WTO trade barometer rises, but slowdown expected later in year
NEW YORK: The World Trade Organization reported a rise in its quarterly trade barometer on Thursday, driven by frontloading purchases but likely to be short-lived as weakening export orders suggest a slowdown later in the year.
The WTO Goods Trade Barometer rose to 103.5, above the baseline of 100 dividing above- and below-trend trade volumes and slightly above a March reading of 102.8.
'The decline in export orders and the temporary nature of frontloading suggest that trade growth may slow in the months ahead,' the WTO said in a statement.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
14 hours ago
- Business Recorder
WTO trade barometer rises, but slowdown expected later in year
NEW YORK: The World Trade Organization reported a rise in its quarterly trade barometer on Thursday, driven by frontloading purchases but likely to be short-lived as weakening export orders suggest a slowdown later in the year. The WTO Goods Trade Barometer rose to 103.5, above the baseline of 100 dividing above- and below-trend trade volumes and slightly above a March reading of 102.8. 'The decline in export orders and the temporary nature of frontloading suggest that trade growth may slow in the months ahead,' the WTO said in a statement.
Business Recorder
11-06-2025
- Business Recorder
China's angry rebuttal to Trump's tariff Tsunami
My reading of China has always been of a country that is sagacious, forgiving and accommodating—an entity flowing naturally through history, shaped by the burden and blessing of over 5,000 years of civilizational legacy. China has long carried the unique distinction of never being an occupying force in the historical sense, never driven by the imperial ambition to rule the world. Despite holding immense power at different junctures in history, China refrained from conquest. Its Great Wall was built not as a launchpad for outward domination, but as a safeguard for inward integration. This tradition of strategic restraint and internal focus has morphed into the philosophical foundation of President Xi Jinping's economic and diplomatic agenda in the 21st century. China's foreign policy, even amid rising global tensions, has maintained its emphasis on win-win cooperation, mutual growth, and infrastructural diplomacy. It does not promote regime change, nor does it meddle in the internal politics of other nations. China's strength lies in its ability to uplift weaker economies through massive infrastructure projects, energy support, port development, and institutional capacity-building. These efforts are not intended to dominate but to elevate. That is the spirit of China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), offering struggling nations an alternative model of growth without conditionalities that mirror neo-colonialism. In contrast, the Trump administration's aggressive 'America First' policy has been marked by an unrelenting tariff war, often in violation of international norms, bilateral treaties, and the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO). These tariffs were not just protectionist; they were unilateral assaults on the interconnected architecture of the global economy. By weaponizing tariffs, Trump sought to coerce trading partners and reconfigure supply chains through brute economic power. However, in doing so, the administration not only antagonized allies and adversaries alike but also disrupted global trade balances, supply chains, and investor confidence. The global economy is an ecosystem. If one part of it is harmed, the ripple effects are felt across continents. In this context, the Trump tariffs didn't just target China—they undermined the very structure of global trade and collaboration. The United States, which once championed free trade, suddenly became its greatest disruptor. This led to global uncertainty, inflation in various sectors, and rising consumer prices within the United States itself. In response to this unprecedented tariff regime, China issued its strongest economic and diplomatic rebuttal to date. Breaking from its traditional quiet diplomacy, Beijing made it unequivocally clear that it would not succumb to unilateral economic bullying. For the first time, Chinese officials accused the United States of distorting international trade norms and harming global economic recovery. China argued that the United States had, in fact, been the largest beneficiary of globalization. With a massive 25% share in world trade, the US economic dominance was built on the very trade practices it was now dismantling. China emphasized that it did not initiate the trade war but would not hesitate to defend its interests. It pledged to open up its economy further, reduce tariffs, and increase imports—not out of compulsion, but to demonstrate its commitment to global cooperation. This stands in sharp contrast to the inward-looking, protectionist tendencies of the Trump administration. China's response was calm but resolute. It promised to uphold the principles of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits. It reaffirmed its belief in genuine multilateralism, rejecting all forms of unilateralism and economic coercion. China stood firmly in support of the international system with the United Nations at its core and the multilateral trading system with the WTO at its foundation. China's declaration also emphasized that the vast majority of nations still believed in fairness, justice, and the rule of international law. These countries, it argued, would eventually stand on the right side of history—not because of allegiance to any one superpower, but because equity must triumph over hegemony. Trump, meanwhile, sought to justify the economic fallout from his tariff blitzkrieg by promising future investments totaling $7 trillion. However, even he admitted that the US stock market had lost nearly $6 trillion in value within days. While the theoretical future investment may or may not materialize over four to five years, the immediate damage was undeniable. The American consumer bore the brunt of the tariffs, with increased prices on everything from electronics to household goods. What Trump failed to recognize—or perhaps chose to ignore—is that tariffs on imports function as a hidden tax on American citizens. When tariffs are levied on goods from China or any other country, US importers pass those costs onto retailers, who in turn pass them onto consumers. So, while the US Treasury may gain in the short term from tariff revenues, it is ultimately the American people who pay the price. This disconnect between political rhetoric and economic reality triggered public backlash. Demonstrations erupted across the United States, not just from ideological opponents of Trump but from ordinary citizens suffering from inflation and job insecurity. The symbols associated with Trump's protectionist agenda—banners, flags, and campaign props—became the targets of public outrage, a visible expression of disillusionment with failed promises and mounting hardship. The damage was not just economic; it was reputational. America's standing as a leader of the free world, a promoter of open markets and democratic values, was called into question. The aggressive imposition of tariffs on allies and adversaries alike sent a message that America was retreating from the world stage, abandoning its commitments, and undermining its credibility. What is the via media in this escalating trade conflict? The answer lies in dialogue, cooperation, and mutual respect. Instead of unilaterally imposing tariffs, the United States must return to the table and engage its partners through negotiation, evidence-based studies, and inclusive policy-making. Any trade policy that causes disproportionate harm to a segment of the global population—be it American or foreign—is inherently flawed. Tariffs should be the last resort, not the first weapon of choice. They must be evaluated based on who truly benefits and who bears the cost. If the people of both nations stand to gain, then policy adjustments may be justified. But if tariffs disproportionately hurt consumers, strain diplomatic ties, and fracture global supply chains, then they are not only counterproductive but dangerous. The world today demands cooperation over confrontation. It requires strategic empathy rather than economic nationalism. China's model of infrastructure-led diplomacy and economic integration may not be perfect, but it offers an alternative vision to brute-force protectionism. A world driven by consultation and shared prosperity is far more stable than one governed by unilateral decrees and economic coercion. The battle between tariff wars and trade cooperation is not just a contest of policies—it is a contest of visions. The world must choose between retreating into silos or building bridges across continents. In this defining moment, China's calm and strategic response to Trump's aggressive tariffs may well mark a turning point in the global order. It is a call for equity—not hegemony. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
16-05-2025
- Business Recorder
US tariffs take centre stage at APEC trade gathering, joint statement in doubt
SEOGWIPO: The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation's trade gathering comes to a close on Friday with divisions over U.S. tariffs and reforms to the World Trade Organization putting the adoption of a joint statement in doubt, according to some diplomats. The annual meeting is the first major multilateral trade gathering since U.S. President Donald Trump's announcement of sweeping tariffs that hit more than half of the 21 members of the bloc with U.S. import duties in excess of the 10% minimum. APEC warned on Thursday that exports from a region that accounts for around half of world trade will slow sharply this year in the wake of the U.S. tariffs. The sessions typically focus on multilateral cooperation on economies and trade, and this year contentious reforms to the WTO are also in the spotlight. Asia Pacific trade envoys to discuss multilateral cooperation in tariff era The Trump administration views the WTO as a body that has enabled China to gain an unfair export advantage and has recently moved to pause U.S. funding to the institution. 'Big economies in APEC might have strong views on certain issues,' a top diplomat from one of the member economies told Reuters, expressing scepticism over the adoption of a joint statement by the close of the two-day meeting. 'But, we never know,' the diplomat added. 'The chairman really wants it,' the official said, referring to South Korea's Minister for Trade Cheong In-kyo. An official from a different country, also expressing doubt about member economies adopting a joint statement, said working-level negotiations were ongoing until late into the night on Thursday. For many of the member economies, the attendance of U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer raised the stakes of the conference held on South Korea's Jeju Island, ahead of a leaders' summit scheduled later in the year. On the first day, many, if not all, of the representatives had or sought a meeting with Greer, according to host country officials. 'Quite a lot of countries had planned to send deputy ministers but later decided to send their ministers after Ambassador Greer's attendance was confirmed,' Cheong said. Greer held talks with China's Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang on Thursday, less than a week after their first face-to-face talks in Geneva on May 10-11, where they agreed to significantly lower tariffs for 90 days. Beijing's commerce ministry spokesperson, He Yongqian, told a press conference that China was always open to resolving economic and trade relations with the United States through offline communication, but gave no details on the latest talks. Greer also met the host country's Cheong, three weeks after Seoul and Washington held their opening round of trade talks, and Malaysian Trade Minister Tengku Zafrul Aziz, who expressed optimism after Thursday's meeting, his second one in two weeks. The U.S. trade representative also met South Korean shipbuilder HD Hyundai's Executive Vice Chairman Chung Kisun on Friday to discuss cooperation between the countries in the sector, the company said. Seoul has offered to collaborate in shipbuilding with Washington as part of a potential trade deal. In late February, a Group of 20 meeting of finance ministers and central bankers held in Cape Town failed to adopt a joint communique, after top officials from several countries, including the United States, skipped it. The meeting concluded with a 'chair's summary' issued by the host, which said participants 'reiterated the commitment to resisting protectionism' and used several words the Trump administration has strongly objected to. Cheong is scheduled to hold a briefing on the meeting outcome on Friday afternoon.
