Sino-U.S. Trade Talks: A Call for Global Leadership with Responsibility

Top US and Chinese leaders have been meeting in the first of high-level talks since US President Donald Trump unilaterally imposed exorbitant tariffs on China, the second largest economy After the US.

As the two largest economies and major global leaders sit to talk trade, it could be time to think global leadership beyond electioneering and narrow partisan interests, but more as a responsibility that calls for the exercise of power with global economic and political accountability.

Bilateral trade between the two biggest economies in the world is important for both domestic and international economic growth and stability.  Total goods trade between China and the US was estimated at $582.4 billion in 2024, accounting for a bigger chuck of the global trade. While the US seem to be rolling back its economic engagement, China has grown to become the number one trading partner with much of the world, including Africa, laying emerging economic norms fostering mutually beneficial cooperation and shared economic opportunities with the least developed countries.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) views trade between the US and China as a significant aspect of the global economy, as the two major economies play an important role in global trade and economic growth, hence trade tensions between the two countries could impact global growth and stability. As our contemporary biggest economies in the world, the two powers shoulder serious responsibility beyond insular interests to maintain open trade based on the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

 Building on his promises during his campaign for the White House to tariff trading partners deemed to be disproportionately and unfairly benefiting from trade with the US, Trump unleashed escalating trade wars by imposing unprecedented tariffs ranging from 10 to 145% on US trade partners, including least developed countries like Lesotho, with a population of 2,3 million.

The Trump Administration imposed tariffs of 145% on Chinese exports into the US ranging from electronics, toys, textiles, and furniture amongst others, triggering cyclical counter tariffs. China strongly responded by raising tariffs on US goods by 125%. China buys a range of goods from goods from the US including oil, gas, grains, and oilseeds from American farmers. Given its population size, China offers a huge domestic market for international trade.

 And as with other countries such as Mexico, Canada and the EU which have engaged in counter tariffs to protect their economic interests, the Trump tariffs have torched a vicious cycle with no winners, and a tense stand-off between Washington and Beijing which does not need to continue.

Washington has also resorted to heightened bullying tactics reflected in fiery self-interested polarising rhetoric which leaves little room for mutually beneficial agreements with other parties. Such bullying, which verges on power play rooted in US hegemonic dominance has been rejected by Beijing and other partners, further fuelling global economic uncertainty and global market turbulence within the USA and abroad.

The tariffing of tiny states whose trade component on a global scale is minuscule may reflect lack of empathy. However, the unilateral targeting of other major powers has the potential to up-end global trade in ways that could destabilise the domestic and global economy.

There is evident need to end the multiple rounds of tit-for-tat tariffs, and the deadlock in ways which will normalise global trade. Indeed, the negotiations which began on Saturday mark a significant step in important    conversations to reset and normalise trade relations between the two major powers, and possibly other parties whose economic interests are linked to both China and the US.

 While Washington has specifically targeted China, the tariffs have equally shaken much of the global south, close trading partners with China. China has emerged as the major trading partner with most countries in the developing world, within the BRICS countries, in addition to overtaking the US as the major trading partner with Africa.

The Trump Administration has threatened to impose high tariffs on BRICS member countries, generating fears that other parties may have to choose between the two major powers, denying them freedom and opportunities for unfettered free trade in ways which enhance their domestic economic interests. African countries, or any other country for that matter, should not be coerced to align with one part or the other at the cost of domestic economic growth and development.

 Indeed, Beijing has rejected the unilateral imposition of tariffs, highlighting their adverse impacts not only on businesses and consumers in the US, but their adverse implications for the global economy which put at risk the wellbeing of the majority in poorer countries. It is significant that on the eve of the trade talks, President Xi was in Moscow, standing alongside leaders from across the Global South – a reminder to Washington that China not only has other options for trade, but stands together with countries from the global south as important trading partners.

Contrary to claims   that tariffs will make America great, for the first time in three years, the US economy is reportedly facing contraction. Sensing economic difficulties and uncertainty American took to the streets in large numbers in mid-April to protest chaotic sudden shifts in policies including unilateral imposition of tariffs and immigrations regulations. US industries that have long depended on Chinese-made goods and inputs are facing have been thrown into an economic dead end, while global markets remain turbulent.

If the idea of tariffs was to play a strong stroke to force other parties to comply to the demands of the Trump Administration, Beijing, as with many other parties have not capitulated as Trump may have desired, but rather, rejected hostile economic bullying, vowing to fight till the end.

There is no doubt that dialogue is an important step, and the best way to address any trade contradictions, however, it must be principled dialogue, based on mutual respect and shared interests. The two major powers should engage in negotiations based on mutual respect, recognising their mutual interests, and the need for responsible global leadership. A commitment to dialogue is as important as the   need to uphold international norms of global free trade as encapsulated in the regulations of the WTO.

The Chinese Embassy in the United States has already warned that   China will not sacrifice its principles to reach any agreement, restating that Beijing will resolutely defend its legitimate rights and interests, uphold international fairness and justice, and safeguard the rules of the WTO and the multilateral trading system. The Embassy also rejected the use of threats and unwarranted pressure as averse to dialogue and negotiation, while calling for talks based on equality, respect, and mutual benefit. China further stated that Beijing will never accept the U.S. saying one thing and doing another, nor will it sacrifice its principles for international fairness and justice to reach any agreement.

Furthermore, the Chinese Embassy in the US referred to Chinas willingness to strengthen solidarity and coordination with the international community, while jointly resisting unilateralism, protectionism and economic bullying to safeguard the multilateral trading system, and defend international fairness and justice.

Moments like we are in do call for leadership with responsibility. And as the two major powers engage in trade talks, we can only hope that they will be guided by sober commitment to shared interests beyond narrow partisan desires.

Dr Gideon H Chitanga is a Political Analyst and International Relations Expert.