By Ryan Yeh
In recent days, amid expectations of a new round of high-level economic and trade talks between China and the U.S., the two sides have engaged in subtle interactions in public discourse.
On May 8, a spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in the United States delivered a critical response with three points to recent U.S. statements following the announcement of the talks. The three points not only directly respond to the U.S.’s remarks but also, against the complex backdrop of the ongoing tariff standoff between China and the U.S., clearly convey China's core stance and deep strategic considerations on the issue. A thorough analysis of these three points helps us understand China's posture in future dialogues and the trajectory of China-U.S. economic and trade relations.
Embassy Spokesperson’s Response to Media Query on the China-U.S. High-Level Economic and Trade Talks
Q: Following China’s recent announcement of upcoming talks with the U.S. side, the United States has stated that it will not lower tariffs before negotiations begin and has implied that the talks were not initiated by the U.S. side. What is China’s comment on this?
A: Regarding the upcoming China-U.S. high-level economic and trade talks, both the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Commerce of China have already made statements. I would like to reiterate the following three points:
First, the U.S. side has recently reached out to China through various channels, actively conveying its desire to engage with China on tariffs and other related issues. After carefully assessing the U.S. messages, China decided to agree to hold discussions. The talks are being held at the request of the U.S. side.
Second, it is China’s consistent position to firmly oppose the U.S. abuse of tariffs. China will resolutely safeguard its legitimate rights and interests, uphold international fairness and justice, and defend WTO rules and the multilateral trading system.
Third, this tariff war was launched by the U.S. side. If the U.S. genuinely wants a negotiated solution, it should stop making threats and exerting pressure, and engage in talks with China on the basis of equality, mutual respect, and mutual benefit. China will never accept a situation where the U.S. says one thing but does another, nor will China seek any agreement at the cost of principles or international fairness and justice.
"Talks Held at U.S. Request": Competing For Narrative Leadership and Demonstrating Strategic Resolve
The first point of the spokesperson's response explicitly states: "The U.S. side has recently reached out to China through various channels, actively conveying its desire to engage with China on tariffs and other related issues. After carefully assessing the U.S. messages, China decided to agree to hold discussions. The talks are being held at the request of the U.S. side." This directly refutes the U.S. implication that "the U.S. did not initiate the talks," with its deeper motivations including several key dimensions:
Competing for the right to shape the international narrative and the moral high ground: In international relations, those who seek dialogue proactively are often seen as more eager to resolve issues. The U.S. has tried to portray a narrative that "China is desperate to negotiate, while the U.S. reluctantly agrees," to demonstrate toughness at home and exert psychological pressure in negotiations. By clarifying that the U.S. initiated the talks, China aims to disrupt this narrative, showing it is engaging on equal terms, not yielding to pressure. This concerns national dignity and gaining broader international understanding and support.
Demonstrating China's strategic resolve and confidence: The wording "after carefully assessing the U.S. messages, China decided to agree to hold discussions" implies that China does not accept all overtures but follows its own criteria and pace. Against the backdrop of U.S. tariff pressures and restrictions on technology and supply chains, China's economy has shown strong resilience. This stance signals that while dialogue is necessary, China can withstand external pressures, will not engage in dialogue for its own sake, and will not sacrifice core interests. This resolve stems from China's large domestic market, complete industrial chain, and ongoing economic structural optimization.
Sending complex signals to U.S. domestic actors: The U.S. is not monolithic on tariff policies and engagement strategies. Some in business, academia, and local governments favor dialogue to ease tensions and reduce trade costs. By emphasizing U.S. initiative, China may indirectly encourage those pragmatic voices, suggesting the dialogue window is driven by internal U.S. needs to win support from more practical forces within the U.S.
"Firmly oppose the U.S. abuse of tariffs...resolutely safeguard its legitimate rights and interests and uphold international fairness and justice": Stating Core Principles and Drawing Red Lines
The second point states: "It is China’s consistent position to firmly oppose the U.S. abuse of tariffs. China will resolutely safeguard its legitimate rights and interests, uphold international fairness and justice, and defend WTO rules and the multilateral trading system." This reinforces China's fundamental stance and operational principles on tariffs:
Identifying the core issue in the trade conflict and China’s unshakable demands: Tariffs are the starting point and core of China-U.S. economic frictions. China views U.S. tariff hikes as unilateral and protectionist, violating WTO rules. Therefore, removing or significantly reducing these tariffs is a core demand China will insist on in any economic talks. Reiterating this sets clear agenda priorities and core concerns for the upcoming negotiations.
Aligning China’s stance with international rules and multilateralism: Linking its position to "international fairness and justice," "WTO rules," and the "multilateral trading system" is a strategic move. It elevates the bilateral trade dispute to a global issue of defending the international trade order, garnering broader global sympathy and support while morally isolating U.S. unilateralism. As globalization faces headwinds and unilateralism rises, positioning itself as a defender of the multilateral system enhances China's international image and soft power.
Setting negotiation red lines and stabilizing expectations: By emphasizing "resolutely safeguard its legitimate rights and interests," China sends a strong signal to the U.S. that there is no room for compromise on core interests. It also assures domestic audiences and markets that the government will uphold principles, avoiding short-term concessions at the expense of national interests. This stabilizes domestic expectations and fosters unity.
"The U.S. Initiated the Tariff War. Dialogue Requires Equality and Respect—No Tolerance for Duplicity": Setting Preconditions for Dialogue and Warning U.S. About its Sincerity
The third point directly states: "this tariff war was launched by the U.S. side," and sets conditions for dialogue: " If the U.S. genuinely wants a negotiated solution, it should stop making threats and exerting pressure, and engage in talks with China on the basis of equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit." It also warns sternly, "China will never accept a situation where the U.S. says one thing but does another, nor will China seek any agreement at the cost of principles or international fairness and justice."
Clarifying responsibility and occupying a morally advantageous position: Stating "his tariff war was launched by the U.S. side" reinforces historical facts and assigns responsibility for the current impasse, providing a moral foundation for China's negotiating stance.
Defining preconditions for constructive dialogue: "Stop making threats and exerting pressure" and "equality, mutual respect, and mutual benefit" are essential prerequisites for effective talks. This directly counters the U.S.'s past "maximum pressure" tactics and signals that China seeks sustainable, constructive solutions, not forced agreements under duress. These principles aim to create a fairer negotiation environment.
Warning about U.S. credibility based on past experience: "China will never accept a situation where the U.S. says one thing but does another," reflects deep-seated distrust of U.S. policy inconsistencies and unfulfilled promises in past interactions. Given the complexity of China-U.S. relations and the frequent inconsistencies in how the United States coordinates and implements its policies toward China, including instances where different departments issue conflicting signals, China's statement serves as a pre-emptive reminder for the U.S. to demonstrate genuine sincerity and consistency, translating commitments into action.
Reiterating red lines and rejecting unrealistic U.S. expectations: The statement that "China will never accept a situation where the U.S. says one thing but does another, nor will China seek any agreement at the cost of principles or international fairness and justice" reinforces the second point, making clear that while China seeks dialogue, there are red lines. If the U.S. attempts to secure deals at the expense of China's core interests or international norms, China will reject them. This demonstrates strategic clarity and firm resolve on major principles.
Conclusion: A Strategic Communication Amid Standoff
Taken together, the three points from the Chinese embassy spokesperson represent a carefully prepared strategic communication amid the ongoing fierce tariff confrontations and severe lack of mutual trust between China and the U.S. They signal China's willingness to engage while clearly defining its principles, red lines, and core concerns.
China's deeper motivations can be summarized as: Strategically, holding narrative leadership, showcasing national dignity and strategic resolve; in regard to China’s stances, defending core economic interests and development rights, aligning them with international rules and multilateralism to gain global recognition; Tactically, setting clear preconditions for dialogue, urging U.S. sincerity and credibility, and managing domestic and international expectations to avoid unrealistic hopes.
As China-U.S. relations stand at a critical crossroads, every interaction on economic issues, especially tariffs, draws global attention. China's statements are an important signal. The path ahead will be bumpy, but these responses make clear that China will engage in this complex game affecting both nations and global economic well-being with confidence, pragmatism, and resolve. The U.S. must carefully interpret these signals and respond constructively to find a mutually beneficial path. Otherwise, formal talks alone may not break the current deadlock.
Ryan Yeh is an observer of international affairs. The views don't necessarily reflect those of BeijingReviewDossier.
