havel, writing under the shadow of Soviet repression, reminded us that 'living in truth' was itself a political act and a refusal to join in the collective lie. In societies that valorise critical inquiry and unfettered debate, the capacity to confront and resolve complex challenges is significantly enhanced. A nuanced understanding of patriotism recognises the intrinsic value of constructive critique, acknowledging that loyalty to one's nation or institution is not predicated on unyielding conformity, but rather on a commitment to its betterment. The democratic ideals of freedom, justice, and equality are not merely aspirational, but are instead contingent upon the ability to challenge entrenched injustices and interrogate authority. When societies compromise academic freedom, they not only erode their moral authority, but also imperil their capacity for envisioning and implementing transformative change. Rosa Luxemburg's words serve as a poignant reminder that freedom means little if it is reserved only for the majority or the loyalist. Real freedom, the kind that nurtures innovation, empathy and justice, begins with the courage to listen to those who speak differently. This capacity for receptivity to dissenting voices constitutes a litmus test of democracy's vitality, and its failure to meet this test has far-reaching and deleterious consequences for the polity. Shelley Walia has taught Cultural Theory at Panjab University, Chandigarh
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
17 minutes ago
- Business Standard
US retail giant Costco to set up global capability centre in India: Report
The centre will initially employ 1,000 people and scale up eventually Reuters HYDERABAD/BENGALURU US retailer Costco Wholesale Corp will open its first global capability centre (GCC) in India in Hyderabad, two people familiar with the plans told Reuters. The centre will initially employ 1,000 people and scale up eventually, sources said. Costco did not immediately respond to Reuters request for a comment.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
17 minutes ago
- Business Standard
India, US seek to futureproof trade agreement amid tax and tariff concerns
Starting April 1, India abolished the 6 per cent equalisation levy on online advertising services provided by non-resident entities, also known as Google tax premium Asit Ranjan Mishra Listen to This Article The US is pressing India to commit to not reintroducing the so-called 'Google tax', while New Delhi is seeking protection from potential future tariffs on pharmaceutical exports as part of the ongoing trade-deal negotiations. Starting April 1, India abolished the 6 per cent equalisation levy on online advertising services provided by non-resident entities, also known as Google tax. The move, announced in March, was aimed at sending a positive signal to US President Donald Trump, who had threatened reciprocal tariffs on high-tariff nations. Apart from Google, the decision also benefited other US-based tech majors, such as Meta and X (formerly
