Search

To what extent can academic trade theories be applied to real world trade issues? We analyze how well modern trade theories and ideas from political economy explain the European Union/United States banana trade war that started in 1993. We show that older trade models, like the Heckscher-Ohlin theorem, only explain observed trade patterns with several core assumptions relaxed. In contrast, the New Trade Theory, with the introduction of heterogeneous firms and monopolistic competition, presents a much more convincing explanation for the banana trade. Finally, we analyze the role of political economy in facilitating the rise and fall of economically inefficient banana tariffs over the course of a two-decade trade war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we investigate the scale of the drop in American imports after it imposed punitive tariffs on Chinese goods. Our analysis spans the whole period of Donald Trump’s presidency (January 2017 – January 2021). In contrast to existing studies, which are mainly devoted to the impact of reduced trade flows on the key macroeconomic indicators, we focus on the specific market of textile products, which was among the most affected by the protectionism measures. The quantitative analysis allows us to conclude that the imposed duties severely hit the textile industry, bringing a noticeable drop in US imports of selected groups of products from China. Furthermore, the review of long‑term consequences indicates that the ongoing trade war has not only adversely affected the macroeconomic fundamentals of the US economy, but it is also likely to have a long‑lasting impact on global supply and production chains.

The purpose of the article is on the deglobalization processes currently taking place in international economic interactions, and also attempts to examine how the trade blocs of the major economies affect the rest of globalization. The Kinked Exponential Model was used to determine decadal growth rates based on 31 years of panel data from 1990 to 2020 for 15 large countries (gross domestic product). Three different regression models i.e., Pooled OLS, Fixed- and Randomeffect models were estimated to examine the effects of trade blocs and wars between nations on the world economy. Over the study period, disparities and increasing economic inequality between variables have widened. In addition, international conflicts have had a negative impact on international trade and have significantly affected globalization. More importantly, trade blocs, particularly the OECD, APEC, and BRICS have slowed trade with the rest of the world, reflecting a process known as regionalization, in which countries cooperate rather than at the global level. In particular, during the third decade of the twentieth century, when the growth rate of trade flows among major countries declined rapidly by 8.8 per cent, this regionalization did not stop and expanded significantly.

This paper provides evidence on the effects of US and Chinese trade policies on the 2020 US presidential election. In response to a series of US tariffs imposed on Chinese goods, China imposed retaliatory tariffs, especially on US agricultural products, which largely affected Republican‐leaning counties. The US government then subsidized US farmers by providing direct payments through the Market Facilitation Program (MFP) to mitigate the Chinese retaliatory tariffs. Using the universe of actual county‐level MFP disbursement data, we document that MFP payments relative to the Chinese retaliatory tariff exposure were higher in solidly Republican counties, implying that the Trump administration allocated rents in exchange for political patronage. We also find that MFP payments outweighed the estimated impact of Chinese retaliatory tariffs and led to an increase in the Republican vote share in the 2020 presidential election. Finally, we uncover evidence that China's retaliatory trade policy and the corresponding US agricultural policy exacerbated political polarization in the US, especially the rural–urban divide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2018, the world witnessed a full‐fledged trade war between United States and China with both countries levying successive tariffs on each other. Though the impact of trade war could be visibly assessed from declining export volume and rising bankruptcy filing from farmers, what went unnoticed was a far‐reaching negative impact at a granular market microstructure level. In this study, the effect of trade war on the leading role of US soybean futures in price discovery has been evaluated. The results corroborate the negative impact of trade war on the information leadership share of US soybean futures market. Moreover, the results shows that the negative impact gets manifested through various sentiment indicators such as Google search trends, hedger's sentiment, and so on. Hence, trade war may have given some temporary economic and strategic benefit to the United States, but it is no less than the proverbial double‐edged sword as it nearly killed the soybean market of the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Kavilando is the property of Kavilando and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Though the use of economic war for realization of U.S. policy goals has a long history, it seems that the former U.S. president Donald Trump was definitely inclined to resort to this instrument of foreign policy more often and on bigger scale than his predecessors. The economic war appeared to be the favourite foreign policy tool of the Donald Trump. The Trump presidential administration clearly preferred economic over conventional war. The White House under the Trump was determined to withdraw its military involvement in the Middle East and other regions of the globe replacing it with severe economic pressure on its opponents and adversaries. The tools of economic war - primarily economic sanctions - were employed by Washington in recent years against the Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Turkey and Venezuela. Over the decades the U.S. intelligence community mastered the economic war tools to provoke bank runs, increased inflation, currency collapse, and shortages of crucial imported products or the combination of the above mentioned things for the purpose of destabilization of targeted economies and regimes. Washington particularly often takes advantage of the dominant position of U.S. dollar in the global economy and its control of the global dollar financial transfers system as a powerful economic weapon. However, the frequent usage of this weapon makes the targeted states inclined to de-dollarize as far as possible and as quickly as possible, which would be unbeneficial to the U.S. eventually. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research explores the specific parts of constant exchange conflict between the US and China, with a particular interest on its implications for the global economic politics. The world supply chain has been significantly disrupted as a result of the trade dispute, which has been marked by a series of tariff impositions and retaliatory measures that have impacted a variety of industries. The trade war has made cybersecurity risks, forced technology transfers, and theft of intellectual property even more of a concern. Prices have gone up and supply chain blockages have occurred as a result of tariffs imposed by both nations on essential technological goods like consumer electronics, telecommunications equipment, and semiconductors. Innovation and expansion in the technology sector have been further hampered by restrictions on cross-border collaborations and investments. In addition, the trade war has leading transnational organizations to re-examine their manufacturing and sourcing reliance on China. Expanding their supply chains by looking for new markets and alternative production sites has been an option for many businesses. Investors, stakeholders in the industry, and policymakers all need to keep a close eye on the changing dynamics if they want to navigate the complexities, come up with plans to reduce risks, and take advantage of potential opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One can attribute the Trump administration's pursuit of a trade war against the People's Republic of China (PRC) to a range of variables, including its re-election hopes, commitment to protectionism as an economic weapon, fears about Beijing's pursuit of artificial intelligence, and broader strategic concerns about the global balance of power. This article argues that another explanation for President Donald J. Trump's ability to change trade policy towards China was the structural weaknesses of the trade policy regime that emerged at the end of the 1990s when Congress adopted Permanent Normal Trade Relations as a designation for free trade in July 1998 and the PRC joined the World Trade Organization in December 2001. Those weaknesses owed much to the ways in which the United States initially framed the new trade regime with the PRC and the limited, only partially conclusive, character of the debate that took place at the time. Despite the growth and embedding of supply chains between China and the United States, these inbuilt weaknesses contributed to the progressive erosion of the trade policy regime during the years that followed. Within this context, few constituencies were ready to lobby for the PRC after January 2017 and the Trump administration faced little opposition to its change of trade policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the attitudes of multinational corporations (MNCs) toward the U.S.-China trade war through an original survey of China-based MNC subsidiaries in the manufacturing industry. Our argument is in two parts. First, firms that have relocated production outside of China or are considering such moves should be less likely to oppose the trade war as they possess outside options that reduce their vulnerability to trade restrictions. Second, firms' tendency toward production relocation can in turn be explained by their local sourcing dependence, as measured by the level of such dependence and the degree to which their operations require supplier certification. This is because firms more heavily embedded in local supplier networks face stronger resource dependence that increases organizational inertia, reducing their ability to switch to alternative suppliers and therefore relocating production to other destinations. Our findings corroborate our hypotheses, highlighting how the heterogeneity in MNCs' supply chain relationships may influence both their manufacturing relocation decisions and trade policy preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on official PRC statistics and analytical data obtained from modern scientific and public research, it follows that the so-called Chinese economic miracle has ended. The rapid development of China was driven using cheap labor and the open-door policy for Western investment under the rules of basic market laws after Deng Xiaoping's 1977 reforms. All three factors have exhausted their resources. Further growth in living standards and education began to pose a danger to the Communist regime. Ignoring the laws of the free market economy, creating artificial plans for stimulating growth, repressing the entrepreneurs, sanctions pressure, an arms race, aggressive plans in the region and demographic changes inevitably lead to dangerous consequences - a slowdown in economic growth, debt load and capital outflow.

Despite numerous studies of the US and China trade war effect being published over the last seven years, this topic has remained equivocal. The portfolio formation model that underlies the arbitrage pricing theory is still relatively small, especially for the portfolio performance of the Fama-French five factors (5FF) model that examines the global economic crisis. Focusing on the trade war year, the study aims to examine the effect of accounting information on portfolio performance by using the 5FF model. This study employs a dummy panel least square regression model, the data are analyzed from Indonesia, US, and China stock markets with 864 portfolio monthly combinations ranging from 2016 to 2019. The result of the study shows that the US-China trade war strengthens the beneficial impact of market risk on portfolio performance in the Indonesian Stock Exchange. On the other hand, the war has no impact on the relationship between market risk and the performance of a portfolio of US stocks. However, it lowered the beneficial impact of size on portfolio performance for both the US and China stock markets. The robust 5FF of accounting information within the study is size and investment. According to the study, systematic risk and idiosyncratic risk should be given more consideration by both investors and companies to prevent unneeded economic losses and manage the risk that could have a greater impact on the stock market.

The United States and China are by far the most powerful countries on the planet by many indicators, and both of these countries can influence the course of many processes around the world. In particular, the United States has a substantial influence on the world stage, so it is necessary to investigate the significance of the confrontation with Beijing in the context of their foreign policy, and what are the prospects for its continuation. Thus, the relevance of the subject is determined by the fact that the results of this confrontation have an impact on the policy of all countries in the future. The main purpose of the study is to determine the level of priority of the confrontation with China for the United States, by analysing the foundations of the geopolitical theory of the United States and considering the history of this conflict. When writing the study, the following methods were used: analysis, synthesis, comparison, specification and generalisation of information. As a result of the study, the following conclusions can be drawn: the confrontation between the United States and Beijing takes place in three main areas of activity: trade, economic, and ideological; it was determined that the United States is the most influential country in the world and is trying to maintain this influence; it was identified that the key aspect of the US foreign policy influence is trade, which is one of the main reasons for the confrontation with China; the impact of this conflict on the whole world was established; certain problems of US internal policy and possible prospects for the development of this conflict were considered. The originality of the study is that it considers the conflict between the United States and China as broadly as possible, considering various fields of activity. The results of this study will be useful for economists who study the economic problems of the whole world, and Ukraine in particular, including researchers in the United States, to draw attention to the problems and threats of their own country

This study explores empirically how Chinese multi-product firms adjust their exports in response to the U.S. tariff escalations during the US–China trade war, using firm-product-level customs trade data from China. We find strong evidence for a new phenomenon we call the within-firm cross-product chilling effect, whereby an additional tariff targeting some of the firm's products sold in the destination market is associated with reduced sales of its other untargeted products in that market. The comparison between firm-product-level and product-level analysis suggests that ignoring the within-firm chilling effect would result in a severe underestimation of the tariff effects. Moreover, the chilling effect is more prominent for products that are more important for a firm's overall sales to the U.S. and that are highly reliant on the U.S. market. We also observe a 'complete tariff pass-through' phenomenon at firm-product level, which complements the product-level evidence in previous related studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we explore how a public national media outlet, the British BBC, represents an international legal case which has a highly political nature. The case is US versus Huawei/Meng Wanzhou, which took place between 2018 and 2021. Accusations were that the Chinese technology company committed fraud, leading the global HSBC bank to breach US sanctions against Iran. The charges were made by the US using what is called an 'extraterritorial law', which, while rejected as law by governments around the world, is policed by US economic powers and control over international finance. Using Critical Discourse Analysis we show that, while the BBC presents much detail of legal process, the actual nature of the law the US uses to bring criminal charges against international companies and banks, is neither considered nor questioned. Our interest is how such a law, which has a huge influence over global trade and politics, is presented to the public in this particular case. We contribute to the position that the nature of laws, how they are used and known, must always be understood within the prevailing discourses of the moment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Strategy framing is usually studied in the context of news coverage about domestic Western politics. This study expands its application to news reports on the China-US trade war—an inter-state conflict including a democratic and one-party dominant system—thereby adding an international dimension to the study of strategy framing. Through a manual content analysis of news coverage from China, the US, Singapore, and Ireland (from January 2013 to January 2020; n = 1872), we investigate whether media independence, conflict involvement, and crisis phases influence the employment of the issue framing and strategy framing. For democratic countries, the more involved they are in the conflict, the more prominent strategy framing was in their coverage of the trade conflict; the inverse was observed for one-party dominant systems. Strategy framing that considers countries as contenders is more prevalent than the sub-frame that focuses on individual politicians. The presence of national-versus-personal level strategy framing was more balanced for directly involved countries than indirectly involved countries since news from directly involved countries accords relatively more space to politicians' personal strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Brazilian Business Law Journal / Administração de Empresas em Revista is the property of Administracao de Empresas em Revista and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study empirically investigates the impact of the U.S.-China trade war on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure readability. We first propose a measure of CSR disclosure readability with the latest word embedding model of Word2Vec. Using the U.S.-China trade war as an exogenous shock, we conduct a difference-in-differences analysis and find that firms release more readable CSR disclosures in response to the trade war. We interpret this finding to indicate that CSR disclosure can be a strategic tool to enhance the firms' reputations when they suffer a negative shock. Moreover, such an effect is more pronounced for firms with tighter internal governance or external supervision. Our results are robust to confining our sample with a Coarsened Exact Matching algorithm and a battery of robust checks. Finally, we find that the trade war leads to increased charitable donations, indicating that our CSR readability measure is more likely to reflect actual CSR activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper develops a duopolistic contingent claim model to evaluate the equity values of life insurers during a trade war. Choosing advanced (technology-oriented) relative to backward (human capital-oriented) technology is crucial for insurance management. A result shows that holding more capital would enhance insurer survival. The enhancement becomes more significant when the trade war becomes more severe and when the technology chosen by the insurers is more backward. Capital, as such, contributes to insurance stability but discourages advanced technology development for insurers during the trade war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The EU deforestation regulation promises global green leadership, however, loopholes may lead to an increase in the trade of deforestation-implicit agricultural products. Ratification of the EU-MERCOSUR free trade agreement could exploit this situation.

This paper is devoted to the causes, manifestations, circumstances, results and global consequences of US-China trade war in 2018–2021. Based on the analysis of management decisions, expert assessments, statistics and opinion polls, the author makes judgments and assumptions about the continuity of US policy, provoking and aggravating conflict relations between the two countries, as well as contributing to their penetration into all spheres of politics, economy, culture and even sports. At the same time, consistent and adequate measures on the part of the People’s Republic of China, which have a predominantly defensive orientation, are taken into account. At the same time, the anti-Chinese trade, investment, and technology policy, which was already carried out under Donald Trump in the name of ensuring the national security of the United States, and under Joe Biden actually turned into a hybrid cold war, is interpreted in the context of causal relationships characterizing the crisis of the neoliberal model of capitalism and the intentions of the world elite to restart the Bretton Woods system by switching to “green” energy. The most important resource of the transformation that has begun is the ideology of justifying any sanctions and other strong-willed decisions of the “democratic” Western states led by the United States against the “authoritarian” losers of the energy transition. Consequently, the “trade war” of the USA and China, objectively acting as an instrument of disorganization of the global world and a powerful limiter of globalization based on “market fundamentalism”, becomes the demiurge of the new globalization projected on the platform of “ideological fundamentalism”. In the situation of a multipolar world and the intensified rivalry of nuclear powers, restarting the world economy through a global war seems impossible. On the contrary, the mechanism of collecting a “green” contribution in favor of potential beneficiaries of the new globalization has not yet been tested. Within this perspective, the US-China trade war becomes not only an existential concern of the US and its allies, but also a problem of China’s survival. Obviously, this circumstance explains the emerging rapprochement between the PRC and the Russian Federation in the direction of pooling resources and forming a military-political alliance.

Continuation of the article. Devoted to the causes, manifestations, circumstances, results and global consequences of US-China trade war in 2018–2021. Based on the analysis of management decisions, expert assessments, statistics and opinion polls, the author makes judgments and assumptions about the continuity of US policy, provoking and aggravating conflict relations between the two countries, as well as contributing to their penetration into all spheres of politics, economy, culture and even sports. At the same time, consistent and adequate measures on the part of the People’s Republic of China, which have a predominantly defensive orientation, are taken into account. At the same time, the anti-Chinese trade, investment, and technology policy, which was already carried out under Donald Trump in the name of ensuring the national security of the United States, and under Joe Biden actually turned into a hybrid cold war, is interpreted in the context of causal relationships characterizing the crisis of the neoliberal model of capitalism and the intentions of the world elite to restart the Bretton Woods system by switching to “green” energy. The most important resource of the transformation that has begun is the ideology of justifying any sanctions and other strong-willed decisions of the “democratic” Western states led by the United States against the “authoritarian” losers of the energy transition. Consequently, the “trade war” of the USA and China, objectively acting as an instrument of disorganization of the global world and a powerful limiter of globalization based on “market fundamentalism”, becomes the demiurge of the new globalization projected on the platform of “ideological fundamentalism”. In the situation of a multipolar world and the intensified rivalry of nuclear powers, restarting the world economy through a global war seems impossible. On the contrary, the mechanism of collecting a “green” contribution in favor of potential beneficiaries of the new globalization has not yet been tested. Within this perspective, the US-China trade war becomes not only an existential concern of the US and its allies, but also a problem of China’s survival. Obviously, this circumstance explains the emerging rapprochement between the PRC and the Russian Federation in the direction of pooling resources and forming a military-political alliance.

This paper investigates the efficacy of currency management as a policy tool to improve trade balance by analyzing the impact of the real exchange rate on the bilateral trade between the United States and China. The paper builds upon the existing literature and empirical analysis is carried out based on the J-curve hypothesis using quarterly data from 2000Q1 to 2021Q4. The vector-auto regression (VAR) model is estimated using China and the United States' trade balance, real exchange rate, and GDP. The impulse response functions provide evidence of the J-curve. A shock in Yuan (CNY)-US dollar real exchange rate leads to initial deterioration but improvement in the trade balance in favor of China over subsequent quarters. The results hold for various sub-periods of analysis, i.e., after the exchange rate was allowed to fluctuate since July 2005. Evidence supports that the policy of managing the real exchange rate might have yielded desired results for China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista UNISCI is the property of Unidad de Investigaciones Sobre Seguridad y Cooperacion International (UNISCI) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Indonesia has been the largest palm-oil producer in the world since 2006. The country's palm-oil products are exported globally, including to member states of the European Union. In recent years, European countries have implemented increasingly stringent regulations on palm-oil imports, including from Indonesia, through policies such as the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) II. This study qualitatively analyzes Indonesia's responses to these policies. We collected data using in-depth interviews and focus-group discussions with government policymakers, activists from nongovernmental organizations, and oil-palm smallholders and entrepreneurs in Indonesia. We demonstrate that the European Union policy has experienced a shift in recent years which has made it more difficult for Indonesian palm-oil products to enter European markets. The Indonesian government views these policies as an environmental issue, a form of trade war, and a challenge to the sovereignty and dignity of the nation. The government's responses have included improvements to cultivation and business practices, demands for broader and more inclusive policies, and "resistance," for example, by referring the case to the World Trade Organization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the Trump trade war, China, the EU, and other countries enacted politically-targeted trade retaliation (PTTR) against swing states and Republican strongholds in the United States. We argue that PTTR increases public concerns about foreign election interference and assess the effects of such retaliation across partisan affiliations. We test our predictions using a national survey experiment in the United States fielded before the 2020 election. In contrast to findings about sanctions and foreign endorsements, we find strong evidence that PTTR increases fears of election interference among both Republicans and Democrats. Partisan double standards in reaction to PTTR were strongest for retaliation targeting swing states and smaller for retaliation targeting the President's base. Overall, the evidence shows that economic policies which are not primarily intended to influence elections may nevertheless come to be viewed by the public as foreign election interference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Comparative Economic Research is the property of Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Human Review is the property of Eagora Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Over the past four decades, Intellectual Property (IP) has been one of the main controversies of US-China trade relations. But the current US-China trade war contains a new focus - technology transfer. This article adopts a socio-legal and economic approach to examine the current technology and trade tensions between these two countries and why China became an Information Technology (IT) powerhouse. It first provides an overview of IP and technology transfer rules under the Phase One US-China Economic and Trade Agreement (POA). It then explores different forms of forced technology transfer activities and the in-depth reasons for the US to shift its main IP concerns from IP enforcement to technology transfer. It explains why the US and China trade war is inevitable, why the current US-China IP-trade war is significantly different from previous ones, and the economic and political reasons behind the global technology leadership competition by the two countries. Finally, the author concludes that the POA and its technology transfer rules are not the ends of the game but just the start of the global technology leadership competition between the US and China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multinational corporations have benefited tremendously from free trade in the past few decades. However, the dynamism of international relations, paired with the global recession, has rekindled the debate over frictionless trade. In this study, we examine how trade friction, created by tariff trade barriers, affects the operational performance of domestic firms which source from the affected countries. We also investigate how various supply chain characteristics and strategies can moderate the impact of such trade friction. Motivated by the 2018 U.S.–China trade war, we conducted a difference‐in‐difference analysis to examine the impact of trade tariffs on performance indicators of U.S. firms with direct supplier connections in China. Specifically, we found that U.S. firms with direct supply partners (i.e., first‐tier suppliers) in China had a worse performance than the U.S. firms without direct supply partners in China in terms of inventory (i.e., days of supply) and profitability (return‐on‐assets). We further found that the negative impacts were more severe for firms with a higher degree of outsourcing, and horizontal and spatial supply base complexity. We discuss the implications for international operations management, supply chain networks, supply risk management, and provide suggestions to supply chain practitioners and trade policymakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The US-China trade war, initiated in March 2018, substantially transformed the trading partnership between the two largest economic powers. It directly influenced the profitability of domestic enterprises related to the export chain and harmed the domestic economy in China and its stock market. This study empirically examines the effects of the trade war on China's stock market based on chronological events and tests whether it is the contagion effect or the present value effect. The empirical study supports the contagion effect because the impact of the US-China trade war differed significantly in different sectors only when the US announced its imposition of more tariffs on US$50 billion worth of Chinese products. However, there is no apparent difference between the industries for other events, nor is there any significant difference between the industries in terms of long-term impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article constructs a measure of geopolitical and economic tensions in US–China relations based on the sentiment expressed in major US news media and utilizes it to analyze the impact of bilateral tensions on US imports from China between 2002 and 2019. Our results suggest that bilateral tensions have had a negative effect on US imports. Additional analyses of the impact of bilateral tensions for industries with varying levels of supply chain linkages to China suggest that, contrary to expectations, they have more disproportionately affected industries highly integrated with the Chinese market. This pattern continues to hold during the trade war period. Not only were bilateral tensions associated with higher tariffs for industries with high levels of global value chain linkages to China, but the tariff hikes have also had a more sustained impact on such industries. Overall, our findings indicate that potential "sunk costs" considerations may not have been strong enough to forestall the downward trend in bilateral trade relations under both routine diplomacy and trade war conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the time of mercantilism onwards, international trade has always been an arena of geopolitical rivalry, and the unipolar international order that emerged after the end of the cold war essentially created a special security architecture in the strategic Middle East so that it could maintain its status quo. Powers inevitably have to choose between two options to work within the framework or to challenge it. This paper examines the competition between the US and china in the form of strategic hedging and under the global value chain structure. The authors will seek to answer the question: What is china's middle east economic strategy in competition with the US? The research hypothesis is that China's middle East economic strategy in competing with the US is targeted influence through the most effective sections of the international value chain. The research findings are based on its explanatory-analytical method, that in the Middle East look, China according to the United States' efforts to build a unified trade front to counter Beijing's state-owned capitalism and in order to reduce its energy security risk, has focused on technology security at targeting growth in the value chain hierarchy and gaining a foothold at its highest levels.

The paper analyzes the economic consequences of the US–China trade war on economics in ASEAN-4. The analysis uses the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model. The simulation scenarios depicted short-run potential effects of manufacturing protection with appropriate retaliation response from China. The results showed escalation of trade wars has an impact on various countries, that is on exports, investment and domestic-sector growth. The US and China trade war has resulted in shifts in US imports by country of origin, Indonesia's GDP and investments have increased, but are still relatively lower compared to other ASEAN-4 countries (Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To this end, mathematical and statistical methods are used to model the effect of tariffs, ex-ante and ex-post, after implementing this trade policy, on exports of aluminum and steel from Mexico to the United States, versus US imports of these metals from the ROW. The results show that the protectionist tariff policy had a structural effect on US imports; likewise, the tariff shock implemented by the United States in June 2018 adversely affected its imports of these goods, both in terms of volume and value. This suggests that bilateral trade may be affected, but the effect is differentiated. The United States may be achieving its objective of protecting its domestic industry or it may impact upwards on the domestic prices of these metals, which could influence the prices paid by the final consumer. For Mexico, trade may be diverted or its export capacity reduced, adversely affecting its trade balance of these metals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global value chains have been a major means of manufacturing and trading goods internationally. Economic efficiency was the sole factor driving the proliferation of GVCs and the China-centered GVCs were established in a variety of manufactured products. In recent years, the China–US trade war and the unfolding COVID-19 pandemic have sent shock waves and disrupted smooth operations of GVCs, which has triggered the geographic restructuring of GVCs, in particular value chain diversification away from China. This paper analyzes the centrality of China in value chains and the vulnerabilities of GVCs exposed to the trade war and the pandemic. This paper provides comprehensive empirical evidence on GVC restructuring from different perspectives and discusses policy options that China could cope with the tide of the value chain diversification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the beginning of the 21st century, China has been accelerating its transition to an innovative economy. Several breakthrough inventions by Chinese engineers and designers have demonstrated that this country is not only a "world factory" but also a competitive developer of high-tech products. China's development has begun to threaten the technological leadership of Western countries. The competitiveness of Chinese scientific and technological developments in the world market is analyzed, and the position of the so-called unicorn companies in the global startup market is evaluated. Government support measures that contribute to the growth of research and development costs are characterized, and the main risks and threats faced by China in its transition to a new technological order are highlighted. The author of the article comes to the following conclusions. The policy of containment of China pursued by Western countries is determined by the growth of the competitiveness of Chinese developments and is primarily aimed at industries in which the country has managed to take a leading position. The high share of R&D spending in China is supported by a preferential tax policy. The effectiveness of Chinese developments is determined by the strategic planning of research areas by the authorities. The main risks in the development of Chinese science are associated with sanctions pressure on sensitive sectors of the national economy, among which the ban on the supply of semiconductor products to Chinese companies poses the greatest threat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the indirect link between the trade war between China-US and deforestation in Brazil. China imposed tariffs that have eliminated American soy exports by November 2018. Higher soybean prices usually increase deforestation in Brazil. We estimate nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag models combined with multiple breakpoint tests to analyze price transmission changes over time. We show that market power emerges in the short run, while long-run price pass-through is close to complete. Extra profits from unexpected market power should induce land clearing for expanding soy production, a problem compounded by lax regulation, and reduced budgets for combating deforestation in Brazil. Results also suggest that effects on deforestation rates should be temporary. Given that the covid19 pandemic brings about a similar shock to global food markers, particularly demand for Brazilian soy, we expect a similar pattern of emergence of market power in the short but not long-run. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The US government has been promoting a new cold war against China for some time. It began before former President Donald Trump initiated a trade war against China and has continued under President Biden. The underlying reason for this policy is the drive of the US government to maintain a position of global domination and to prevent any other country from rising to a position of equal, or near equal, economic, political, or military strength with the US. This cold war is unjustified and poses serious dangers for people around the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]