Q: Would you say that China has won this round of the tariff battle?

Shen Yi: Of course. China was conducting business by the rules when the U.S. came in slapping a 125% tariff on our goods. So, we responded in kind — hit back with reciprocal tariffs, and on top of that, we threw in a series of non-tariff countermeasures. That forced the U.S. to come to the table. And in Geneva, we got them to take the first step and roll back their tariffs on us. Then we reciprocated. That’s like pushing them back and shutting down their bullying. If that’s not a win, then what is?

It’s like when people say, “The Korean War ended where it started, at the 38th parallel, so what did China really gain?” But what they don’t see is that we fought all the way to the Yalu River and then pushed the flames of war back south, forcing the U.S. to the negotiation table and into a ceasefire agreement. If that’s not a victory, what is?

Some Chinese people may feel a bit unsatisfied — like we didn’t get a sweeping, all-out win. But in reality, what you’re seeing now is what international competition typically looks like. The late Joseph Nye talked about a world of complex interdependence — that still applies today. We often criticize Trump for breaking the rules, but we also need to make sure our own understanding of the world isn’t driven purely by emotion. We can’t fall into the same kind of zero-sum thinking that Trump does.

The second thing we need to learn is the audacity to claim victory—and the skill to manage it well. We need to have the courage to say out loud that we won. Take what just happened in Geneva — we secured such a favorable outcome, and yet some people still hesitate to admit it was a win. Could this hesitation be a sign of a lack of confidence?

Then there’s management of victory — which means knowing how to analyze and understand the reasons behind our success. Beyond our institutional strengths, the most fundamental reason is that we’ve followed a fact-based, pragmatic approach — one that respects objective reality and adheres to the underlying principles and methods of science.

We shouldn’t expect that a “victory” means the Americans will kneel down and say, “We’re sorry, we were wrong, we’ll never do it again.” That’s just not realistic. Nor should we fantasize about a single move leading the other side to total submission — like in a Hollywood or Bollywood movie where everything ends happily ever after: swords into plowshares, horses back to pasture, and everyone breaking into song and dance. That’s not how the real world works.

We’ve often talked about fighting a protracted war or running a “hundred-year marathon.” So why are some people already losing patience after just a month or so?

It’s true — the past month or so has been hard to get through. One difficulty after another, constant challenges. Naturally, people are feeling anxious. But this is what real life looks like. If we want China to take a central position in the international system, then we have to develop a new kind of mindset and awareness.

First, when the other side comes at us aggressively, we need the guts to say “no” — and then stand our ground.

Second, when we achieve a phased result, we should have the courage to recognize and admit it as a victory.

Third, even when we see signs of success, we must remain clear-eyed: this is only the first round — in fact, the first round may not even be fully over yet. There are more uncertainties ahead, more tough and drawn-out contests waiting for us.

Only when we build up this set of mental and strategic habits can we say that we’re truly ready — in terms of mindset, understanding, and conceptual foundation — to engage in the systemic competition of major powers.

When you’re in a long-term strategic struggle with an irrational opponent, it’s very easy to fall into what Nietzsche warned about: “When you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.” And before you realize it, you may end up becoming the very thing you set out to resist.

So at all times, we must hold fast to our core principles, stay grounded in China’s national interests, and maintain a clear, objective understanding of the basic logic and defining features of the U.S.-China strategic rivalry. With this as the foundation, we can begin to build more accurate expectations. And only on the basis of such expectations can we properly assess U.S.-China interactions — their policies, their strategies, and the broader game between us. That is what we most need to be doing right now.

Q: In this ongoing cycle of talks and confrontation, how should we understand and handle this back-and-forth?

Shen Yi: If the Americans reimpose the tariffs they’ve agreed to lift, we’ll just respond in kind. As for the non-tariff barriers that were suspended or lifted, we can always bring them back. If you want to escalate, well, we’ve got tools in our kit to escalate too — and not just tit-for-tat, but with upgraded options.

People need to understand that strategic competition between countries can be really tedious. It’s often just the same tools and tactics used over and over. The whole point of this repetition is to wear down your will — either hit you with a knockout blow, or drag it out until you lose hope and give up.

From the moment the U.S. unilaterally imposed tariffs to where we are now — sitting at the negotiation table — the first round of the game still isn’t over. It’s not over until the U.S. actually implements all the commitments it’s made. Think back to 2018: we negotiated with the Americans from May through July, basically wrapped up a phase, and then — bang — they slapped on another round of tariffs, and the talks collapsed. That kind of thing could easily happen again, so we need to be mentally and tactically prepared.

Trump will always play the game of “I’m in! I’m out!” — jumping back and forth just to confuse or provoke you. If this were a normal American political elite, they would have stopped this kind of pointless testing long ago. But the reality is, Trump is that kind of erratic, disordered figure. He charges headlong in the wrong direction — and we simply have to hold the line, absorb the pressure, and hit back just hard enough to push him back toward rationality.

Honestly, based on everything we know about Trump, it would be more surprising if he didn’t stir up trouble down the line. The man thrives on chaos. Playing the fool, pushing boundaries, acting shamelessly — these are all classic parts of his strategic playbook.

Q: If Trump acts the way we expect — erratic and flip-flopping on tariffs and trade issues — will there be the cost for him?

Shen Yi: The cost Trump will have to bear depends on how America’s domestic system reacts. When dealing with someone like Trump, the only viable strategy is to ensure the U.S. pays a real price for his actions. Only then will internal mechanisms emerge to constrain him more effectively over time.

First of all, the current situation has already increased the constraints and limits Trump faces domestically. The China-U.S. dynamic today is very different from what it was back in 2018. The countermeasures we launched back then caused relatively mild disruptions — not like the chaos we see now in 2025: empty ports, unused containers, surging prices. These shocks are much stronger this time, which gives us reason for cautious optimism. Trump, or at least those around him, are likely learning harder lessons than they did in 2018.

Look at the latest developments — take Scott Bessent’s recent negotiation authority, for example. It came with a surprisingly high level of discretion. And so far, Trump seems willing to accept what’s on the table. That alone shows there’s been some behavioral adjustment, even if temporary.

Second, it’s now clear there are a few pressure points where Trump can feel pain. For instance, when the U.S. Treasury market shows volatility, or when specific service sectors and import-dependent industries are hit, he tends to react. So the strategy is straightforward: identify those weak spots, and strike consistently and systematically.

At the same time, we need to be clear about something — the most effective way to shape Trump’s behavior isn’t necessarily direct confrontation with him. It’s getting everyone else in the U.S. — the political elite, the business world, and ordinary voters — to see clearly that Trump’s policies are wrong. Once that realization takes root, multiple forces within the U.S. will start acting to check him.

Trump’s domestic game, meanwhile, is to convince those around him that this chaotic, irrational style of his actually delivers asymmetric gains for the U.S. That’s what he’s trying to sell. So what we need to do is prove two things:

First, this kind of erratic, reckless approach doesn’t yield any asymmetric benefits for America.

Second, it actively harms the U.S. — the more unhinged the approach, the greater the damage.

If America behaves rationally, its losses might be smaller. But if it lets Trump run wild, the cost will only go up. And that is what will trigger internal checks and balances against Trump inside the U.S. system.

Q: Trump’s chaotic tariff punches aren’t aimed solely at China — other countries have also been targeted. While a few surrendered almost instantly — to use Chinese internet slang, they “slid into a kneel” — many others didn’t reach a deal with him at all. Now that China and the U.S. have issued this joint statement, what kind of impact or signal will it send for Trump’s future negotiations with other major global economies?

Shen Yi: The key takeaway for other countries is this: learn from China’s experience. Study how China managed to reach an agreement with Trump — the most important principle is reciprocity. Without reciprocal countermeasures, there’s no way Trump would ever come to the table. If you can’t make him feel the pain, he’ll just keep hammering you with his tariff blackmail.

So now that countries have seen China’s example, the lesson is: don’t just imitate part of it — adopt the whole approach.

Among the world’s major economies, the EU has at least drawn up a sanctions list against the U.S. If Washington fails to lift tariffs by the deadline, Brussels has pledged to respond with retaliatory measures. However, since the U.S. tariffs on the EU are already in effect, Europe’s response has been noticeably weaker than China’s.

Japan? Even weaker. So far, we’ve seen no concrete retaliation list from Tokyo. Occasionally they make noises about U.S. debt or zero-tariff access, but that’s about it.

And then there are countries like the UK — the ones that proactively approach Trump and try to cut a deal. What happens? Just look: they get nothing in return. The tariffs remain, and what follows is pure chaos — like “chickens flying and dogs jumping,” as we say in Chinese. In short, they get burned.
So what produces the best outcome? Real, reciprocal countermeasures. That’s the route Mexico and Canada took. They stood their ground. And look — the U.S. isn’t so quick to pick a fight with them anymore.

In that sense, if other countries are serious about resisting this trend, they have two choices: either follow China’s lead, or form a bloc. Better yet, they could come to China and propose something more structured — maybe China could take the lead in designing a multilateral mechanism under the WTO framework, or a more flexible arrangement, that allows others to negotiate with the U.S. from a position of parity, just like China did.
This is entirely imaginable — and worth hoping for.

To sum it up: the stronger your will, the smaller your losses; the weaker or more submissive you are — the more completely you “slide into a kneel” — the greater the damage you’ll suffer.

Editor: LQQ