You called me. No — you called ME. Before US-China meeting, nations each say the other wanted talks
It's the question that has put Beijing and Washington in a verbal sparring match even as the two countries are heading into a weekend meeting in Switzerland to discuss lowering sky-high tariffs that they slapped on each other in heated moments that have shaken financial markets and stirred worries about the global economy.
'The meeting is being held at the request of the U.S. side,'' Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said Wednesday.
President Donald Trump disagreed. 'They said we initiated it? Well, I think they ought to go back and study their files,' Trump said Wednesday when swearing in David Perdue as the new U.S. ambassador to China. That followed weeks of each side suggesting the other side had reached out first, including Trump implying Chinese President Xi Jinping had called him, only to be refuted by Beijing.
When it comes to the world's two largest economies readying themselves for what is expected to be tough trade talks, the public back-and-forth is no trivial matter.
'The obsession with who reached out first is a proxy fight over leverage,' said Craig Singleton, senior director of the China program at the Washington-based think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies. 'For Washington, signaling that Beijing initiated the meeting reinforces the narrative that the tariffs are working. For Beijing, denying outreach preserves the illusion of parity and avoids domestic perception of weakness.'
Jockeying for dominance
Daniel Russel, a former U.S. diplomat who oversaw East Asian and Pacific affairs, called the exchange 'part diplomatic stalemate and part dominance display worthy of a nature documentary.'
In his decades-long career as a diplomat, Russel said he is unaware of a single instance where a Chinese leader initiated a call with a U.S. president. 'It may be pride, it may be protocol, but for Beijing, being the demandeur is to show weakness — and that's something the Chinese system is hardwired to avoid,' said Russel, now vice president for international security and diplomacy at the Asia Society Policy Institute.
The Trump's administration is less accommodating. 'Their position is: 'If Xi wants the tariffs lifted, he knows how to reach us,'' Russel said.
Not long after Trump raised tariffs on Chinese goods to 145% and Beijing retaliated with 125% tariffs on U.S. goods, Trump suggested that China, like many other countries, was in talks with his administration. On April 22, he apparently directed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt to say 'we're doing very well' regarding a potential trade deal with China.
'I think it's a process that's going to go pretty quickly with China,' Trump said on the same day. 'I think we're going to live together very happily and ideally work together.'
Back and forth ... and back again
Yet China quickly denied any talk towards a deal. When asked about such negotiations, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun responded: 'All is fake news.' The next day, Guo asked the U.S. to 'stop creating confusion' on tariff talks.
Then came a TIME magazine interview when Trump claimed Xi had called him. Details? None provided. When? Trump didn't say. 'He's called. And I don't think that's a sign of weakness on his behalf," Trump said in the interview published on April 25. Beijing dismissed it, saying there was no recent leadership phone call.
Yet soon the word started to spread on China's social media that the Trump administration was contacting Beijing, and it was confirmed a few days later by the Chinese Commerce Ministry.
The U.S. had 'repeatedly' and 'proactively' conveyed messages to China recently to express the hope to engage in negotiations with China, the ministry said on May 2. 'In this regard, the Chinese side is assessing it," the ministry said, in an apparent off-ramp move climbdown that prepared the public opinion for the announcement a few days later that Vice Premier He Lifeng would meet U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in Switzerland this weekend.
Sun Yun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center, said the reality is more complicated when the two governments have been in regular contact and each side may have its own understanding what constitutes 'reaching out' for tariff talks. 'Technically," Sun said, 'both sides are correct.'
By Thursday, Trump appeared ready to move on. 'We can all play games — who made the first call, who didn't make them. Doesn't matter," Trump said.
Referring to the upcoming tariff talk this weekend in Switzerland, Trump said: "It only matters what happens in that room.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
State of play in Trump's tariffs, threats and delays
Dozens of economies including India, Canada and Mexico face threats of higher tariffs Friday if they fail to strike deals with Washington. Here is a summary of duties President Donald Trump has introduced in his second term as he pressures allies and competitors alike to reshape US trade relationships. - Global tariffs - US "reciprocal" tariffs -- imposed under legally contentious emergency powers -- are due to jump from 10 percent to various steeper levels for a list of dozens of economies come August 1, including South Korea, India and Taiwan. The hikes were to take effect July 9 but Trump postponed them days before imposition, marking a second delay since their shock unveiling in April. A 10 percent "baseline" levy on most partners, which Trump imposed in April, remains in place. He has also issued letters dictating tariff rates above 10 percent for individual countries, including Brazil, which has a trade deficit with the United States and was not on the initial list of higher "reciprocal" rates. Several economies -- the European Union, Britain, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia and the Philippines -- have struck initial tariff deals with Washington, while China managed to temporarily lower tit-for-tat duties. Certain products like pharmaceuticals, semiconductors and lumber are excluded from Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs, but may face separate action under different authorities. This has been the case for steel, aluminum, and soon copper. Gold and silver, alongside energy commodities, are also exempted. Excluded too are Mexico and Canada, hit with a different set of tariffs, and countries like Russia and North Korea as they already face sanctions. - Canada, Mexico - Canadian and Mexican products were hit by 25 percent US tariffs shortly after Trump returned to office, with a lower rate for Canadian energy. Trump targeted both neighbors over illegal immigration and fentanyl trafficking, also invoking emergency powers. But trade negotiations have been bumpy. This month, Trump said Canadian goods will face a higher 35 percent duty from August 1, and Mexican goods will see a 30 percent level. Products entering the United States under the USMCA North American free trade pact, covering large swaths of goods, are expected to remain exempt -- with Canadian energy resources and potash, used as fertilizer, to still face lower rates. - China focus - Trump has also taken special aim at China. The world's two biggest economies engaged in an escalating tariffs war this year before their temporary pullback. The countries imposed triple-digit duties on each other at one point, a level described as a trade embargo. After high level talks, Washington lowered its levies on Chinese goods to 30 percent and Beijing slashed its own to 10 percent. This pause is set to expire August 12, and officials will meet for further talks on Monday and Tuesday in the Swedish capital Stockholm. The US level is higher as it includes a 20 percent tariff over China's alleged role in the global fentanyl trade. Beyond expansive tariffs on Chinese products, Trump ordered the closure of a duty-free exemption for low-value parcels from the country. This adds to the cost of importing items like clothing and small electronics. - Autos, metals - Trump has targeted individual business sectors too, under more conventional national security grounds, imposing a 25 percent levy on steel and aluminum imports which he later doubled to 50 percent. The president has unveiled plans for a 50 percent tariff on copper imports starting August 1 as well and rolled out a 25 percent tariff on imported autos, although those entering under the USMCA can qualify for a lower rate. Trump's auto tariffs impact vehicle parts too, but new rules ensure automakers paying vehicle tariffs will not also be charged for certain other duties. He has ongoing investigations into imports of lumber, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and critical minerals that could trigger further duties. - Legal challenges - Several legal challenges have been filed against the tariffs Trump invoked citing emergencies. The US Court of International Trade ruled in May that the president had overstepped his authority, but a federal appeals court has allowed the duties to remain while it considers the case. If these tariffs are ultimately ruled illegal, companies could possibly seek reimbursements. bys/des/mlm Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Fox News
6 minutes ago
- Fox News
Trump is concerned about how the Fed is managed more than about firing Powell, says deputy chief of staff
Deputy White House chief of staff James Blair discusses where President Trump stands on Jay Powell's position with the Federal Reserve, when we may start to see rate cuts, and more on 'Sunday Night in America.'
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Obama ‘Russia-gate' push offers the MAGA Epstein crowd a head on a plate. Here's why he can't deliver on that promise
Tulsi Gabbard is the face of Donald Trump's newest bid to move the news cycle off the Jeffrey Epstein files. But she, like the president himself, is likely to see her efforts end in the same murky water where the dreams of prosecuting Hillary Clinton died during Trump's first term in office. On Wednesday, the White House trotted out the Director of National Intelligence, alongside press secretary Karoline Leavitt, to brief reporters on an intel review that Gabbard had led. She told reporters that new evidence pointed to the involvement of former president Barack Obama and top officials in a supposed campaign to alter the conclusions of intelligence assessments, in order to forge a link between Trump and Russia where none supposedly existed. It was an old theory with a new twist, which Gabbard laid out as an apparent years-long 'coup' attempt against Trump. She argued that Obama, along with former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former FBI chief James Comey, knowingly changed official intelligence assessments to explain the scope of the nefarious activity Russia was up to during the 2016 election. 'The implications of this are far reaching and have to do with the integrity of our democratic republic,' Gabbard claimed. 'It has to do with an outgoing President taking action to manufacture intelligence, to undermine and usurp the will of the American people in that election and launch what would be a years long coup against the incoming president United States, Donald Trump.' It's at this point where Trump and the White House's call for 'justice' and 'accountability' (two words Leavitt and Gabbard floated Wednesday) runs out of gas. In 2019, Trump's White House appointed a special counsel to look at the origins of the Russia investigation and found no evidence of criminal activity committed by Obama or other members of his administration. And given how the federal statute of limitations works, the clock is ticking for Trumpworld to take a second crack at delivering the retribution the president has long threatened to levy against his enemies. Under federal law, most criminal charges have a statute of limitation of five years, meaning that the entirety of the 'Russiagate' probe's duration now falls outside the legal window for criminal prosecution. To be clear, the statute of limitations does not apply to murder, or sexual abuse. Nor does it apply to treason, which Trumpworld has long, and frivolously, suggested charging Obama and others with. (Trump made that specific accusation once again in the wake of Gabbard's memo being published last week.) Nor does the statute of limitations apply to another criminal count that could be leveled against the former president and members of his team in a last-ditch attempt to make something stick: conspiracy against rights. The latter charge carries a statute of limitations of ten years, not five, and as a result it's by far the most likely avenue for federal prosecutors to take if a real effort is made to deliver on Trump's promised vengeance. The New York Post reported that some of Trump's allies view it as their best shot. But opponents say even that would be a fool's errand. 'These bizarre claims against President Obama are a made up farrago of malicious nonsense. The context makes clear that this is an effort to distract from Trump's major Epstein problem,' Norm Eisen, a constitutional scholar and co-counsel for the first Trump impeachment effort in 2020, said in a statement to The Independent on Wednesday. Eisen added: 'We at Democracy Defenders Fund have filed a legal demand under the freedom of information act for the Trump - Epstein documents and if we do not get them we will be litigating. But there is no basis for charging Obama with any crime irrespective of the statute of limitations, and plucking an offense out of thin air simply because it has a longer statute of limitations just highlights the baselessness of it all. ' The Obama "Russia-gate" push is the latest move by the Trump administration to attempt to quell outrage from the MAGA base after a July 6 DOJ memo concluded there were no more significant disclosures to be made in the Epstein case. The pressure has also intensified on the president after it was revealed the DOJ told Trump in May that his name appears multiple times in the Epstein files, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday. The president had denied to reporters earlier this month that his name had been in the files. Appearing in the files does not indicate that an individual has committed any wrongdoing, nor has Trump ever been accused of misconduct in connection with the Epstein case. At Wednesday's White House briefing, Gabbard deflected questions on potential charges for former president Obama to Attorney General Pam Bondi, possibly the most embattled member of Trump's Cabinet thanks to the Epstein Files uproar. 'I'm leaving the criminal charges to the Department of Justice. I am not an attorney,' said Gabbard. But the DOJ has been silent for nearly a week since the publication of a memo outlining the Director of National Intelligence's latest review. And the DOJ hasn't uttered a peep in terms of plans to launch investigations into Gabbard's findings, despite the director's claim that all evidence was referred to Bondi's office. A spokesperson for Obama, meanwhile, issued a rare statement Tuesday calling the 'Russia-gate' accusations 'bizarre', and correctly noting that 'nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but didn't successfully manipulate any votes.' The intelligence assessment, released by Gabbard, relied heavily on her conflation of the finding that Russian actors did not launch cyberattacks against U.S. voting platforms with a finding that Russia had not interfered at all. Like the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020, the DOJ and other agencies found that Russia was behind influence campaigns on social media aimed at sowing election disinformation. At the White House briefing, Gabbard and Leavitt presented that conclusion anew by inferring that Russia did interfere but without the goal of helping either major candidate in the 2016 race. Conspiracy against rights would be an ironic charge for Trump's team to level against Obama, considering the president was accused of this in a criminal probe launched by special counsel Jack Smith over Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election. This charge would require that Trump's prosecutors prove the existence of an organized plot between Obama and his advisers to keep Trump out of the White House — something even Gabbard didn't allege on Wednesday, as the intelligence probe did not turn up any evidence of a concerted scheme. The Biden administration tried for four years to hold Trump accountable for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. His mishandling of classified materials after leaving the White House also triggered criminal charges. But in both cases, the DOJ was too slow to bring the case to trial, and the charges were dismissed after Trump's 2024 election victory. Trump was charged with conspiracy against rights for allegedly conspiring to violate the rights of millions of Americans by working with state legislatures and Congress in a half-cocked bid to throw out the 2020 election results pointing to his defeat. It's the same charge, down to the letter, that Obama would now face from a Trump-DOJ, if such an effort be launched. Gabbard couldn't answer why those charges against Obama weren't pursued during Trump's first term. 'I can't speak to what happened there,' she said Wednesday. 'There were several [directors of national intelligence] under the first Trump administration. President Trump faced many challenges from those who were working in the government who sought to undermine his presidency.'
