The expected trade war between the United States and China, specifically during Trump’s reign, is reflecting a formidable economic and geopolitical rivalry between them. China recently imposed sanctions on U.S. defence contractors such as Raytheon, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin in a preemptive response to expected 60% tariffs on Chinese imports. Although Chinese sanctions grabbed eyeballs, they did not seriously wound the U.S. economy; they were more a signal to Beijing regarding how displeased it is with U.S. policy. For instance, most of the sanctions actions associated with the U.S. impact firms with limited connection with the Chinese market. In targeting firms with connections to U.S. weapons exports to Taiwan, the Chinese message gets across on core geopolitical issues without putting significant economic stakes at risk. They also refer to a distinct way of conveying strength without escalating contingencies to precipitates that are beyond manageable. Furthermore, China’s reassertion of its clear position on its sovereignty and strategic issues fits into a general trend in Chinese policymaking of making symbolic gestures to deter and create narratives that consolidate long-term national interests while not undermining them.
Apart from trade, Beijing lifted the lid on its one-of-a-kind sixth-generation stealth fighters, backed by sophisticated network-warfighting capabilities, while providing clear visions of China’s dreamed aspiration to depart from the US-led technical supremacy status quo to strive for leadership across different domains. The latest produced fighters, the J-36 and J-50, suggest growing Chinese technological strengths and are designed to surpass the capabilities of the U.S.’s fifth-generation F-35 fighters. These jets are characterised by higher stealth qualities accompanied by larger payloads, particularly regarding missiles and the integrated Artificial intelligence systems, which not only help the Chinese military force but are a concern for the US’s air superiority and historical dominance in the defence industries. Such breakthroughs by Beijing’s military industry also strengthened the attempts to present China as a formidable rival to America in terms of global power across economic, technological, and military terms. The effects are already visible as the stock of US arms firm Lockheed Martin, maker of the fifth-generation fighter jet F-35, was downgraded to Hold from Buy at Deutsche Bank with a price target of $523, down from $611.
These recent steps must be considered when considering the political relations between China and America in the upcoming Trump administration. The Trump administration expected tariffs in a bid to check China’s ambitious march to power; Beijing handled this well, answering it diplomatically and in equal measure. Chinese sanctions on defence firms complimented its export controls of rare earth minerals and limited the sale of products with dual-use. Even though most of these actions subdued large harm to certain industries, they shielded China’s own economy.
Interestingly, Beijing’s decision to opt for signalling in the trade war demonstrates an appreciation of power dynamics. Its recent subtle form of altercative manoeuvring was done in a way that did not create a direct economic confrontation to upset Chinese markets and disrupt global harmony when it sought to display its robust local and international strength. This is the familiar paradox of the Chinese, especially under Xi Jinping’s reign. They present themselves as a resilient power while avoiding a reckless fight that could, in fact, harm them.
Meanwhile, the trade war has allowed Beijing to reframe the global narrative discourse or its branding in China’s favour. As Washington embraces protectionist policies, Beijing appears as the world’s guardian of globalisation and multilateralism. Through its Belt and Road Initiative and prowess in green technology, China is gaining strength to turn countries in its favour amid U.S. unpredictable stances. In this way, Beijing has provided itself the action space to shift the burden of the trade war, which is still growing, while also deepening the country’s integration into the international community.
Nevertheless, Chinese symbolic actions do carry their fair share of risks. Such signalling strategies could cover China’s frailties since it shies away from substantive actions while over-relying on symbolic gestures. Too much reliance on economic restrictions and sabre-rattling may make trading partners avoid China or give the US an excuse to take stronger retaliatory measures. Moreover, if others persistently label Beijing’s actions as ineffective and toothless, then its authority and influence will be eroded on the global level.
After all, the trade war is about narratives as much as it was about the economies. Yet, China’s sanctions and technology expansion can be seen as a highly symbolic, tactical, yet well-calculated power play of using perception as a weapon. In consistently responding to U.S. disentanglement measures and demonstrating its progress, Beijing also sent a message to the latter: it is ready to fight back and emerge as a worthy, resilient, and formidable global force. Overall, the recent actions of China before Trump’s inauguration ceremony highlight its ability to pivot amid external pressures while ensuring its long-term goals during one of the most complex times in recent history.
