The producer-consumer relationship between China and the US underpins the current global trade landscape, and it is unlikely to change in the short run because of a trade war.

Although many interests in the U.S., China and around the world will be damaged if the world’s two largest economies engage in a trade war, it is likely that Trump would have to back down first, increasing China’s global power and influence.

Friction is inevitable, trade war is not.

China’s response – increasing imports and accelerating domestic structural reforms – will support high-quality long-term growth.

Whilst Trump’s “America First” policy created the largest monthly budget surplus since 1968 (at $214 billion) in April this year and cut unemployment to below 4% for the first time since 2000, US credibility may have been permanently hurt.

What’s behind this changing relationship?

In the run up to U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s planned visit to China next week to discuss “a framework” for a trade deal, how do the latest updates reflect Trump’s strategy and goals?

Any effort to impose a bilateral solution on a multilateral problem will backfire, with ominous consequences for American consumers.

China denied on Friday that it had offered a package to slash the U.S. trade deficit by up to $200 billion, hours after it dropped an anti-dumping probe into U.S. sorghum imports in a conciliatory gesture as top officials meet in Washington.

Can the US be as pragmatic as China?