China-U.S. relations should not be confined by the so-called “trade balance.” Their relations should go beyond the 100-day action plan, and they should reassess and redefine the “economic balance.” By doing so, it will help lift China-U.S. economic cooperation and trade onto the track of “win-win” and sustainable development. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks Wednesday during a campaign rally in Miami. (EVAN VUCCI, ASSOCIATED PRESS)

This week, among the chaos of the Trump administration, talks of trade actions against China swirled after Reuters reported that Trump was expected to issue a m

Recently, the Trump administration continuously sends out signals that it is considering to make a final decision on the Section 232 investigations into steel, claiming some steel imports are threatening the US national security and hinting to impose barriers to limit steel import, and that the final and exact tariffs or quotas will depend on negotiation results with related countries.

The trade imbalance issue is not central to the mission of the CED. It should be left to the market, to the sector cooperation and to restructuring in the global supply chain.

Trade ties between China and the United States have been under close scrutiny since President Trump took office. During the campaign, Trump frequently targeted

After the U.S.-Sino Comprehensive Economic Dialogue, trade issues are alienating not only China and America’s NATO allies – but its NAFTA partners, Canada and Mexico.

The first China-U.S. Comprehensive Economic Dialogue yielded no tangible results. But the two powers have plenty of room for agreement – if they can put their sense of exceptionalism aside.

Two major American car manufacturers, Ford Motor Company and Tesla, are moving ahead with plans in China that seem a direct challenge to President Donald Trump’s crusade to keep American manufacturing jobs in the U.S. Surprisingly, the companies seem to have met little resistance from the administration thus far.

As long as China continues to carry out its export-driven economic growth model through its strong state capitalism, then the U.S. business community will still have to face trade protectionism through non-tariff barriers, industrial policy, subsidies, and currency manipulation.

Outcomes fromU.S.-China trade talks that were recently announced ignored the major structural issues facing U.S.-China economic relations. While a trade deal was produced, the major point of contention between the two countries, that they practice deeply divergent forms of capitalism, was ignored. In order to truly make progress on trade between the U.S. and China mutual understanding of the different dynamics driving the two forms of capitalism is needed.