Trump's trade policy: pushing back against China
Although not akin to the protectionist policies practiced by the United States through the 1930s, the trade war launched by the Trump administration since early 2018 challenges the principles and institutions of free trade.
The taxes and barriers currently put in place correspond to certain exceptional legal provisions in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) texts and rely on US trade laws predating the WTO. Trump’s trade policy enjoys a level of bipartisan consensus in the country today, centered around the idea of improving the conditions of trade with partners while hampering the growing power of China.
The "optimal tariff" theory explains the benefits for great economic powers such as the US of high customs duties, as a lever to compel trade partners to open their domestic markets or to renounce economic policies considered harmful to US interests. President Trump thus imposed the renegotiation of regional agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS). He also favors the negotiation of bilateral or regional agreements rather than the global mechanisms of the WTO, which he denounces.
Despite the hype, the consequences of this American-led return of protectionism could in fact remain modest for the World economy and even for international trade. In the case of the European Union (EU), where trade negotiators seem to be holding their ground in the face of Trump’s demands, the reduction of US-China trade could allow an increase of exports to the US. Above all, sorting out China’s fraudulent commercial practices and reforming WTO rules, as required by president Trump, would ultimately be a very positive step forward.
The return of tariffs and the proliferation of non-WTO trade agreements, however, remain contrary to the philosophy of openness that presided over international economic relations from 1945 to this day. Ultimately, two parallel trading systems – an American one and a Chinese one – could emerge.
Taken by surprise, China has yet to elaborate a clear response to what is certainly a challenge to its desire to expand its economic and commercial power around the world. China’s reaction will be decisive.
This content is available in French : "La politique commerciale de Trump : faire reculer la Chine"
Author(s)
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
Center for Asian Studies
Asia is a nerve center for multiple global economic, political and security challenges. The Center for Asian Studies provides documented expertise and a platform for discussion on Asian issues to accompany decision makers and explain and contextualize developments in the region for the sake of a larger public dialogue.
The Center's research is organized along two major axes: relations between Asia's major powers and the rest of the world; and internal economic and social dynamics of Asian countries. The Center's research focuses primarily on China, Japan, India, Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific, but also covers Southeast Asia, the Korean peninsula and the Pacific Islands.
The Centre for Asian Studies maintains close institutional links with counterpart research institutes in Europe and Asia, and its researchers regularly carry out fieldwork in the region.
The Center organizes closed-door roundtables, expert-level seminars and a number of public events, including an Annual Conference, that welcome experts from Asia, Europe and the United States. The work of Center’s researchers, as well as that of their partners, is regularly published in the Center’s electronic journal Asie.Visions.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
RAMSES 2024. A World to Be Remade
For its 42nd edition, RAMSES 2024 identifies three major challenges for 2024.
France and the Philippines should anchor their maritime partnership
With shared interests in promoting international law and sustainable development, France and the Philippines should strengthen their maritime cooperation in the Indo-Pacific. Through bilateral agreements, expanded joint exercises and the exchange of best practices, both nations can enhance maritime domain awareness, counter security threats and develop blue economy initiatives. This deeper collaboration would reinforce stability and environmental stewardship across the region.
The China-led AIIB, a geopolitical tool?
The establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in 2016, on a Chinese initiative, constituted an attempt to bridge the gap in infrastructure financing in Asia. However, it was also perceived in the West as a potential vehicle for China’s geostrategic agendas, fueling the suspicion that the institution might compete rather than align with existing multilateral development banks (MDBs) and impose its own standards.
Jammu and Kashmir in the Aftermath of August 2019
The abrogation of Article 370, which granted special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), has been on the agenda of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for many decades.