China played hardball, and it worked. After months of escalation, Beijing's readiness to go toe-to-toe with Washington has forced American negotiators into concessions—and both sides are now closing in on a trade deal neither wanted to walk away empty-handed.
Senior economic and trade officials from China and the US wrapped up two days of negotiations in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on October 26. Both sides announced they'd reached a "framework consensus"—diplomatic speak for the hard part's done. Chen Bing, a commentator at Shenzhen TV's Zhi News, interpreted this to mean the framework and specifics are finalized, just awaiting formal approval from both capitals.
Washington Shows Its Hand
During the Kuala Lumpur talks, the American side telegraphed urgency. On day one, US officials called the meeting "very constructive." Trump, kicking off his Asian tour that same day, announced he'd meet China's leader in South Korea and said the US would make concessions—adding he hoped China would do the same. The subtext was clear: Trump needed a win in Seoul, and he needed it badly.
After the second day, US Treasury Secretary Bessent went further, describing a "very successful framework" that was both constructive and far-reaching. The negotiations, he said, had established a substantial framework to ensure the leaders' meeting this Thursday (October 30) would be succeeful.
What Bessent Let Slip
Bessent later sat down with US media and revealed details that tell you everything about who had leverage in that room.
First: The US will no longer impose 100% tariffs on China. Bessent said the past two days went really well and that slapping 100% tariffs on China was off the table.
Second: China's rare earth controls are temporarily suspended. According to Bessent, the threat of China immediately implementing global rare earth export controls has vanished. He believes Beijing will delay rare earth restriction measures for one year to reassess.
Third: China will resume purchasing US soybeans. Bessent hinted both sides might reach an agreement on soybean purchases, with China once again making large-scale buys. "Our soybean farmers will feel very good about what's going on both for this season and the coming seasons for several years," he said.
Fourth: China approves the TikTok equity transaction. Bessent said all TikTok transaction details are “ironed out”, with the final agreement to be completed by the two countries' leaders at the summit.
“I’m not part of the commercial side of the transaction,” Bessent added. “My remit was to get the Chinese to agree to approve the transaction, and I believe we successfully accomplished that over the past two days.
Bessent deliberately leaked news favorable to the US. But here's what he didn't say out loud: Without major American concessions, China wouldn't have agreed to any of this.
Reading between the lines: Beijing's Shopping List
Li Chenggang, China's International Trade Negotiation Representative and Vice Minister of Commerce, revealed what was actually discussed—and his list tells you the scope of American retreat.
According to Li, both sides explored solutions for handling relevant issues and formed preliminary consensus. The discussions covered export control issues of concern to both sides, further extending the suspension period for reciprocal tariffs, fentanyl tariffs and enforcement cooperation, further expanding trade, and US Section 301 shipping fee measures. China and the US held constructive discussions on all of it. The US stated its position firmly, Li said, and China defended its interests resolutely. Both sides reached preliminary consensus.
The topics Li mentioned are bilateral, which means you can reverse-engineer what Washington gave up.
First: US negative actions are temporarily suspended. China launched global rare earth export controls in October as a response to American negative actions, including the "Affiliates Rule" proposed in September—meaning Chinese companies sanctioned by the US and their subsidiaries with more than 50% shareholding would also face sanctions. Additionally, the US began imposing fees on ships entering Chinese ports. If China agreed to postpone global rare earth export controls for one year, the US penetrating controls or port fees are likely temporarily suspended as well.
Second: The US will reduce or cancel fentanyl tariffs. In March this year, China imposed 10 to 15% tariffs on a series of US energy and agricultural products to retaliate against the US imposing 20% so-called fentanyl tariffs on Chinese goods, including a 10% tariff on US soybeans. For China to purchase US soybeans, China's 10% tariff on US soybeans needs to be cancelled—and the prerequisite is the US reducing or canceling that 20% fentanyl tariff.
The Nuclear Option Works
In this China-US trade war, China activated the nuclear option of comprehensive rare earth trade control. Trump threatened vehemently to impose 100% tariffs on China, but this was just another chapter in Trump's TACO deal—an acronym standing for "Trump Always Chickens Out." After his bluster, he still had to sit down and negotiate with China. He still had to make concessions to get an outcome both sides could accept.
How the China-US trade war unfolded echoes the strategy China's leadership set early on: "Strike one punch to avoid a hundred punches." In plain terms, hit hard, hit first—and you won’t have to keep blocking blows forever.
Lo Wing-hung
Bastille Commentary
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
Some people fancy themselves legal eagles. So they exploit every procedural loophole to challenge the government. The practical effect: draining public resources and burning through taxpayers' cash.
Enter Chow Hang-tung. The former vice-chair of the now-defunct Hong Kong Alliance took issue with prison dress codes. Her legal gambit hit a wall on Tuesday when High Court Judge Russell Coleman tossed the case and stuck her with the bill.
On September 6, 2024, Chow filed her judicial review application over the CSD's inmate clothing policy. Her complaint: Female inmates must wear long pants during summer unless granted special permission, while male inmates wear shorts. She also alleged that in July and August 2024, she verbally requested permission to wear shorts from CSD staff on two separate occasions—both times refused. Therefore, Chow sought judicial review of both the clothing policy itself and the Department's alleged denial of her shorts request.
Chow was previously jailed after being convicted of "inciting others to knowingly participate in an unauthorized assembly." She's still awaiting trial this year on a separate charge of "inciting subversion of state power."
Court Slams the Door Shut
The High Court judge dismissed Chow's judicial review application. In his judgment, Judge Coleman pointed out that the current inmate clothing policy—including requiring female inmates to wear long pants during daytime in summer—was formulated by the CSD under authority granted by the Prison Rules. The court was satisfied that the Department possessed professional expertise and experience in this area, had carefully weighed various factors and consulted professional opinions during the decision-making process, and conducts continuous reviews. The court ruled that Chow failed to prove the current policy discriminates against female inmates.
The CSD emphasized the importance of uniformity in inmates' clothing. Think of it like school uniforms—it helps train discipline and accommodates female inmates' emphasis on privacy, covering scars, leg hair, and so forth.
Judge Coleman also agreed with CSD Senior Clinical Psychologist Hung Suet-wai's assessment that female inmates' mental health is more vulnerable, and some female inmates are particularly sensitive with unique clothing needs. Additionally, since male staff regularly enter female correctional facilities, appropriate clothing should be provided to protect female inmates' privacy. Wearing long pants therefore allows female inmates to feel psychologically more comfortable and secure.
Regarding Chow's claim that she requested to wear shorts between July and August 2024 and was refused by the CSD, Judge Coleman found her account unconvincing.
What the Evidence Actually Shows
Observing Chow's conduct and the entire judicial review proceedings, several conclusions jump out.
1. Chow's passion for making requests
As the High Court judgment pointed out, according to CSD records, between July 2021 and September 2024—a span of 3 years and 2 months—Chow made a total of 297 requests (averaging 21 requests per month).
Yet oddly, never once did she include a request to wear shorts. During the same period, across 136 consultations with CSD doctors, she never mentioned feeling uncomfortable or overheated from wearing long pants, nor had she ever requested to wear shorts for any health-related reasons.
This clearly shows her allegation of making requests that were refused by the CSD was completely fabricated. She's simply hunting for various reasons to challenge the CSD, constantly wanting to sue the government.
2. Burning public funds on the public's dime
Chow formally submitted hundreds of requests to the CSD. Just responding to her requests already left CSD Staff exhausted. If dissatisfied, she'd complain through various channels, or even file for judicial review to challenge the Department's decisions—wasting massive CSD resources and court time.
Many people complain about lengthy scheduling delays at the High Court. These "serial filers" constantly filing lawsuits occupy precious court time.
3. Prison is not a holiday resort
Jimmy Lai's children complained that it was too hot for him in prison without air conditioning. Before the judgment, Chow's Patreon account grumbled about the inability to shower or change into fresh pants when the trousers get dirty from daily prison routine—freedoms she suggested ordinary people take for granted. They seem to treat imprisonment like a vacation, expecting various freedoms.
Prison indeed, as Chow said, has "no such freedom." If prison offered all sorts of freedoms, plus basically provided food, accommodation, and priority medical care, many people would deliberately commit crimes to go to prison.
How Prison Oversight Actually Works
I am a Justice of the Peace and regularly inspect prisons. I fully understand that to ensure inmates' rights are protected, the CSD provides various channels both within and outside the Department for inmates to voice complaints—for example, to Justices of the Peace who conduct regular visits or to the Ombudsman.
The Department has continuously implemented multiple measures to improve the detention environment within prisons. I've seen powerful fans installed in prisons. New gates and windows with better ventilation efficiency are also being installed to improve air circulation within facilities.
Hong Kong's treatment of prisoners is already very humane—unlike the United States, which sends unconvicted illegal immigrants to prisons in El Salvador with harsh conditions. That Barbie-doll-like US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem even made a special trip to pose for photos outside prison cells in El Salvador, treating inmates' privacy as nothing.
I fully support the High Court's dismissal of Chow's judicial review application and ordering her to pay the CSD's legal costs, reducing the burden on taxpayers.
Lo Wing-hung
