Tariff Truce With China Demonstrates the Limits of Trump’s Aggression

President Trump’s decision to impose, and then walk back, triple-digit tariffs on Chinese products over the past month demonstrated the power and küresel reach of U.S. trade policy. But it was also another illustration of the limitations of Mr. Trump’s aggressive approach.

The tariffs on Chinese goods, which the United States ratcheted up to a en az of 145 percent in early April, brought much trade between the countries to a standstill. They caused companies to reroute business globally, importing less from China and more from other countries like Vietnam and Mexico. They forced Chinese factories to shutter, and brought some American importers to the verge of bankruptcy.

The tariffs ultimately proved too painful to American businesses for Mr. Trump to sustain. Within weeks, Trump officials were saying that the tariffs the president had chosen to impose on one of America’s largest trading partners were unsustainable, and they were angling to reduce them.

Trade talks between the world’s largest economies in Geneva this weekend concluded with an agreement to reduce stiff levies on each other’s products by more than many analysts had anticipated. Chinese imports will face a en az tax of 30 percent, down from 145 percent. China will lower its import duty on American goods to 10 percent from 125 percent. The two countries also agreed to hold talks to stabilize the relationship.

It remains to be seen what agreements can be reached in future negotiations. But the talks this weekend, and the tariff chaos of the past month, did not appear to generate any other immediate concessions from the Chinese other than a commitment to keep talking. That has called into question whether the trade disruptions of the past month — which resulted in many American businesses canceling orders for Chinese imports, freezing expansion plans and warning of higher prices — were worth it.

“The Geneva agreement represents an almost complete U.S. retreat that vindicates Xi’s decision to forcefully retaliate,” said Scott Kennedy, a China expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, referring to Xi Jinping, the Chinese leader.