The trade war between the United States and China is one of the causes, perhaps the main one, of the weak growth prospects of the world economy, and especially of the European economy. Therefore, a trade agreement that puts an end to the conflict would be the first condition for stabilizing the prospects for global trade and for removing fears of a slowdown. But that agreement, which seemed very close during the negotiations in Washington, was abruptly upended by the U.S. administration’s decision, in the middle of the talks, to apply a tariff increase on up to $200 billion of Chinese products. Trump broke the deferment that is implied in all negotiations with the argument that China had breached some of its previous commitments. The negotiations have not been interrupted and will continue in Beijing, but Trump has resorted to one of his favorite tactics, which is to execute a show of force to destabilize his interlocutors and bring negotiating tensions to the limit. The signing of the agreement is crucial to expectations for the next four years.
It is likely that the agreement will be signed in the next two weeks. China depends on its exports more than the United States does and urgently needs to prop up its growth possibilities with a phase of changes in its domestic economic policy. For Trump's economic team, it is vital to convey to the public that he has achieved a political victory over China by reducing the U.S. trade deficit with that country, which is estimated at $419 billion. Behind Trump's protectionist practices lurks a medium-term strategy of using state policy to gain markets for new technologies, such as 5G, for U.S. companies, 5G being a technology for which China is a powerful competitor.
We must not lose sight of the fact that Chinese commercial positions have well-known advantages in Europe. It seemed necessary to correct them through a determined negotiation strategy, what in politics is called "standing firm." But the tariff war promises to be at least as expensive as the invasive maneuvers of Chinese products.
It is not the least of the problems that occur under the principle that any economic zone is considered in practice to be a "commercial enemy" of the United States, and therefore, it also places the eurozone in the line of fire. In a protectionist environment, an uncontrolled race is unleashed to gain economic advantages at the expense of other countries or economic zones from which it is difficult to leave and destroys trust within political relations.
For the White House, consideration of global economic growth is secondary, as are the costs needed to support sectors of the American economy, in this case agriculture, in the wake of reprisals by third countries. As long as the U.S. economy continues to grow, the damage produced by Trump's trade policy will be an irrelevant political factor. Aggressive tariffs will be sustained as long as growth rates are high and as long as the Federal Reserve can maintain interest rates at a relatively moderate level with respect to prospects for overheating the economy.
It is likely that the agreement will be signed in the next two weeks. China depends on its exports more than the United States does and urgently needs to prop up its growth possibilities with a phase of changes in its domestic economic policy. For Trump's economic team, it is vital to convey to the public that he has achieved a political victory over China by reducing the U.S. trade deficit with that country, which is estimated at $419 billion. Behind Trump's protectionist practices lurks a medium-term strategy of using state policy to gain markets for new technologies, such as 5G, for U.S. companies, 5G being a technology for which China is a powerful competitor.
We must not lose sight of the fact that Chinese commercial positions have well-known advantages in Europe. It seemed necessary to correct them through a determined negotiation strategy, what in politics is called "standing firm." But the tariff war promises to be at least as expensive as the invasive maneuvers of Chinese products.
It is not the least of the problems that occur under the principle that any economic zone is considered in practice to be a "commercial enemy" of the United States, and therefore, it also places the eurozone in the line of fire. In a protectionist environment, an uncontrolled race is unleashed to gain economic advantages at the expense of other countries or economic zones from which it is difficult to leave, and destroys trust within political relations.
For the White House, consideration of global economic growth is secondary, as well as are the costs needed to support sectors of the American economy, in this case agriculture, in the wake of reprisals by third countries. As long as the U.S. economy continues to grow, the damage produced by Trump's trade policy will be an irrelevant political factor. Aggressive tariffs will be sustained as long as growth rates are high and as long as the Federal Reserve can maintain interest rates at a relatively moderate level with respect to prospects for overheating the economy.
La guerra comercial entre Estados Unidos y China es una de las causas, quizá la principal, de las débiles perspectivas de crecimiento de la economía mundial y, en especial, de la europea. Por lo tanto, un acuerdo comercial que ponga fin al conflicto sería la primera condición para estabilizar las perspectivas del comercio global y alejar los temores a una desaceleración. Pero ese acuerdo, que parecía muy próximo en las negociaciones en Washington, resultó bruscamente perturbado por la decisión de la Administración estadounidense de aplicar, en plenas conversaciones, una subida arancelaria de hasta 200.000 millones de dólares a los productos chinos. Trump rompió la prórroga que implica toda negociación con el argumento de que China había incumplido alguno de sus compromisos previos. Las negociaciones no se han interrumpido y continuarán en Pekín, pero Trump ha recurrido a una de sus tácticas favoritas, que consiste en ejecutar una demostración de fuerza para desestabilizar a sus interlocutores y llevar la tensión negociadora al límite. Que se firme el acuerdo es crucial para las expectativas de los próximos cuatro años.
Es probable que el acuerdo acabe por firmarse en las próximas dos semanas. China depende de sus exportaciones más que Estados Unidos y necesita con urgencia apuntalar sus posibilidades de crecimiento en una fase de cambios de su política económica interna. Para el equipo económico de Trump resulta vital transmitir a la opinión pública que ha logrado una victoria política frente a China reduciendo el déficit comercial de Estados Unidos con aquel país, que está calculado en 419.000 millones de dólares. Detrás de las prácticas proteccionistas de Trump permanece agazapada la estrategia a medio plazo de utilizar la política de Estado para ganar mercados de las nuevas tecnologías para las empresas estadounidenses, como el 5G, en las que China es un competidor poderoso.
No hay que perder de vista que las posiciones comerciales chinas tienen elementos ventajistas bien conocidos en Europa. Parecía necesario corregirlos mediante una negociación decidida, lo que en política se llama “plantarse”. Pero la guerra arancelaria promete ser al menos tan costosa como las maniobras invasivas de los productos chinos. No es el menor de los problemas el que se aplique según el principio de que cualquier zona económica se considera en la práctica como un “enemigo comercial” de Estados Unidos y, por lo tanto, sitúa también a la eurozona en la línea de fuego.
En un entorno proteccionista, se desata una carrera incontrolada por ganar ventajas económicas a costa de otros países o zonas económicas de la que es difícil salir, y destruye las relaciones políticas de confianza.
Para la Casa Blanca, las consideraciones sobre el crecimiento económico global son secundarias, igual que los costes que tengan que soportar sectores de la economía estadounidense, en este caso la agricultura, por las represalias de terceros países. Mientras la economía norteamericana siga creciendo, el daño producido por la política comercial de Trump será un factor político irrelevante. La agresividad arancelaria se sostendrá mientras las tasas de crecimiento sean elevadas y mientras la Reserva Federal pueda mantener los tipos de interés en un nivel relativamente moderado respecto a las expectativas de recalentamiento de la economía.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.