africa.chinadaily.com.cn
China counters US protectionism with global partnerships and domestic growth
The US's tariff war, potentially escalating into broader economic conflicts, is prompting China to strengthen global partnerships and boost domestic demand to attract foreign investment and create shared prosperity.
- What is the primary impact of the US's protectionist trade policies on global trade dynamics?
- The US initiated a tariff war, potentially escalating to currency and tech wars, aiming to force other countries to cover its trade deficits. China, viewing this as an opportunity, is strengthening partnerships with key economies to boost globalization and free trade, positioning itself as a shared market for global growth.
- How is China strategically leveraging the US's tariff war to promote its own economic and geopolitical interests?
- The US's protectionist approach contradicts its past role as a champion of multilateral trade. China is countering this by focusing on domestic demand and opening-up policies, aiming to attract global partners and create a virtuous cycle of shared prosperity.
- What are the long-term implications of the US's shift towards protectionism and China's response on the global economic order?
- China's strategy focuses on bolstering domestic demand through increased incomes and robust social security, attracting foreign investment and generating new growth momentum. This proactive response positions China as a key player in a reshaped global trade landscape.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the US's actions as aggressive and disruptive to the global trade order, while portraying China's response as a proactive and beneficial effort to promote globalization. The headline (if any) and introductory paragraphs likely emphasized China's perspective and its potential to benefit from the US's trade policies. This framing might unduly influence the reader to view China's response more favorably.
Language Bias
The article uses strong, loaded language to describe the US's actions, such as "subversive," "brute force," and "law of the jungle." These terms carry negative connotations and frame the US's behavior in an unfavorable light. More neutral terms like "protectionist measures," "trade restrictions," or "unilateral actions" could offer a more balanced perspective.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on China's perspective and response to US tariffs. It omits detailed analysis of the US's justifications for its actions beyond characterizing them as protectionist and motivated by trade deficits. Alternative perspectives from US economists or policymakers are absent, potentially leading to an incomplete understanding of the motivations behind US trade policy. While brevity may be a factor, the lack of counterarguments weakens the analysis.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the situation as a simple choice between the US's protectionist approach and China's commitment to globalization. It overlooks the complexities of global trade, the various factors influencing trade policies, and potential middle grounds or alternative approaches. The narrative simplifies a multifaceted issue into a binary opposition.
Gender Bias
The article features only one named source, Zhang Yansheng, who is male. While this doesn't automatically indicate gender bias, the lack of diverse voices limits the potential for varied perspectives. More female voices or diverse viewpoints could provide a more complete and balanced analysis.
Sustainable Development Goals
The US tariff war negatively impacts global trade, potentially leading to job losses and slower economic growth in many countries. China's response, while aiming to create opportunities, also faces challenges in maintaining economic stability amidst global trade uncertainty.