The recent signing of an agreement between China and the United States has led to a significant reduction in tariffs, with a 90-day “buffer period” set in place. At first glance, it seems like the situation is easing and negotiations have resumed. However, many experts are warning that this “truce” is more like a brief calm in the eye of a storm, with a real tempest potentially brewing. The statements made by Xi Jinping and the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs the next day gave the impression of a sudden change in attitude.
On the second day after the agreement was reached, Trump flew directly to the Middle East, making a global impact with Saudi Arabia committing to invest $600 billion in the United States in the future, including a nearly $142 billion arms deal. Qatar even offered a Boeing plane known as the “Airborne Palace,” ready to be customized as Trump’s exclusive “Air Force One.” This move has caused a stir in the United States.
While making temporary concessions at the negotiating table, the international chessboard is seeing successive moves. Is Trump’s move really a “pause”? Or is it the opening move in a larger strategic game?
The latest round of tariff showdown between China and the US has pressed the pause button for now, but is this really a turning point? Many experts warn that this may not be a turning point, but rather a brief calm before the storm.
On May 12th, the US and China reached a temporary agreement in Geneva. The US cut tariffs on Chinese products from 145% to 30%, while China also reduced retaliatory tariffs on US goods to 10%. Both sides also pledged to suspend restrictions on rare earth exports and initiate a 90-day negotiation buffer period.
The White House hailed this as a “historic victory,” while Chinese state media claimed it as a “success in forcing concessions from the US.”
A sentence from CNBC columnist and former Department of Defense policy official Dewardric McNeal poured cold water on the situation, stating that this is merely the “calm at the center of the storm,” with the real storm yet to come.
Mark Wu, an international trade professor at Harvard University, pointed out that China has not made substantial concessions, and the key now is whether the US can push for real results during this 90-day period.
Finance Minister Scott Bessent bluntly stated that this agreement is just a “reboot of the negotiation mechanism,” not the end, let alone a concession.
In my view, Trump’s “tariff reduction” move also has political considerations in the US. Since he announced the “Tariff Liberation Day” on April 2, the stock market has been continuously falling, and his approval ratings have been shaken. With the announcement of the negotiation agreement, the stock market immediately soared.
However, the question remains: How long can this agreement hold? The Washington Post quoted Alicia Garcia-Herrero, chief economist for the Asia Pacific region at the French Foreign Trade Bank, stating that this is simply a delay tactic and not a real solution to the problem.
So, what are the main issues at play here? Let’s address the three major risks currently at hand:
First, the Chinese market is not truly open. McNeal mentioned that the Chinese market is no longer the “land of opportunity” it was during the early days of the WTO; instead, it has become a highly nationalistic environment influenced by the Chinese Communist Party. Foreign companies struggle in China due to pricing pressure and are easily targeted politically.
Second, fentanyl has become a key negotiating chip. Trump imposed special tariffs on China for smuggling fentanyl. Now, China claims to be making concessions, but US experience tells us that promises from China come fast while implementation is slow. Without quantifiable metrics and enforcement mechanisms, promises are essentially empty.
As a live example, during the routine press conference at the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the 13th, when asked about fentanyl and tariffs, a media outlet was met with a denial from China. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian stated that China has repeatedly stated that fentanyl is a problem for the US, not China, and the responsibility lies with the US itself. Ignoring China’s goodwill, the US unjustly imposed tariffs on fentanyl from China, severely impacting dialogue and cooperation between China and the US on drug control and damaging China’s interests. Lin further stated that if the US truly wants to cooperate with China, it should “stop smearing and shifting blame on China, and engage with China in a dialogue based on equality, respect, and mutual benefit.”
Let’s now look at the third major risk: non-tariff barriers persist. Examples include opaque permitting processes, favoritism towards domestic technology, restrictions on purchasing American goods, and more. McNeal warns that these issues will not be resolved in the 90-day period; in essence, the next wave of tariffs is only a matter of time.
Wayne Winegarden, an economist at the Pacific Research Institute (PRI), summarizes it clearly: “This is not a victory, just pushing the pause button.”
The BBC points out the strategic intentions of the Chinese Communist Party: while negotiations are ongoing on the surface, behind the scenes, they are promoting “internal circulation,” aiming to reduce reliance on the US and preparing for a long-term engagement.
Scott Kennedy, director of Chinese business and political economy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), highlighted that in this round of US-China competition, the Chinese Communist Party gained a small advantage, with Trump making some concessions, but this situation is not sustainable.
So, what should American companies do? McNeal’s suggestion is very practical: “This 90-day period is not a buffer, it is a window of opportunity to relocate.” It’s time to consider going to Vietnam, Mexico, or even back to the US. Relying on China now is not just a commercial risk but also a strategic mistake.
What do you think? Do you see this “truce” as a turning point, or as a prelude to a bigger storm?
In fact, this “buffer period agreement” was not a last-minute decision but had been prepared beforehand.
The Financial Times revealed that three weeks ago, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had a secret meeting with Chinese Finance Minister Lao Fan’an at the underground headquarters of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). This marked the first direct contact between high-level US and Chinese officials since Trump returned to the White House.
Bessent admitted that the 145% high tariffs were essentially an “economic blockade,” which China could not sustain, and the US did not want to drag it out either. However, he emphasized that this was not a concession but a way to “take a breather” and then advance Trump’s key policy of “strategic decoupling.”
He made it clear that the focus would no longer be on “efficiency” but on “resilience.” Industries related to national security, such as chips, pharmaceuticals, and steel, would have to be back under US control. This “truce” is simply a milestone in the decoupling strategy.
However, the response from the Chinese side suggests the drama is far from over.
The BBC noted that even as the negotiating delegations from both sides had flown to Switzerland for talks, Chinese state media was mocking the US Treasury Secretary on social media, claiming that he was “pushing an empty shopping cart to negotiations” and shouting, “We will accompany you to the end,” showing a tough stance.
Upon the conclusion of the negotiations, Xi Jinping immediately appeared in Beijing and at a “China-Latin American Ministerial Conference,” he shouted to a group of Latin American country representatives for “unity and cooperation” and “opposition to hegemony.” He even specifically exclaimed, “Bullying will only lead to self-isolation,” words clearly aimed at Trump. It seems he changes his stance faster than turning a page.
CNN analysis suggests that the recent Chinese actions are intentionally portraying them as “responsible” actors, aspiring to be champions of free trade while labeling the US as an “international bully” behind the scenes.
Not content with just slogans, China is also spending money. They announced plans to provide 66 billion RMB in credit support to Latin American countries and switch to settlement in the yuan. It appears they aim to challenge the dominance of the US dollar and engage in a currency war.
However, commentator Zhao Xiao pointed out that this tough talk from China is actually a mask for insecurity. He cited statistics indicating that China’s exports to the US account for about 3% of its GDP, and the manufacturing industry heavily relies on overseas orders. With the high tariffs now in place, many factories have shut down, workers have taken to the streets for labor rights, and economic data has been deliberately obscured. Even more ironic is that while China talks tough, it quietly withdrew retaliatory tariffs on eight categories of US-produced chips.
Comparatively, Trump’s strategy is clear-cut. He set a 90-day negotiation deadline, with the agreement leading to tariff reductions and a return to high tariffs if an agreement is not reached. At the same time, he also shows goodwill, stating that he is not considering a return to the 145% peak and hinting at a possible phone call with Xi Jinping over the weekend.
The White House has set three red lines: structural reform, market reciprocity, combating illegal trade, especially addressing the root of the opioid crisis. These are not symbolic statements but the real core of the negotiations.
China has also begun tentatively offering concessions. Trump mentioned that China is willing to fully open its market to American companies. This move aims not only to negotiate lower tariffs but also represents a certain acknowledgment of the unequal trade relationship of the past.
Despite these developments, the future of US-China relations remains pessimistic. Scholars in Beijing are already considering a full-blown US-China war, a real military confrontation.
Professor Wang Jishi from the School of International Relations at Peking University has warned that the current US-China relationship may be even more tense than the US-USSR Cold War era, emphasizing that the risk of a hot war is now higher than in the past.
Professor Shi Yin from Renmin University of China also warned that a new cold war is emerging, even more complex and dangerous than the old one. He emphasized not to underestimate the US and not to overestimate China, cautioning that having nuclear weapons does not prevent a major conflict between the US and China.
Both scholars stress that what will ultimately determine global dynamics are technology, industry, and institutions, not a few propaganda slogans.
Having discussed the power play at the US-China negotiating table, let’s widen our perspective and take a look at the Trump administration’s maneuvers in the Middle East.
On May 13, Trump arrived in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia, marking his first visit to the Middle East during his new term. Upon arrival, the Saudi royal family rolled out a lavender-colored carpet symbolizing “rebirth and growth,” in a high-profile welcome ceremony, incorporating designs featuring “spring desert flowers” and traditional “Sadu patterns,” clearly signaling an esteemed guest reception.
The main event was the signing of agreements.
Saudi Arabia pledged to invest up to $600 billion in the US over the coming years, with a focus on energy, artificial intelligence, healthcare, data centers, and defense modernization. DataVolt, a Saudi data enterprise, plans to invest $20 billion in the US to establish AI data centers and energy infrastructure.
The White House announced that Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman signed a record-breaking arms deal totaling $142 billion, covering the most advanced equipment and services from over a dozen US defense firms, touted as the “largest arms sale in history.”
Trump also expressed the hope for Saudi Arabia to join the “Abraham Accords” at the appropriate time, aiming for normalized relations with Israel. While Saudi Arabia still insists on the establishment of a Palestinian state, behind-the-scenes discussions have commenced, heralding a major breakthrough strategically.
Trump’s Middle East trip has three key stops: Saudi Arabia, attending the US-Saudi Investment Forum and securing major deals; Qatar, visiting the Al Udeid Air Base housing US troops and holding closed-door meetings with Qatari Emir; and the United Arab Emirates, focusing on AI, energy, and technological cooperation.
Gregg Roman, Executive Director of the United States-Middle East Forum, commented that this visit has two main objectives: first, to instill confidence in allies, and second, to counter the perception of the Biden administration’s “withdrawal from the Middle East.” He stated that Trump aims to reassure allies that the US is back and remains a reliable partner.
Moreover, strategically significant is the White House’s announcement that they would lift the export restrictions on AI chips to Middle Eastern countries, previously imposed during the Biden administration to prevent technology flow to China. This policy adjustment is seen as a step towards reinitiating US-Middle East technological cooperation. The UAE also promptly announced plans to invest up to $1.4 trillion in the US over the next decade, focusing on AI, semiconductors, manufacturing, and energy sectors.
One highlight of Trump’s Middle East tour was when the Qatari royal family, eager to show goodwill, offered to gift Trump a Boeing 747-8 luxury royal plane to be repurposed as the new “Air Force One.” The aircraft, originally reserved for royal use, boasts interior decor comparable to an “Airborne Palace.”
However, critics from both US parties have opposed Trump accepting this gift, citing technical and security concerns regarding a foreign government offering a plane for presidential use, as well as the extravagance of the gesture. The aircraft is valued at $400 million.
On May 13, Trump took to social media to clarify: “The Boeing 747 is to be gifted to the US Air Force/Defense Department, not to me! This is a gift to our country from a country—Qatar that has been a great ally in containing terrorism,” he wrote. He added, “Why should our military – our taxpayers – be forced to spend hundreds of millions of dollars when we can get this great plane for free from a country that wants to honor us for doing a great job? The tremendous cost savings will be used for our new ‘Make America Great Again’… Only a fool would say no to that.”
Reportedly, Trump visited the aircraft at a Florida airport in February, where it was stationed. He had previously stated that he would not be using the aircraft after leaving office. During his first term in 2018, Trump awarded Boeing a $3.9 billion contract to manufacture two new planes. However, with delays, Boeing hopes to have the plane in service by 2027, around the time Trump is set to retire.
How do you view Trump’s Middle East tour? Is it setting the stage for American manufacturing and diplomatic influence? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments section.
Don’t forget to subscribe to the YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/@tangqingnews
And subscribe to the GJW channel:
https://www.ganjingworld.com/channel/1eiqjdnq7go2ebXA2yTPUSg631de0c