On Monday, US President Donald Trump took to social media with a shocking statement in response to China’s 34 percent retaliatory tariffs on US imports, angrily condemning the move as going against his prior warnings. He threatened that if China did not withdraw its 34 percent counter-tariffs by the end of the day on Tuesday, the US would impose an additional 50 percent punitive tariff on Chinese imports starting from midnight on Wednesday. He also warned that “all talks with China concerning their requested meetings with us will be terminated!”
Trump’s statement illustrated that the US would no longer tolerate China’s unfair practices — prolonged abuse of tariffs, non-tariff barriers, illegal subsidies for businesses and long-term manipulation of exchange rates — and would respond strictly to its continuously escalating trade provocations. China’s Ministry of Commerce fired back in response, stating that China would “fight to the end.” Tariffs of a cumulative 104 percent took effect against China on Wednesday, which Trump increased to 125 percent later that day.
Upon closer inspection, Trump’s series of statements and actions are not solely focused on using tariffs as an economic tool, but instead reflect a strategic consideration to lure the snake out of its hole and strike it while its head is exposed. It is clear that he is attempting to use his harsh “reciprocal” tariff policy to progressively escalate the economic friction between the US and China into a full-scale strategic confrontation — even if it comes with the risk of pushing both sides to the brink of war.
In reality, after Trump announced the retaliatory tariffs, China’s pro-war factions immediately mocked him and the US. Chinese state-sponsored media outlets such as China Global Television Network and Xinhua released artificial intelligence-generated content, including a song titled The Tragedy of Tariffs and a video featuring a humanoid robot named “TARIFF.”
In the video, the robot criticizes the US for using tariffs as a weapon, warning that it would lead to a never-ending trade war that would bring suffering to all citizens. In the end, the robot — unable to fulfill its mission of protecting the best interests of humanity — self-destructs. The video uses the robot’s self-destruction to portray Trump’s trade policies as not only failing to protect US interests, but for potentially destroying global supply chains and ruining economic stability.
China responded to Trump’s “Liberation Day” with sarcasm and mockery, displaying an arrogant and conceited attitude. This behavior only furthered Trump’s anger and ignited a confrontational spark that led to this week’s sharp and sudden increase in US-China tensions.
As the world reels from the shock of this trade confrontation, pro-peace voices within China have been all but completely suppressed — only the hardline pro-war factions remain, manipulating and dominating the public discourse. After Trump initially announced the US would implement a 34 percent tariff on Chinese imports, China quickly retaliated with a 34 percent counter-tariff.
Soon after, a post on the WeChat messaging app written by someone called He Bin (賀濱) — purportedly an academic associated with the Public Policy Research Center at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), a major Chinese think tank — circulated online. The post said that implementing retaliatory tariffs would be a mistake on China’s part, likening it to a “you hit your wife, I’ll hit mine” mentality, arguing the move is akin to China following the US in shooting its own foot.
However, the post quickly attracted public criticism and was labelled as defeatist. On Sunday, after less than one week, CASS announced that the Public Policy Research Center with which He was affiliated would officially be abolished and its research projects transferred to CASS’ Institute of Economics, highlighting the Chinese Communist Party’s strict zero-tolerance policy toward internal dissent.
The particularly abnormal and volatile international situation calls for even more caution in handling the geopolitical risks across the Taiwan Strait. Taiwan is not only faced with the economic rivalry between two major world powers, but also with the accompanying hidden provocations that could affect the stability of the Taiwan Strait.
If the two behemoths on either side of Taiwan actually engage in armed conflict, it would be impossible for our nation to remain uninvolved. Whether it is disruptions to the global supply chain, fluctuations in financial markets or diplomatic pressure, all are challenges that Taiwan must cautiously address.
This latest tariff confrontation might just be the tip of the iceberg — the deeper issues are the complete reorganization of the global order and inevitable ideological conflicts. As dark clouds begin to gather, Taiwan must make hay while the sun still shines and prepare itself to weather the storm.
Liao Ming-hui is an assistant researcher at the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
RSS