As China maintains a tough stance and uncompromising rhetoric in response to Washington’s tariff hikes, analysts say Beijing is trying to mask its economic troubles and save face.
In contrast, they note that the United States—armed with greater leverage—has taken a more flexible diplomatic approach, gaining the upper hand over the Chinese regime that has clung to a rigid strategy largely seen as ineffective.
Despite mounting economic pressure, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson in April reaffirmed China’s hardline stance on the trade dispute with the Trump administration, stating: “A fight? We’ll fight to the end. A talk? Our door remains wide open.”
Henry Wu, macroeconomist and Taiwan AIA Capital lead economics researcher, told The Epoch Times that the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) aggressive rhetoric is aimed at preserving its public image.
“It keeps saying it will fight to the end, but the truth is that Xi Jinping misjudged the impact of U.S. tariffs. Instead of tackling the real issues, he resorted to nationalist sentiment, ultimately dragging down China’s economy,” Wu said.
In recent weeks, China’s export sector has been hit hard, with a surge in business closures and rising unemployment. Videos of industry workers and business owners complaining about the downturn have circulated widely on Chinese social media.
Beijing initially tried to rally international opposition to U.S. President Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs through diplomatic outreach and appeals to shared economic interests, but found little success—particularly in its efforts to court the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the EU—as other countries prioritized their own interests.
“Despite occasional political friction with Washington, neither bloc can afford to alienate the United States,” Wang He, a U.S.-based China affairs commentator, told The Epoch Times.
“In 2024, the EU and ASEAN both ran large trade deficits with China, which were effectively offset by their trade surpluses with the United States. Moreover, with China’s economy weakening and its outlook uncertain, Beijing has little to offer in terms of tangible economic benefits. As a result, very few countries aligned with China, leaving it increasingly isolated on the global stage,” Wang added.
He noted that the Chinese regime had also hoped the United States would fall into disarray under tariff pressure, but that didn’t happen.
“On the contrary, it was China’s economy that took the hit,” Wang said.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, and China’s Vice Premier He Lifeng will meet in Switzerland on May 10–11 for the first in-person trade talks since the tariff conflict began, aiming to ease tensions—weeks after Trump announced 145 percent duties on Chinese imports and Beijing responded with 125 percent tariffs on U.S. imports.
Trump on May 9 signaled that he is considering cutting tariffs on China from 145 percent to 80 percent ahead of the meeting.
An “80 percent Tariff on China seems right! Up to Scott B,” Trump wrote on his social media account on Friday morning, referring to Bessent.
Although China has publicly denied that Xi Jinping had spoken with Trump or that senior Chinese officials held private trade talks with the White House, reports suggest that China quietly lowered tariffs on certain U.S. imports, particularly high-tech products, including semiconductors.
“The two sides must have remained in contact through various levels and channels, but Beijing was playing semantic games, insisting such contact does not constitute formal negotiations,” Wang said.
He said that Trump used tariffs as leverage to force China to negotiate and open its markets.
“Trump was proactive and flexible, while China, defensive and image-conscious, remained stubborn—creating a sharp contrast,” Wang remarked.
Regarding the future of U.S.-China trade relations, Wu noted that during Trump’s first term, Washington made significant efforts to negotiate, only to find that agreements were often not honored. “Even when China signed, implementation was typically superficial and short-lived—just enough to meet the bare minimum.”
In his view, Trump may not be interested in talks this time, pointing out that he raised tariffs on Chinese goods to up to 145 percent without initiating negotiations, while actively pursuing trade deals with Canada, Mexico, Taiwan, Japan, and Vietnam.
“The United States has realized the problem isn’t just Xi Jinping—it’s the whole authoritarian system of the CCP,” Wu said. “In that system, all economic gains are eventually captured by elites through political power. Integrating China into globalization only strengthened this authoritarian model. Trump now clearly sees that this is not just about negotiation, it’s about applying maximum pressure to bring down the CCP regime and rebuild a China based on democracy, rule of law, freedom, and human rights.”
Wang predicted that going forward, the U.S.-China trade war is likely to follow a pattern of ongoing fighting and talking, with no short-term resolution.
“But Trump is expected to quickly finalize trade deals with other countries this week, which would strengthen his position. If the United States forms a tariff alliance, China will face even greater pressure. At this point, the initiative firmly lies in Trump’s hands,” he said.
Wu suggested another possibility. He said the talks in Switzerland might not lead to a positive outcome. It might become a one-time event, with no follow-up negotiations.
