May 04, 2018
U.S. talks trade with China amid broader strategic disengagement
The Trump administration’s senior economic team just wrapped up talks in Beijing to address rising U.S.–China tensions. These talks appear to have amounted largely to an exchange of views, with China, unsurprisingly, evincing little willingness to immediately address the bilateral trade deficit with the United States or curb its mercantilist economic approach.
The bottom line: The inconclusive results should not obscure a new direction in U.S. relations with China: disengagement.
In retrospect, the end of the Obama administration may represent the high-water mark of U.S.-China ties.
- Beijing’s bilateral trade with Washington reached roughly $578 billion in 2016, up from around $116 billion in 2000, while Chinese annual direct investment in the United States over the same period surged from $68 million to more than $45 billion.
Read the Full Article at Axios
More from CNAS
-
Sharper: Global Coronavirus Response
Commentary
As regions across the United States enforce states of emergency and a growing list of countries restrict travel, close schools, and quarantine citizens, the economic and human...
By Chris Estep & Cole Stevens
-
China, Europe, and COVID-19 with CNAS’s Ashley Feng and Kristine Lee
Podcast
Ashley Feng and Kristine Lee join Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Jim Townsend to explain China’s response to COVID-19 on the latest episode of Brussels Sprouts. Feng is a Research ...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Jim Townsend, Kristine Lee & Ashley Feng
-
Can the G7 Stop the Coronavirus?
Commentary
The world’s leading governments are throwing all they have into the coronavirus fight. Recent days have seen dramatic social distancing requirements, novel border controls, ma...
By Gary Edson & Richard Fontaine
-
Virus Competition Is Wrecking China-U.S. Cooperation Hopes
Commentary
As Washington shifted its worldview over the last several years to a sharp focus on China competition, even the most claw-bearing hawks generally left open the possibility of ...
By Richard Fontaine
