Opinion | US-China trade war is really a clash of civilisations and ideologies
The growing conflict between China and the United States caused by the trade war is very little to do with tariffs, says Zhang Lin
The conflict between China and the United States is a competition between two different civilisations and value systems.
While the trade imbalance between the two countries continues to make headlines, it actually means little to either. For China, the role of net export contribution to economic growth has been negative in most years since 2008. For the US, a trade deficit is inevitable when it consumes 30 per cent of the world’s products but produces only 13 per cent. Both Washington and Beijing must know this: the dispute is about much more than trade.
Washington has been reflecting on its China policy, as US Vice-President Mike Pence said in his speech at the Hudson Institute on October 4 – the US opened the door to let China join the World Trade Organisation in 2001 and helped it to thrive through trade. However, China has refused to follow the path that Washington once hoped it would.
Also in 2001, the September 11 terrorist attacks happened. The events shocked America and the world, and led to zthen US President George Bush’s administration changing its foreign policy priorities and policy stance on China. At the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders’ summit in Shanghai that year, Beijing fully endorsed Washington’s anti-terrorism policy.
Had September 11 not happened, Bush would have had more time and resources to put pressure on China to “evolve” in the desired direction. But Beijing at that time was viewed by Washington as a friend, not a foe.
Then came the subprime mortgage crisis in 2008, which hurt not only the US economy but also undermined confidence in the whole liberal democracy/free-trade system, or the values known as Washington Consensus.
China, meanwhile, was showing the way, with a massive stimulus package. State intervention became a popular coping mechanism around the world, and the Chinese model – defined by a powerful state, a major presence for state-owned enterprises, and illiberal social and political tendencies, suddenly looked attractive – creating the so-called Beijing Consensus.
