Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

As US–China Talks Resume, Beijing Bolsters Economic Defenses

Blog

As US–China Talks Resume, Beijing Bolsters Economic Defenses
Blog

Blog

As US–China Talks Resume, Beijing Bolsters Economic Defenses

2025-05-08 18:47 Last Updated At:18:47

After months of escalating tariff battles between the United States and China, the first significant turning point has emerged. Both sides are preparing for new talks, while Beijing has introduced a sweeping set of measures to shore up its economy.

Trade Talks Resume Amid Economic Maneuvers

China announced that Vice Premier He Lifeng will travel to Switzerland from May 9 to 10, where he is scheduled to meet with the US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Commerce said that senior American officials have recently signaled a willingness to discuss tariff adjustments, reaching out to Beijing through multiple channels in hopes of opening negotiations. China, after careful assessment of American overtures, taking into account global expectations, its own interests, and the appeals of American industry and consumers, agreed to resume contact.

The ministry spokesperson underscored that “any dialogue or negotiation must be based on mutual respect, equal consultation, and mutual benefit.” Quoting a Chinese proverb, the spokesperson added, “Listen to what they say, watch what they do.” If the United States were to say one thing and do another, or use talks as a pretext for coercion, China “will not agree, nor will it sacrifice its principles or international fairness and justice for the sake of any agreement.”

Key Takeaways on the Current Landscape:

Dialogue is preferable to stalemate. The resumption of direct contact marks a pivotal moment in US–China relations.

A swift agreement is unlikely. Recent talks between the United States and both South Korea and Japan have yielded no breakthroughs. Drawing on the experience of the Trump administration’s first term, these negotiations are expected to be lengthy and difficult.

Endurance will determine the outcome. Both countries are absorbing the pain of elevated tariffs. Whichever side proves less able to withstand the pressure and becomes eager for a deal will likely have to make greater concessions. China, for its part, is preparing for a protracted contest, aiming to inflict enough economic discomfort on the United States to secure a favorable agreement. Unlike Washington, Beijing is not promising a quick resolution.

This context helps explain why, as it announced new talks with Washington, Beijing also unveiled a package of measures in support of the economy. The People’s Bank of China, the National Financial Regulatory Administration, and the China Securities Regulatory Commission jointly introduced the plan. Several elements stand out among the others:

First, the central bank lowered the required reserve ratio for banks, injecting one trillion yuan in long-term liquidity into the financial system. By cutting the ratio by 0.5 percentage points, banks can lend more against their deposits, boosting credit supply. The required reserve ratio for auto finance and leasing companies was reduced from 5 percent to zero, increasing the availability of loans for purchases of cars and equipment. The central bank will also provide 500 billion yuan in new loans for consumer services and elderly care, encouraging spending and investment.

Pan Gongsheng, governor of the central bank, summarized first-quarter financial market performance: The Shanghai SE Composite Index hovered around 3,300 points and rebounded quickly after a dip in early April; 10-year government bond yields remained stable at about 1.65 percent; and after a slight depreciation, the renminbi recovered to about 7.2 per dollar, signaling relatively balanced cross-border capital flows.

The message from Beijing is clear: Even as the United States intensified its tariff campaign, China’s financial markets remained stable. Now, as trade talks resume, Beijing is again moving to bolster liquidity and support the economy, preparing for what could be a drawn-out tariff battle.

Contrasting American and Chinese Approaches

Since taking office, Trump launched tariff battles against the world. The United States has tended to act on impulse, pushing all its chips on the table in hopes of intimidating opponents and securing quick, favorable deals. But when confronted with China’s firm resistance, Washington has appeared short on follow-through. Trump repeatedly talked up negotiations to steady market sentiment, but offered few concrete measures to support the economy, relying instead on threatening Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell to cut interest rates. Yet with tariffs fueling inflation, the Fed’s room to maneuver is limited. Trump’s approach has been characterized by bravado, not by sustained strategy.

China, by contrast, has long prepared for the possibility of renewed tariff conflict. Its approach is methodical and deliberate, with contingency plans in place. Last September, Beijing took early steps to stabilize markets and cushion the economic slowdown. Now, as negotiations begin again, it is rolling out another round of liquidity measures – demonstrating a strategy of “building high walls, stockpiling grain, and waiting patiently,” rather than boasting of easy victories.

If the current dynamic holds, the side less able to endure the pain will be the first to seek a deal, and will have to make the greater concessions. China is in no rush; the pace and outcome of talks will depend on how much pain the United States can withstand, and how much it is willing to give up, and how quickly.

Lo Wing-hung




Bastille Commentary

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Trump's Venezuela play just gave Western progressives a masterclass in American hypocrisy.

Steve Bannon, Trump's longtime strategist, told The New York Times the Venezuela assault—arresting President Nicolás Maduro and all—stands as this administration's most consequential foreign policy move. Meticulously planned, Bannon concedes, but woefully short on ideological groundwork. "The lack of framing of the message on a potential occupation has the base bewildered, if not angry".

Trump's rationale for nabbing Maduro across international borders was drug trafficking. But here's the tell: once Maduro was in custody, Trump stopped talking about Venezuelan cocaine and started obsessing over Venezuelan oil. He's demanding US oil companies march back into Venezuela to seize control of local assets. And that's not all—he wants Venezuela to cough up 50 million barrels of oil.

Trump's Colonial Playbook

On January 6, Trump unveiled his blueprint: Venezuela releases 50 million barrels to the United States. America sells it. Market watchers peg the haul at roughly $2.8 billion.

Trump then gleefully mapped out how the proceeds would flow—only to "American-made products." He posted on social media: "These purchases will include, among other things, American Agricultural Products, and American Made Medicines, Medical Devices, and Equipment to improve Venezuela's Electric Grid and Energy Facilities. In other words, Venezuela is committing to doing business with the United States of America as their principal partner."

Trump's demand for 50 million barrels up front—not a massive volume, granted—betrays a blunt short-term goal. It's the classic imperial playbook: invade a colony, plunder its resources, sail home and parade the spoils before your supporters to justify the whole bloody enterprise. Trump isn't chasing the ideological legitimacy Bannon mentioned. He's after something more primal: material legitimacy. Show me a colonial power that didn't loot minerals or enslave labor from its colonies.

America's Western allies were silent as the grave when faced with such dictatorial swagger. But pivot the camera to Hong Kong, and suddenly they're all righteous indignation.

The British Double Standard

Recently, former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith penned an op-ed in The Times, slamming the British government for doing "nothing but issuing 'strongly worded' statements in the face of Beijing's trampling of the Sino-British Joint Declaration." He's calling on the Labour government to sanction the three designated National Security Law judges who convicted Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai of "collusion with foreign forces"—to prove that "Hong Kong's judiciary has become a farce." Duncan Smith even vowed to raise the matter for debate in the British Parliament.

The Conservatives sound principled enough. But think it through, and it's laughable. The whole world's talking about Maduro right now—nobody's talking about Jimmy Lai anymore.

Maduro appeared in US Federal Court in New York on January 6. The United States has trampled international law and the UN Charter—that's what Duncan Smith would call "American justice becoming a farce." If Duncan Smith's so formidable, why doesn't he demand the British government sanction Trump? Why not sanction the New York Federal Court judges? If he wants to launch a parliamentary debate, why not urgently debate America's crimes in invading Venezuela? Duncan Smith's double standards are chilling.

Silence on Venezuela

After the Venezuela incident, I searched extensively online—even deployed AI—but couldn't find a single comment from former Conservative leader Duncan Smith on America's invasion of Venezuela. Duncan Smith has retreated into his shell.

Duncan Smith is fiercely pro-US. When Trump visited the UK last September amid considerable domestic criticism, the opposition Conservatives didn't just stay quiet—Duncan Smith actively defended him, calling Trump's unprecedented second UK visit critically important: "if the countries that believe in freedom, democracy and the rule of law don’t unite, the totalitarian states… will dominate the world and it will be a terrible world to live in."

The irony cuts deep now. America forcibly seizes another country's oil and minerals—Trump is fundamentally an imperialist dictator. With Duncan Smith's enthusiastic backing, this totalitarian Trump has truly won.

Incidentally, the Conservative Party has completely destroyed itself. The party commanding the highest support in Britain today is the far-right Reform Party. As early as last May, YouGov polling showed Reform Party capturing the highest support at 29%, the governing Labour Party languishing at just 22%, the Liberal Democrats ranking third at 17%, and the Conservatives degraded to fourth place with 16% support.

The gutless Conservative Party members fear offending Trump, while voters flock to the Reform Party instead. The Conservatives' posturing shows they've become petty villains for nothing.

Lo Wing-hung

Recommended Articles