On May 12, 2025, the Valdai Club hosted an expert discussion dedicated to the US-China trade war. Moderator Ivan Timofeev, highlighted a number of characteristics of Donald Trump's policy that led to it.
These include the use of tariffs for political purposes instead of regular sanctions, the securitisation of tariff policy, that is, its linkage with security issues, and an increase in tariffs for those countries that interact with countries that are the target of sanctions (secondary tariffs). The only country that has responded to the Americans’ sweeping policy changes clearly and proportionally is China, Timofeev emphasised.
Olga Biryukova, a senior researcher at the Centre for Comprehensive Economic Studies and the Laboratory for Responsible Business at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, called the current situation "a storm before the calm." She believes that the problems in the global economy began long before the US tariff adventure. In her opinion, they were the result of long-term trends, such as the accumulation of imbalances between the economic power of developing countries and their role in global governance, the uneven development of different sectors of the American economy, the reduction of natural sources of economic growth by the European Union, the change in the leading lobbyists for global trade rules, and the growth of protectionism. Biryukova stressed not to perceive the US tariff policy as an existential threat to the global economy. America is trying to save its industry, reindustrialise, and return production capacity to its territory. However, it apparently does not have a well-developed plan of action, which has led to the start of a trade war with many countries at the same time.
Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs noted that Trump's tariff policy has no economic justification. It was based on the idea that the American trade deficit is associated with illegal barriers, although in fact it was generated by the budget deficit and low savings in the United States. Trump also hoped that this policy would strengthen Washington's negotiating position, but it turned out that the United States has overestimated its global power and influence. Now the United States is gradually coming down to earth. As it turns out, the American market is not as influential as Trump thought and cannot dictate terms to the entire world. As for the dollar, it undoubtedly remains an important currency, but it is easy to bypass, which seriously reduces the effectiveness of sanctions. In this regard, Sachs suggested that the tariff war is coming to an end and this experience will help the United States realise the importance of multipolarity.
Zhao Huasheng, a professor at the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University and a member of the Beijing International Dialogue Club, presented a view of the trade war from the Chinese side. He pointed out that China's approach is not tactical, but strategic in nature and is aimed at laying the foundation for relatively stable relations with the United States in the future. At the same time, the policy of the United States is aimed not only at eradicating the trade imbalance, but also at comprehensively suppressing China's development. Trump expected that China would not be able to do without the American market and would be forced to surrender to the mercy of the winner, but he faced a decisive rebuff. Beijing does not want a trade war with the United States, but it is ready to accept the challenge. China continues to develop and maintain an economy which is open to the outside world, while pursuing the stabilization of the market, actively diversifying foreign trade and developing domestic consumption, the researcher said.
Dmitry Kiku, Deputy Director of the Department for Control over External Restrictions of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, noted that the United States is rapidly losing markets, and the vacated niches are being occupied by China. In addition, the increase in tariffs has negatively affected the economy of the United States itself, which is closely linked to the Chinese economy. There are also negative effects for states that are friendly to the United States, for example, Japan. Thus, apparently, the course taken by Washington has not worked one hundred percent. In turn, China, which participates in BRICS, the SCO and the APEC forum, and actively interacts with ASEAN, has many areas to compensate for the negative consequences of decisions made in Washington. Speaking about the possible consequences of the trade wars for Russia, Kiku pointed to the presence of a reliable legal framework for protecting Russian interests from the actions of unfriendly countries.
