Recently, the United States initiated a trade dispute with our country on the grounds of the imbalance in Sino-US trade. U.S. President Trump even put on a "victim" posture, accusing WTO rules of not conducive to the United States, and criticizing the WTO for favoring China and unfair to the United States.
Regarding the issue of the U.S. trade deficit, academic circles at home and abroad have done a lot of research, and the more consistent conclusions are that there are four reasons: the status of the U.S. as an international reserve currency, the low savings model of the U.S. overconsumption, the division of labor in the global value chain, and the U.S.'s high-tech in China Export restrictions. Therefore, the responsibility for the Sino-US trade imbalance is not with China, but with the United States itself. The so-called deficit is just an excuse for Trump to initiate trade frictions with China. He believes that "WTO favors China" is simply untenable.
Regarding the interests of rules, the makers of the rules are often the biggest beneficiaries.
In terms of economic and trade benefits, the United States has obtained a large number of hidden benefits based on rules.
Now, when the United States finds that it cannot achieve its goal of quickly restricting China within the framework of the WTO, it flagrantly abandons its original promise and blatantly implements unilateral trade protectionism. In this sense, the Sino-US trade dispute is essentially a struggle between unilateralism and multilateralism, and a struggle between protectionism and free trade. China stands on the side of truth and justice, facing the severe challenges that threaten the country's core interests, and facing perverse acts that endanger the common interests of the world, we can only "accompany to the end."
