Unsuccessful Attempts At Resolving U.S.-China Trade

6 Unsuccessful Attempts at Resolution of the U.S.-China Trade War

The trade war between the United States and China has persisted for several years, characterized by mutual tariffs, accusations of unfair trade practices, and ongoing negotiations that have largely failed to produce lasting resolutions. Both nations have engaged in various strategies to resolve the conflict but faced significant obstacles rooted in conflicting economic interests, structural differences, and geopolitical rivalry. These attempts included landmark agreements, unilateral tariff policies, and addressing key disputes such as intellectual property rights and technology transfer issues, yet none succeeded in establishing a comprehensive and sustainable resolution.

The most notable effort was the Phase One Agreement signed in January 2020, which temporarily eased tensions by committing China to purchase additional U.S. goods and services and by promising limited tariff reductions. However, this agreement did not address fundamental issues like intellectual property theft, forced technology transfers, and state subsidies, leaving critical dispute areas unresolved (Ciccantell et al., 2023). The agreement’s narrow scope was insufficient to resolve the structural tensions embedded in the economic models of both countries, which largely contributed to the continuation of hostilities.

Unilateral tariff strategies have been a predominant feature of the trade conflict, with the U.S. imposing tariffs on Chinese goods to press China into changing trade practices, and China retaliating with its own tariffs. These measures, intended to compel better trade arrangements, instead resulted in mutual economic harm. Increased tariffs raised costs for consumers and industries in both nations, disrupted global supply chains, and adversely affected key sectors such as agriculture, electronics, and manufacturing (Ciccantell et al., 2023). The mutual damage caused by these tariffs fostered domestic opposition but failed to bring about a resolution, as both sides remained unwilling to remove tariffs unilaterally, fearing strategic disadvantages.

The dispute over intellectual property rights and forced technology transfers has been another critical impasse. The U.S. alleges that China engages in practices that compel U.S. companies to transfer technology in exchange for market access. China's state-led development model, which involves heavy subsidies and strategic industry support, conflicts with U.S. demands for fair market competition and IP protection. Persistent disagreements over these issues reflect deeper structural differences that are difficult to reconcile, leaving negotiations incomplete and fragile (Shi, 2022).

Geopolitical considerations have played a central role in hindering resolution. The trade war is intertwined with broader strategic competition for global influence, technological supremacy, and military power. Both the U.S. and China view the conflict as a part of their national security agendas, making compromises politically challenging. The U.S. approach under administrations of both Trump and Biden has been assertive, framing the trade war as part of a strategy to contain China’s rise, while China perceives U.S. actions as attempts to undermine its sovereignty and development goals (Siripurapu & Berman, 2023).

In conclusion, all major attempts at resolving the U.S.-China trade war have failed to address the core structural, economic, and geopolitical issues that sustain the conflict. The Phase One Agreement was insufficient to resolve fundamental disputes, unilateral tariffs have caused mutual harm without resolving underlying concerns, and geopolitical rivalry continues to impede meaningful resolution. Until both nations are willing to make substantial compromises on critical issues like trade practices, technology transfer, and strategic interests, the conflict is likely to persist, impacting the global economy and international trade relations.

References

• Bown, C. (2022). Four years into the trade war, are the US and China decoupling? Peterson Institute for International Economics.
• Ciccantell, P. S., Smith, D. A., & Sowers, E. (2023). Trade Wars and Disrupted Global Commodity Chains. Journal of World-Systems Research, 29(2), 457–479.
• Shi, Y. (2022). A Review of Non-Tariff Measures with Particular Focus on the U.S. and China Practices. Theoretical Economics Letters, 12(03), 601–628.
• Siripurapu, A., & Berman, N. (2023). The Contentious US-China Trade Relationship. Council on Foreign Relations.
• Winkler, S. C. (2023). Strategic Competition and U.S.–China Relations: A Conceptual Analysis. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 16(3).
• Mahedi, H., Wang, J., Mizanur, R. M., Hasan, R., Srikanto, M., & Al, F. U. (2024). A Comparative Analysis of the Trade Policies of China and the United States of America. Open Journal of Business and Management, 12(04), 2174–2207.
• Fajgelbaum, P., & Khandelwal, A. (2021). The Economic Impacts of the US-China Trade War. National Bureau of Economic Research.
• Caldara, D., Iacoviello, M., Molligo, P., Prestipino, A., & Raffo, A. (2019). The Economic Effects of Trade Policy Uncertainty. International Finance Discussion Paper.
• Cheng, N. F. L., Hasanov, A. S., Poon, W. C., & Bouri, E. (2023). The US-China trade war and the volatility linkages between energy and agricultural commodities. Energy Economics, 120, 106605.
• Mahedi, H., Wang, J., Mizanur, R. M., Hasan, R., Srikanto, M., & Al, F. U. (2024). A Comparative Analysis of the Trade Policies of China and the United States of America. Open Journal of Business and Management, 12(04), 2174–2207.