Why has US President Donald Trump imposed tariffs on countries all around the world? And in particular, why is Trump waging a trade war on China? What are his real goals?
Well, to try to answer these questions, I spoke with the economist Michael Hudson, who is the author of many books, and who just published the new report “Return of the robber barons: Trump’s distorted view of US tariff history“.
Michael Hudson outlined the history of the use of tariffs in the United States and in other countries, and he explained how Trump is using tariffs as a weapon of class war, to benefit the rich at the expense of the vast majority of the population, and also how Trump is trying to reshape the global financial system, in order to benefit the United States at the expense of everyone else.
In the 1950s, when Japan and much of Europe was in ruins, the U.S. accounted for 50% of the world’s global production. By the 1960s, this was 35%, declining to 25% by the 1980s. By 2025, the U.S. share of global production had fallen to 12% as production grew elsewhere. (itif.org, Feb. 18)
The capitalist class in the U.S. has grown frantic about this reversal. Its focus is on China, and it blames China for its spectacular level of modern industrial development. In advanced technology manufacturing the future is clear: China holds 45% of the global share to 11% for the U.S. Higher levels of production need a high-tech infrastructure to move what is produced to global markets.
Hog farmers are bracing for costs to soar after China slapped a 135% tariff on imports of U.S. soybeans, a key ingredient of animal feed, even as Beijing looks to producers like Brazil to meet its demand for the legume amid a greater push for self-sufficiency.
Soybeans – which feed the production of China’s 435-million-strong pig industry – remains America’s top agricultural export, selling more than 27 million metric tons or over half of the $24.6 billion in total U.S. agricultural products Beijing imported in 2024.
The steep tariff hikes on agricultural products like soybeans and corn, both major components of hog feed, will drive up the cost of breeding livestock and translate into higher food prices for ordinary consumers for China – the world’s largest producer and consumer of pork, industry insiders said.
On April 11, China announced 125% tariffs on U.S. imports, in retaliation to U.S. President Donald Trump’s increase of duties on Chinese imports to 145%. With this, the total tariff on U.S. soybean imports rose to 135%, after adding in the 10% duty China imposed on certain U.S. agricultural products in March.
At an estimated 125% tariff hike, the CIF – cost, insurance, and freight – price of U.S. soybean imports will rise to $1,026 per metric ton, nearly double that of Brazilian soybeans at about $580 per metric ton, prompting China to increase its soybean shipments from Brazil, said the derivatives marketplace operator, CME Group.
Workers transport imported soybean products at a port in Nantong, Jiangsu province, China, April 9, 2018.(China Stringer Network via Reuters)
Ever since the world’s two largest economies engaged in an earlier trade war in 2018 during Donald Trump’s first term as U.S. president, China has been turning to countries like Brazil to meet its demand for farm goods. It has also made a push for more self-sufficiency, reducing its reliance on imports of U.S. agricultural products.
Today, China has significantly increased its reliance on Brazil, the world’s top soybean producer, importing 72.5 million metric tons of Brazilian soybeans in 2024, up from 19 million metric tons in 2010. In comparison, U.S. soybean imports stood at 27.2 million metric tons in 2024, largely unchanged from its 2010 levels.
China is now making a similar push to import more of the protein- and oil-rich seeds from Brazil to meet the demand of its hog industry, but hog farmers believe this won’t be enough to stem the impact of high tariffs on U.S. agricultural imports.
“For soybeans and corn, they (the government) can import from wherever they want. We ordinary people have no choice,” said Sun Jun, a hog farmer in China’s southwestern province of Sichuan.
To be sure, the composition of soybeans and corn is high in feed for livestock, including pigs, poultry, and cattle.
Sun estimates that an animal feed weighing 100 kilograms (220.5 pounds) would typically contain around 25 kilograms (55 pounds) of corn and wheat, and 20 kilograms (44 pounds) of soybean meal, a by-product of oil extraction from soybean seeds.
“Once the price rises, it will directly push up the breeding cost,” said Sun.
Sun now buys about 3 metric tons of hog feed every month, which costs about 14,000 yuan (US$1,915) per month, he said.
That’s already a one-third increase from an estimated 10,500 yuan (US$1,436) in cost he would have incurred for the same amount of hog feed a week earlier, based on the price of 3.46 yuan (49 U.S. cents) per kilogram (2.2 pounds), as listed by Chengdu Development and Reform Committee then.
Soybeans are displayed with a farmer miniature in this illustration picture taken June 20, 2023.(Florence Lo/Reuters)
The impact of rising feed costs will be felt by ordinary consumers through higher food and meat prices, said industry insiders.
“The breeding costs of the livestock industry are already very high … The price of meat (as a result) has been rising for more than half a month and is bound to increase,” Lu, a resident of Linyi, Shandong, told RFA.
Lu, like some of the other industry insiders RFA interviewed for this story, provided only her first name for safety reasons.
“The tariff increase will ultimately be borne by consumers,” she added.
From a macro perspective, China remains highly dependent on agricultural product imports, said Li Qiang, who previously worked at the Agricultural Product Pricing Bureau.
“25% of the food needed by mainlanders depends on imports, and mainly comes from the United States, mainly wheat and soybeans,” added Li, who is a resident of Qingdao prefecture-level city in Shandong province.
Shandong, which is a key player in China’s hog breeding industry, has seen the construction of multi-story pig farms that are at the center of the country’s efforts to ramp up domestic production to cut its reliance on pork imports.
But China’s food and catering sector, which imports much of its pork and beef from the U.S., will not be spared the effects of the tariff hikes, say industry insiders.
Since the start of April, the price of high-end steaks has increased by 30% to 50%, said Geng, the head of a restaurant in Wuhan city in Hubei province.
His company purchases beef from Inner Mongolia, but high-quality steaks still need to be imported from the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, said Geng.
“If tariffs are added, the price will be even more expensive,” he added.
Edited by Tenzin Pema and Mat Pennington
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Qian Lang for RFA Mandarin.
President Donald Trump is again loudly complaining that the US military bases in Asia are too costly for the US to bear. As part of the new round of tariff negotiations with Japan and Korea, Trump is calling on Japan and Korea to pay for stationing the US troops. Here’s a much better idea: close the bases and return the US servicemen to the US.
Trump implies that the US is providing a great service to Japan and Korea by stationing 50,000 troops in Japan and nearly 30,000 in Korea. Yet these countries do not need the US to defend themselves. They are wealthy and can certainly provide their own defense. Far more importantly, diplomacy can ensure the peace in northeast Asia far more effectively and far less expensively than US troops.
The US acts as if Japan needs to be defended against China. Let’s have a look. During the past 1,000 years, during which time China was the region’s dominant power for all but the last 150 years, how many times did China attempt to invade Japan? If you answered zero, you are correct. China did not attempt to invade Japan on a single occasion.
You might quibble. What about the two attempts in 1274 and 1281, roughly 750 years ago? It’s true that when the Mongols temporarily ruled China between 1271 and 1368, the Mongols twice sent expeditionary fleets to invade Japan, and both times were defeated by a combination of typhoons (known in Japanese lore as the Kamikaze winds) and by Japanese coastal defenses.
Japan, on the other hand, made several attempts to attack or conquer China. In 1592, the arrogant and erratic Japanese military leader Toyotomi Hideyoshi launched an invasion of Korea with the goal of conquering Ming China. He did not get far, dying in 1598 without even having subdued Korea. In 1894-5, Japan invaded and defeated China in the Sino-Japanese war, taking Taiwan as a Japanese colony. In 1931, Japan invaded northeast China (Manchuria) and created the Japanese colony of Manchukuo. In 1937, Japan invaded China, starting World War II in the Pacific region.
Nobody thinks that Japan is going to invade China today, and there is no rhyme, reason, or historical precedent to believe that China is going to invade Japan. Japan has no need for the US military bases to protect itself from China.
The same is true of China and Korea. During the past 1,000 years, China never invaded Korea, except on one occasion: when the US threatened China. China entered the war in late 1950 on the side of North Korea to fight the US troops advancing northward towards the Chinese border. At the time, US General Douglas MacArthur recklessly recommended attacking China with atomic bombs. MacArthur also proposed to support Chinese nationalist forces, then based in Taiwan, to invade the Chinese mainland. President Harry Truman, thank God, rejected MacArthur’s recommendations.
South Korea needs deterrence against North Korea, to be sure, but that would be achieved far more effectively and credibly through a regional security system including China, Japan, Russia, North Korea, South Korea, than through the presence of the US, which has repeatedly stoked North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and military build-up, not diminished it.
In fact, the US military bases in East Asia are really for the US projection of power, not for the defense of Japan or Korea. This is even more reason why they should be removed. Though the US claims that its bases in East Asia are defensive, they are understandably viewed by China and North Korea as a direct threat – for example, by creating the possibility of a decapitation strike, and by dangerously lowering the response times for China and North Korea to a US provocation or some kind of misunderstanding. Russia vociferously opposed NATO in Ukraine for the same justifiable reasons. NATO has frequently intervened in US-backed regime-change operations and has placed missile systems dangerously close to Russia.
Indeed, just as Russia feared, NATO has actively participated in the Ukraine War, providing armaments, strategy, intelligence, and even programming and tracking for missile strikes deep inside of Russia.
Note that Trump is currently obsessed with two small port facilities in Panama owned by a Hong Kong company, claiming that China is threatening US security (!), and wants the facilities sold to an American buyer. The US on the other hand surrounds China not with two tiny port facilities but with major US military bases in Japan, South Korea, Guam, the Philippines, and the Indian Ocean near to China’s international sea lanes.
The best strategy for the superpowers is to stay out of each other’s lanes. China and Russia should not open military bases in the Western Hemisphere, to put it mildly. The last time that was tried, when the Soviet Union placed nuclear weapons in Cuba in 1962, the world nearly ended in nuclear annihilation. (See Martin Sherwin’s remarkable book, Gambling with Armageddon for the shocking details on how close the world came to nuclear Armageddon). Neither China nor Russia shows the slightest inclination to do so today, despite all of the provocations of facing US bases in their own neighborhoods.
Trump is looking for ways to save money – an excellent idea given that the US federal budget is hemorrhaging $2 trillion dollars a year, more than 6% of US GDP. Closing the US overseas military bases would be an excellent place to start.
Trump even seemed to point that way at the start of his second term, but the Congressional Republicans have called for increases, not decreases, in military spending. Yet with America’s 750 or so overseas military bases in around 80 countries, it’s high time to close these bases, pocket the saving, and return to diplomacy. Getting the host countries to pay for something that doesn’t help them or the US is a huge drain of time, diplomacy, and resources, both for the US and the host countries.
The US should make a basic deal with China, Russia, and other powers. “You keep your military bases out of our neighborhood, and we’ll keep our military bases out of yours.” Basic reciprocity among the major powers would save trillions of dollars of military outlays over the coming decade and, more importantly, would push the Doomsday Clock back from 89 seconds to nuclear Armageddon.
BANGKOK – Chinese investments in Thailand are facing intense scrutiny as the host country made the first arrest of a Chinese enterprise official allegedly accountable for the collapse of a building that killed over 100 workers after an earthquake in late March.
The 30-story government audit building was the only major structure to collapse in Thailand due to the 7.7-magnitude tremor with the epicenter in Myanmar 1,000 kilometers (621 miles) away. It raised questions about its design, construction controls, materials used, and allegations of bribery and official corruption. As many as 47 construction workers remained unaccounted for while 47 were confirmed dead and nine injured so far.
Thai government agencies were scrambling to probe the validity of China Railway Number 10 (Thailand) Co., Ltd., which is part of China state-owned China Railway Engineering Corp. It formed a joint venture with the Thai construction giant, Italian Thai, but was found using as partners Thai laymen who lacked knowledge of building construction.
Authorities are also probing Xin Ke Yuan Steel, a Chinese steel company whose steel bars – used in the collapsed office – were found to be substandard in subsequent tests.
On Sunday, the Department of Special Investigation, or DSI, arrested Chuanling Zhang, an executive at China Railway Number 10 (Thailand) Co., Ltd. He was charged on Monday with violation of business law by using three Thai nominees in the Thai-registered company.
According to Thailand’s Foreign Business Act 1999, foreigners can set up a joint venture with a Thai partner but are not allowed to hold more than a 49% stake. Thai nominees are often used to circumvent the laws.
Zhang, who said he was an official for China’s state enterprise, said he knew the three Thai men from rural regions, but did not know them well, according to a DSI official.
He was freed on 500,000 baht (US$15,066) bail but barred from leaving the country. If convicted, Zhang could face as long as three years in prison and a fine of 2 million baht (US$60,288).
Woranan Srilam of the DSI said his office was looking for the three Thai men whom the media described as laymen who earned small salaries but hold million baht worth of stocks.
“We are looking to see if the Thai executives hold stakes on behalf of other persons,” said Woranan. “Also we are trying to find if there was bid rigging which hampered other competitors.”
Since the collapse, the officials at the State Audit Office only issued public condolences but gave no clear statement. The project blueprint made available to the public showed overpriced and unnecessary items including a 200-seat theater. Insiders said bribery was common in state biddings, though officially unconfirmed.
An engineer filed a complaint that his signature was counterfeited as control engineer. Authorities have yet to file charges against any Thai officials.
Xin Ke Yuan’s defense
Authorities have also focused on a Chinese steel giant Xin Ke Yuan Steel Co., Ltd. – the main supplier of steel bars. The ministry of industry found their steel rods were low quality.
The company’s external lawyers on Monday denied the accusations that the steel products used in the building played a part in the collapse.
“[We] believe that the truth will come out that the main causes of the state audit building collapse were likely other factors such as the design, the engineers or the reduction in specs,” Piyapong Kongmaruan, a lawyer for Xin Ke Yuan told a press briefing on Monday.
“There was a misguided concept that all Chinese companies are likely shady. Xin Ke Yuan is fully legal and meets standards,” he said, adding that the damaged steel in the rubble should not be assumed to represent the company’s overall product quality.
Xin Ke Yuan’s lawyer Piyapong Kongmaruan, left, and his associate lawyer speak to the media at a Bangkok hotel on April 21, 2025(Pimuk Rakkanam/RFA)
Since China adopted stringent production techniques, and in the face of export tariffs, Chinese factories which use a more polluting induction furnace process moved to Thailand. Xin Ke Yuan was registered with a capital of 1.4 billion baht (US$42.2 million) under the privileges offered by the Board of Investment, or BOI.
“You invited them to come in but you tied their hands and proposed a strip off the BOI list,” said Surasak Weerakul, another lawyer representing the Chinese firm. “Chinese investors are very wary of this.”
Some domestic voices still remain critical. An opposition Thai lawmaker, Chutiphong Pipoppinyo, said Thailand should seize the chance to clean up the poor business practices and not worry about shady ones.
“All investors still want to invest in Thailand,” he told reporters.
The DSI’s Woranan said his agency was also focusing on tax fraud. Initial investigations found the company, suspended for pollution since last December, cheated on more than 200 million baht (US$6 million) in Value-Added Tax returns, though it claimed to have paid over 800 million baht (US$42.1 million) in corporate taxes since 2019.
Edited by Mike Firn and Taejun Kang.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Pimuk Rakkanam for RFA.
A claim emerged in Chinese-language social media posts that a U.S. congressman named “Jack Kimble” suggested selling all American beef to India if China stops importing it.
But the claim is false. There is no U.S. congressman by that name. The claim originated from a satirical social media post.
A Taiwanese political talk show, TVBS News Talk, cited Chinese outlet NetEase to claim that a U.S. congressman named “Jack Kimble” suggested selling all American beef to India if China stops importing it.
The guest of the show, retired Taiwanese Lt. Gen. Shuai Hua-min, used the claim to criticize the U.S. as ignorant, noting that Indians don’t eat beef.
TVBS guest and retired Taiwanese Lt. Gen. Shuai Hua-min criticized Washington, citing a claim that a U.S. congressman suggested selling all U.S. beef to India if China refuses to buy it.(TVBS/YouTube)
The U.S. and China are waging a tit-for-tat trade battle, which threatens to stunt the global economy, after Trump announced new tariffs on most countries.
Specifically, the Trump administration has ramped up its trade war with Beijing by hiking import taxes on Chinese goods to as high as 145%
China, which has pledged to “fight to the end” if Washington continues to escalate the trade spat, has hit back by imposing duties of 125% on U.S. exports, prompting U.S. companies to seek alternative markets and manufacturing bases.
India has emerged as a key partner in this realignment. U.S. Vice President JD Vance recently visited India to advance negotiations on a bilateral trade deal aimed at boosting trade from the current US$190 billion to US$500 billion by 2030. Discussions include tariff relief and increased imports of U.S. goods by India .
But the claim about the purported remarks made by a U.S. congressman named “Jack Kimble” is false.
Keyword searches found that the claim originated from a satirical post from a parody X account named “Rep. Jack Kimble.”
The account is known for political satire and explicitly describes itself as representing California’s fictional 54th congressional district – California only has 52 districts.
According to the official website of the U.S. House of Representatives, there is no member named “Jack Kimble.”
On April 16, the parody account posted a satirical message suggesting selling beef to India if China stops buying it. This post was mistakenly translated and widely shared across Chinese social media platforms, including Weibo, Douyin, and even Chinese state-affiliated outlets like Hua Shang Daily.
The “US congressman suggests the U.S. sell beef to India” claim circulated across various Chinese news and social media platforms.(Weibo, Douyin and Hua Shang Daily)
Asia Fact Check Lab (AFCL) was established to counter disinformation in today’s complex media environment. We publish fact-checks, media-watches and in-depth reports that aim to sharpen and deepen our readers’ understanding of current affairs and public issues. If you like our content, you can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alicia Dong for Asia Fact Check Lab.
TAIPEI, Taiwan – South Korea said it’s considering setting up a “necessary facility” in overlapping territorial waters with China in the Yellow Sea as a countermeasure to Beijing’s installation of a steel structure in the area.
South Korean media reports say the structure, which is 50 meters (164 feet) in both height and diameter, is the latest of three Chinese installations in the waters. Beijing has said all the structures are for aquaculture.
“Regarding the proportional measure, we are taking this matter very seriously from the perspective of protecting our maritime territory,” said South Korea’s oceans minister Kang Do-hyung on Monday, adding that the government first has to decide “what kind of facility is necessary at which level.”
“We are strongly protesting to China through diplomatic channels. We view this matter with utmost seriousness, given its importance and our position on protecting our maritime territory,” said Kang.
Kang’s remarks came after media reported that the disputed structure is an old oil rig that was used in the Middle East.
The structure, equipped with a helipad, has “Atlantic Amsterdam” written on its surface, which is the name of an oil rig built by France in 1982, Seoul-based daily Chosun Ilbo reported on Monday.
South Korea and China’s overlapping claims to areas of the Yellow Sea are managed under a provisional measures zone, or PMZ, intended to prevent conflict between the two states.
Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun on Monday reiterated that the structure was for aquaculture.
“The aquaculture facilities set up by a Chinese company in the PMZ do not contravene the agreement between China and the ROK,” said Guo, calling South Korea by its official name, Republic of Korea.
“China has shared relevant information and maintained communication with the ROK through channels such as the dialogue and cooperation mechanism of maritime affairs. We hope the ROK will view this in an objective and reasonable manner,” he said.
A Chinese-South Korean agreement that established the PMZ in 2001 allows fishing vessels from both countries to operate within the zone. It prohibits any activity beyond navigation and fishing.
Despite the agreement, China has reportedly installed several large steel structures, including two in April and May of last year, and another this year, raising concerns in South Korea over potential territorial disputes.
In February, the two countries had a tense maritime standoff as Chinese authorities blocked Seoul’s attempt to investigate Beijing’s steel structure near Ieo Island, off South Korea’s southwest coast.
Analysts say China has employed a deliberately incremental strategy in waters it seeks control over, including the South China Sea – gradually advancing its territorial claims through low-level actions that avoid outright conflict but steadily alter the status quo.
This includes building artificial islands on features such as Cross Reef and Mischief Reef, deploying coast guard and maritime militia vessels near contested areas such as Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal, and installing military facilities including runways, missile systems and surveillance radars on reclaimed land.
Edited by Mike Firn and Stephen Wright.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Taejun Kang for RFA.
Some would posit, “If you have nothing nice to say, don’t say anything.”
US president Donald Trump is not beholden to that epithet and neither is his vice-president JD “I don’t like China” Vance.
Previously, in January 2018, Trump was criticized for referring to Haiti and African countries as “shithole countries.”
On 8 April 2025, Trump took pleasure in describing countries purportedly cowering at the prospect of US tariffs being levied on them:
These countries are calling us up, kissing my ass. They are, they are dying to make a deal. Please, please sir, make a deal. I’ll do anything. I’ll do anything sir.
The same lack of respectful discourse is followed by Vance. At a meeting in the White House on 28 February 2025, Volodomyr Zelenskyy found himself attacked on two sides. However unsavoury a character Zelenskyy is, and however improper his remarks might have been when he was at the White House, he was a guest. And the attack, in particular by Vance, on a guest was unbecoming.
We borrow money from Chinese peasants to buy the things those Chinese peasants manufacture.
Decidedly, it was a boorish comment from the vice-president. China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian was not impressed:
It is surprising and sad to hear such ignorant and impolite words from this vice president.
Is Vance merely revealing his ignorance as well as rudeness? Is there any truth to the depiction Vance proffers on China?
Today’s Chinese “peasants”
China has eliminated extreme poverty. The US Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) and official poverty data report 5.3% of Americans (around 17.5 million people) as living in “deep poverty” (with incomes below 50% of the federal poverty line) (source: Census.gov – Poverty Tables [Table B-1, B-2]).
An end to extreme poverty posits an end to homelessness. In the US, homelessness is rising in recent years. Ecofact.org reports:
There were 771,480 people recorded as homeless in 2024 — or about 23 per 10,000 people. This represented an increase of over 18% relative to the numbers recorded in 2023. The data show that 36 percent of the homeless were unsheltered — that is, they lived in places not considered fit for human habitation …
Chinese peasants live in the world’s largest economy expressed as GDP (PPP). Chinese peasants put up a space station on their own. Cars produced by Chinese peasants are dominating the world market. And Chinese peasants have developed (Chinese tech is stolen according to Vance) flying cars for the markets, when the markets are ready. These peasants are great at innovating and manufacturing: Comac C919 narrow-body airliner, Long March rockets, 30-satellite Beidou positioning system, molten salt thorium reactors, HarmonyOS, 5.5G, 3nm chips, robotics, AI, hypersonic weapons, etc, etc.
And pertinently for peasants, China’s agricultural sector is undergoing significant transformation through technological innovation, while in the US, farmers are worried about China’s retaliatory tariffs.
Many Americans, if presented the choice, might well opt for Chinese peasant status.
TAIPEI, Taiwan – Beijing accused the United States of “pressuring other countries” to curb trade, following media reports that the Trump administration will use tariff relief as leverage to push nations to scale back their economic ties with China.
More than 70 countries have expressed interest in negotiating trade deals, according to the U.S., after U.S. President Donald Trump earlier this month announced a 90-day pause on his “reciprocal” tariffs on imports from dozens of countries.
“China firmly opposes any party striking a deal at the expense of China’s interests,” a Chinese commerce ministry spokesperson said Monday, accusing the U.S. of using “reciprocity” as a cover to exert dominance in trade and economic matters.
“Seeking tariff exemptions at the expense of others’ interests is like making a deal with the tiger for its skin – it will ultimately backfire and hurt all parties involved,” said the spokesperson, vowing “reciprocal countermeasures,” without elaborating.
The ministry’s statement came after Bloomberg News last week reported that the Trump administration intended to push countries seeking relief from tariffs to reduce their trade with China.
U.S. officials were discussing plans to pressure other nations to stop importing excess goods from China and impose duties on imports from specific countries with close ties to Beijing, Bloomberg reported, citing people familiar with the matter.
The U.S. and China are waging a tit-for-tat trade battle, which threatens to stunt the global economy, after Trump announced new tariffs on most countries.
Specifically, the Trump administration has ramped up its trade war with Beijing by hiking import taxes on Chinese goods to as high as 145%
China, which has pledged to “fight to the end” if Washington continues to escalate the trade spat, has hit back by imposing duties of 125% on U.S. exports.
Trump on Easter Sunday posted about a ‘non-tariff cheating’ list, warning trade partners of non-tariff-related offenses that could spoil relations with the United States. The eight-point list included currency manipulation, export subsidies, counterfeiting, and transshipping.
“These non-tariff barriers are just as bad as tariffs – maybe worse,” Trump’s post on Truth Social read, drawing attention to practices such as currency manipulation, value-added taxes acting as export subsidies, product dumping and government-backed export incentives.
He also named counterfeit goods, IP theft, protectionist technical standards, and transshipping to dodge tariffs as part of what he sees as a global playbook of economic sabotage.
“Yeah, we’re talking to China. I would say they have reached out a number of times,” Trump told reporters last week, hinting at renewed negotiations with Beijing.
He earlier said that Washington and Beijing were in talks on tariffs, expressing confidence that the world’s two largest economies would reach a deal over the next three to four weeks.
Edited by Taejun Kang and Stephen Wright.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alan Lu for RFA.
Air Show China demonstrated that Chinese air power is leaving behind its legacy Russian jets in favour of nationally developed platforms. One of the main stars of the China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibition that took place in Zhuhai, Guangdong province (12-17 November) was the Shenyang J-35A fighter. The design is an F-35-looking analogue with […]
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, who has visited China again three months after his trip in January, recently publicly stated that the company would “unswervingly serve the Chinese market” and emphasized China’s key role in the global supply chain. He said Nvidia has grown together with the Chinese market and achieved mutual success. Against the backdrop of the US imposing tariffs and banning Nvidia’s export of H20 chips to China, Huang’s visit and his emphasis that China is a “very important market for Nvidia” can be seen as US companies’ indirect resistance to US government’s protectionist trade policies. His stance, viewing China as an opportunity rather than a threat, and the call for cooperation rather than decoupling, resonates strongly with the American tech and business community.
China is one of the world’s largest consumer markets, and its thriving industrial ecosystem and broad application scenarios provide crucial momentum for continuous innovation for many American companies like Nvidia. As Huang put it, in-depth cooperation with Chinese companies has enabled it to evolve into an even more competitive international enterprise. Previously, some US business leaders also noted that they don’t need to hitch a ride with the US government, they need the government to clear the path for us. The importance and urgency of cooperation with China have “unexpectedly” been highlighted against the backdrop of the US’ reckless imposition of tariffs.
Not just in the tech and business industry, the call for “We need China” has recently spread across various sectors of American society. A recent poll by Pew Research Center also revealed surprising results. The survey showed that fewer and fewer Americans now view China as an enemy, with significant year-over-year decline in the share of Americans with an unfavorable view of China over the past five years. Bloomberg described this as “a sentiment that runs counter to the tariff,” calling the finding “surprising.” Moreover, on overseas social platforms like TikTok, Chinese e-commerce has unexpectedly risen to prominence, sparking a new wave of “Made in China” enthusiasm among US consumers. Many influencers have posted unboxing videos of products bought from Chinese e-commerce platforms, exclaiming that they can get the same quality items for just a tenth of the price.
Despite Washington frequently having sent signals of confrontation, which has pushed China-US economic relations to the brink, American society is not in favor of a zero-sum game between the two countries. Pew’s survey results, to some extent, puncture the bubble of the so-called tariff policies inflated by Washington. Relevant approach has not reflected public opinion in the US, but instead oversimplifies the complexity and multifaceted nature of the bilateral relationship, turning it into a full-scale confrontation. Washington’s abuse of tariffs ignores the high degree of economic complementarity between the two countries and the practical needs of their people, creating chaos and uncertainty for both the US and the global economy – something the American public is feeling firsthand.
Those who are “surprised” by public opinion should reflect on what exactly is American public’s attitude toward China, and who is “influencing” Americans’ perceptions of China. Over the past few years, the so-called “China threat” has almost become the default opening line for politicians when discussing China, and the attitudes of some members of the public have also been affected. “China is taking advantage of the US,” “the US must get the trade imbalance fixed,” and “pursuing economic containment of China to achieve ‘America First’” – this is the outdated logic behind Washington’s so-called tariff policies toward China.
China-US economic and trade cooperation has brought enormous economic benefits to both sides, and the US has benefited just as much as China. The US imports a large volume of consumer goods, intermediate goods, and capital goods from China, supporting the development of its manufacturing supply chains and industrial chains, enriching consumer choices, lowering the cost of living, and improving the real purchasing power of the American public, especially for middle- and lower-income groups. When taking into account goods trade, services trade, and the local sales revenue of domestic enterprises operating in each other’s countries, the economic gains from China-US trade are roughly balanced. These facts cannot be concealed by lies or slander; in fact, the more China-US economic and trade relations come under strain, the more likely these truths are to resonate within the US.
Gavin Newsom, governor of California, recently announced plans to sue the US federal government over its abuse of tariff policies, stating, “We’re standing up for American families who can’t afford to let the chaos continue.”
The hope of the China-US relationship lies in the people, its foundation is in the two societies, its future depends on the youth, and its vitality comes from exchanges at subnational levels. According to the public opinion survey conducted by the Global Times Institute (GTI) on “mutual perceptions between China and the US” in 2024, around 90 percent of respondents from both China and the US express concern over bilateral relations, with mainstream public opinion in both countries favoring strengthened economic and trade exchanges, people-to-people exchanges, and cooperation on climate change.
The phenomenal grassroots interactions between Americans and Chinese on social media recently also reflect that, beneath the anti-China clamor stirred up by some Washington politicians, there remains a strong, constructive desire among the people of both nations for peaceful coexistence and cooperative engagement. If the US continues to go its own way, pressing China with tariff blackmail and inciting for China-US “decoupling,” the growing opposition from their voters may become a political reality that Washington can no longer ignore.
This week Cambodia marks the 50th anniversary of the fall of Phnom Penh to the murderous Khmer Rouge, and Vietnam celebrates the fall of Saigon to North Vietnamese forces in April 1975.
They are being commemorated very differently; after all, there’s nothing to celebrate in Cambodia. Its capital Phnom Penh was emptied, and its people had to then endure the “killing fields” and the darkest years of its modern existence under Khmer Rouge rule.
Over the border in Vietnam, however, there will be modest celebrations for their victory against US (and Australian) forces at the end of this month.
Yet, this week’s news of Indonesia considering a Russian request to base aircraft at the Biak airbase in West Papua throws in stark relief a troubling question I have long asked — did Australia back the wrong war 63 years ago? These different areas — and histories — of Southeast Asia may seem disconnected, but allow me to draw some links.
Through the 1950s until the early 1960s, it was official Australian policy under the Menzies government to support The Netherlands as it prepared West Papua for independence, knowing its people were ethnically and religiously different from the rest of Indonesia.
They are a Christian Melanesian people who look east to Papua New Guinea (PNG) and the Pacific, not west to Muslim Asia. Australia at the time was administering and beginning to prepare PNG for self-rule.
The Second World War had shown the importance of West Papua (then part of Dutch New Guinea) to Australian security, as it had been a base for Japanese air raids over northern Australia.
Japanese beeline to Sorong
Early in the war, Japanese forces made a beeline to Sorong on the Bird’s Head Peninsula of West Papua for its abundance of high-quality oil. Former Australian prime minister Gough Whitlam served in a RAAF unit briefly stationed in Merauke in West Papua.
By 1962, the US wanted Indonesia to annex West Papua as a way of splitting Chinese and Russian influence in the region, as well as getting at the biggest gold deposit on earth at the Grasberg mine, something which US company Freeport continues to mine, controversially, today.
Following the so-called Bunker Agreement signed in New York in 1962, The Netherlands reluctantly agreed to relinquish West Papua to Indonesia under US pressure. Australia, too, folded in line with US interests.
That would also be the year when Australia sent its first group of 30 military advisers to Vietnam. Instead of backing West Papuan nationhood, Australia joined the US in suppressing Vietnam’s.
As a result of US arm-twisting, Australia ceded its own strategic interests in allowing Indonesia to expand eastwards into Pacific territories by swallowing West Papua. Instead, Australians trooped off to fight the unwinnable wars of Indochina.
To me, it remains one of the great what-ifs of Australian strategic history — if Australia had held the line with the Dutch against US moves, then West Papua today would be free, the East Timor invasion of 1975 was unlikely to have ever happened and Australia might not have been dragged into the Vietnam War.
Instead, as Cambodia and Vietnam mark their anniversaries this month, Australia continues to be reminded of the potential threat Indonesian-controlled West Papua has posed to Australia and the Pacific since it gave way to US interests in 1962.
Russian space agency plans
Nor is this the first time Russia has deployed assets to West Papua. Last year, Russian media reported plans under way for the Russian space agency Roscosmos to help Indonesia build a space base on Biak island.
In 2017, RAAF Tindal was scrambled just before Christmas to monitor Russian Tu95 nuclear “Bear” bombers doing their first-ever sorties in the South Pacific, flying between Australia and Papua New Guinea. I wrote not long afterwards how Australia was becoming “caught in a pincer” between Indonesian and Russian interests on Indonesia’s side and Chinese moves coming through the Pacific on the other.
All because we have abandoned the West Papuans to endure their own “slow-motion genocide” under Indonesian rule. Church groups and NGOs estimate up to 500,000 Papuans have perished under 60 years of Indonesian military rule, while Jakarta refuses to allow international media and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit.
Alex Sobel, an MP in the UK Parliament, last week called on Indonesia to allow the UN High Commissioner to visit but it is exceedingly rare to hear any Australian MPs ask questions about our neighbour West Papua in the Australian Parliament.
Canberra continues to enhance security relations with Indonesia in a naive belief that the nation is our ally against an assertive China. This ignores Jakarta’s deepening relations with both Russia and China, and avoids any mention of ongoing atrocities in West Papua or the fact that jihadi groups are operating close to Australia’s border.
Indonesia’s militarisation of West Papua, jihadi infiltration and now the potential for Russia to use airbases or space bases on Biak should all be “red lines” for Australia, yet successive governments remain desperate not to criticise Indonesia.
Ignoring actual ‘hot war’
Australia’s national security establishment remains focused on grand global strategy and acquiring over-priced gear, while ignoring the only actual “hot war” in our region.
Our geography has not changed; the most important line of defence for Australia remains the islands of Melanesia to our north and the co-operation and friendship of its peoples.
Strong independence movements in West Papua, Bougainville and New Caledonia all materially affect Australian security but Canberra can always be relied on to defer to Indonesian, American and French interests in these places, rather than what is ultimately in Australian — and Pacific Islander — interests.
Australia needs to develop a defence policy centred on a “Melanesia First” strategy from Timor to Fiji, radiating outwards. Yet Australia keeps deferring to external interests, to our cost, as history continues to remind us.
Ben Bohane is a Vanuatu-based photojournalist and policy analyst who has reported across Asia and the Pacific for the past 36 years. His website is benbohane.com This article was first published by The Sydney Morning Herald and is republished with the author’s permission.
In the last days of March, I was in China’s new city of Xiong’an, less than a two-hour drive from Beijing. The city is being built to relieve congestion in the capital, but it will also be home to women and men who are eager to develop China’s new quality productive forces and will be the centre of universities, hospitals, research institutes, and innovative technology companies, including high-tech farming. Xiong’an has the ambition of reaching ‘net-zero’ carbon dioxide emissions while using big data to harness social science to improve the quality of people’s everyday lives.
The city is built amidst a massive web of lakes, rivers, and canals, with Lake Baiyangdian at its heart. On a chilly afternoon, a group of us – including Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research team members Tings Chak, Jie Xiong, Jojo Hu, Grace Cao, and Atul Chandra – took a boat across the lake to visit a museum dedicated to the fight against Japanese imperialism.
Prominent Chinese rights lawyer Lu Siwei, who was arrested and deported from Laos in 2023, was sentenced behind closed doors in China to 11 months in prison on Friday, his wife told Radio Free Asia.
Lu, 52, who was accused of illegal border crossing, plans to appeal the sentence by the Chenghua District Court in Chengdu, southwestern Sichuan province, said his wife Zhang Chunxiao, who lives in the United States. The court also fined him 10,000 yuan ($1,370).
Despite holding a U.S. visa and Chinese passport, Lu was arrested in the Lao capital Vientiane in July 2023 while en route to join his family in America. He was detained in the Southeast Asian country for more than a month, before being forcibly repatriated to China.
He was stripped of his legal license in 2021, banned from international travel, and has faced repeated harassment and constant surveillance for his human rights activities.
Rights campaigners have said his arrest in Laos and forced repatriation illustrates the growing and oppressive reach of Chinese authorities beyond China’s borders, often referred to as transnational repression.
On his arrival in China, Lu was held in Sichuan’s Xindu Detention Center until his release on “bail, pending trial” in late October of 2023. He was formally arrested again a year later, in October 2024, as Chinese authorities sought to move ahead with prosecuting him on charges of illegal border crossing from China to Laos.
Lu’s lawyers on Friday pleaded for a reduction in his sentence, citing time he has previously served during his detention abroad in Laos. But these requests were rejected, his wife said.
When taking into account the six months Lu has served since his detention last year and the three months in 2023, the verdict should also have been announced on the opening day of the trial, said Zhang.
His lawyers now expect Lu will be in prison until at least Aug. 9, after accounting for time served while in detention prior to the closed-door hearing on Friday, she added.
“The lawyers have been fighting for them (the court) to hold a public trial, but on the day of the pre-trial meeting on April 16, I heard that someone who wanted to go to the trial was kicked out,” said Zhang.
On Friday too, no spectator passes were issued and Lu’s friends were barred from attending the trial, she said. Instead, they were “…invited for tea, sent on tours, and given warnings (by police),” she said.
Both uniformed and plainclothes police presence could be seen outside the court, where several police cars had been deployed, a Chengdu activist told RFA. He spoke on the condition of anonymity for safety reasons.
“I saw police and plainclothes officers walking around outside the court, constantly observing passers-by, which made people quite nervous. I didn’t dare to go near the court,” he told RFA.
Edited by Tenzin Pema and Mat Pennington
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Qian Lang for RFA Mandarin.
Prominent Chinese rights lawyer Lu Siwei, who was arrested and deported from Laos in 2023, was sentenced behind closed doors in China to 11 months in prison on Friday, his wife told Radio Free Asia.
Lu, 52, who was accused of illegal border crossing, plans to appeal the sentence by the Chenghua District Court in Chengdu, southwestern Sichuan province, said his wife Zhang Chunxiao, who lives in the United States. The court also fined him 10,000 yuan ($1,370).
Despite holding a U.S. visa and Chinese passport, Lu was arrested in the Lao capital Vientiane in July 2023 while en route to join his family in America. He was detained in the Southeast Asian country for more than a month, before being forcibly repatriated to China.
He was stripped of his legal license in 2021, banned from international travel, and has faced repeated harassment and constant surveillance for his human rights activities.
Rights campaigners have said his arrest in Laos and forced repatriation illustrates the growing and oppressive reach of Chinese authorities beyond China’s borders, often referred to as transnational repression.
On his arrival in China, Lu was held in Sichuan’s Xindu Detention Center until his release on “bail, pending trial” in late October of 2023. He was formally arrested again a year later, in October 2024, as Chinese authorities sought to move ahead with prosecuting him on charges of illegal border crossing from China to Laos.
Lu’s lawyers on Friday pleaded for a reduction in his sentence, citing time he has previously served during his detention abroad in Laos. But these requests were rejected, his wife said.
When taking into account the six months Lu has served since his detention last year and the three months in 2023, the verdict should also have been announced on the opening day of the trial, said Zhang.
His lawyers now expect Lu will be in prison until at least Aug. 9, after accounting for time served while in detention prior to the closed-door hearing on Friday, she added.
“The lawyers have been fighting for them (the court) to hold a public trial, but on the day of the pre-trial meeting on April 16, I heard that someone who wanted to go to the trial was kicked out,” said Zhang.
On Friday too, no spectator passes were issued and Lu’s friends were barred from attending the trial, she said. Instead, they were “…invited for tea, sent on tours, and given warnings (by police),” she said.
Both uniformed and plainclothes police presence could be seen outside the court, where several police cars had been deployed, a Chengdu activist told RFA. He spoke on the condition of anonymity for safety reasons.
“I saw police and plainclothes officers walking around outside the court, constantly observing passers-by, which made people quite nervous. I didn’t dare to go near the court,” he told RFA.
Edited by Tenzin Pema and Mat Pennington
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Qian Lang for RFA Mandarin.
Mike Gallagher (Wall Street Journal, 4/15/25) insists the “scientific elite…should have come clean about the pandemic’s laboratory origin.” His evidence for such an origin? “Western intelligence agencies…favor that view, and most Americans agree.”
For a while it seemed like the dubious hypothesis that the virus that causes Covid did not jump from animals to humans, but was released from a Chinese lab, might be fading away. But the US government and the media are breathing new life into this zombie idea, contributing to the vilification of China and undermining actual scientific research.
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed (4/15/25), former Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher, who previously headed the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, asserted that “Wuhan lab’s risky gain-of-function research was a giant mistake that cost millions of lives.” He offered as evidence that “Western intelligence agencies” who “initially bowed to political pressure and rejected the theory that Covid emerged from the Wuhan lab…now favor that view, and most Americans agree.”
The op-ed called not for a massive overhaul of scientific research into stopping the next pandemic, but for a domestic and international hunt for those responsible for such treachery, because the “Chinese Communist Party was permitted to bleach the crime scene.” Gallagher said:
Mr. Trump should establish a multination tribunal, akin to the International Criminal Court but with actual teeth, to investigate the origins of the virus, examining evidence of negligence or intentional misconduct, and determining the culpability of key people and institutions.
‘Finally comes clean’
“In 2020, when people started speculating that a laboratory accident might have been the spark that started the Covid-19 pandemic,” writes Zeynep Tufekci (New York Times, 3/16/25) they were treated like kooks and cranks.” In fact, the theory got a respectful hearing from outlets like the Washington Post (4/2/20, 4/14/20), ABC (5/3/20) and CNN (5/3/20); see FAIR.org (10/6/20).
Gallagher isn’t alone when it comes to media outlets reheating the lab leak furor. New York Times contributing writer Zeynep Tufekci (3/16/25) stressed that “there is no strong scientific evidence ruling out a lab leak or proving that the virus arose from human-animal contact in that seafood market.” Her main evidence that the virus might have originated in a lab leak was the assessment of various intelligence agencies (mostly US, one German).
Tufekci (New York Times, 11/27/24) had previously praised President Donald Trump’s appointment of Stanford health economist Jay Bhattacharya to lead the National Institutes of Health, despite “making catastrophically wrong predictions” about the deadliness of Covid, because he “has criticized those who would silence critics of the public health establishment on a variety of topics, like the plausibility of a coronavirus lab leak.”
Tufekci’s recent column was gleefully received by right-wing media. The New York Post (3/17/25) said the Times “finally ran a column by a scientist who said the public was ‘badly misled’ about the origins of Covid-19—triggering backlash from readers who say the admission comes five years too late.” It said that Tufekci—who is a sociology professor at Princeton University, and not a medical researcher, as the Post implies—“argued that officials and scientists hid facts, misled a Times journalist and colluded on campaigns to bury the possibility of a research lab leak in Wuhan, China.”
The British conservative magazine Spectator (3/18/25) reported on Tufekci’s piece with the headline “The New York Times Finally Comes Clean About Covid.” The subhead: “It only took the newspaper five years to acknowledge what people had said since the beginning.” Another right-wing British outlet, UnHerd (3/17/25), also used Tufekci’s column as fodder for a “we told you so” piece.
It’s not true that Tufekci is the first at the Times to advance the lab leak hypothesis. The Times‘ David Leonhardt promoted the concept in his widely read Morning Newsletter (5/27/21) only about a year after the US went into shutdown mode. “Both animal-to-human transmission and the lab leak appear plausible,” Leonhardt wrote. “And the obfuscation by Chinese officials means we may never know the truth.”
Molecular biologist Alina Chan was more definitive in a New York Times op-ed (6/3/24) published last year, headlined “Why the Pandemic Probably Started in a Lab, in Five Key Points.” Chan wrote that “a growing volume of evidence…suggests that the pandemic most likely occurred because a virus escaped from a research lab in Wuhan, China.” The essay “recapitulates the misrepresentation, selective quotation and faulty logic that has characterized so much of the pro—lab leak side of the Covid origin discourse,” FAIR’s Phillip Hosang (7/3/24) wrote in response.
Government talking points
Science (12/3/24): “The committee’s 520-page report…offers no new direct evidence of a lab leak, but summarizes a circumstantial case.”
In another FAIR piece (4/7/23) about corporate media pushing lab leak speculation, Joshua Cho and I noted that news and opinion pieces often cited intelligence agencies to bolster the credibility of their lab leak claims. “Readers should be asking why so many in media find government talking points on a scientific question so newsworthy,” we wrote, noting that “there is a vast amount of scientific research that points to Covid spreading to humans from other animal hosts.”
Less than two years later, as Trump prepared for his second inauguration, the federal government reintroduced the specter of “lab leak” when the Republican-led House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released a report that offered “no new direct evidence of a lab leak,” but instead, according to Science (12/3/24), offered
a circumstantial case, including that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) used NIAID money to conduct “gain-of-function” studies that modified distantly related coronaviruses.
The magazine also reported that “Democrats on the panel released their own report challenging many of their colleagues’ conclusions about Covid-19 origins.” The minority report noted “that the viruses studied at WIV with EcoHealth funding were too distantly related to SARS-CoV-2 to cause the pandemic.”
The following month, the CIA “offered a new assessment on the origin of the Covid outbreak, saying the coronavirus is ‘more likely’ to have leaked from a Chinese lab than to have come from animals” (BBC, 1/25/25). As AP (1/26/25) noted, however, the “spy agency has ‘low confidence’ in its own conclusion.” Reuters (3/12/25) subsequently reported, citing “a joint report” by two German outlets, Die Zeit and Sueddeutscher Zeitung, that
Germany’s foreign intelligence service in 2020 put at 80%–90% the likelihood that the coronavirus behind the Covid-19 pandemic was accidentally released from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology.
‘Unfounded assertions are dangerous’
According to a survey by the Global Catastrophic Risk Institute (2/24), epidemiologists and virologists believe a natural zoonotic origin for Covid is far more likely than a lab leak.
Once again, the claims about the pandemics origin being a Chinese lab leak seem to come from Western spooks and anti-Communist zealots, not actual scientists. Yet Gallagher and Tufekci present these governmental declarations, sometimes from the same agencies that brought us the Iraqi WMD hoax, as compelling evidence, seemingly more authoritative than the researchers in relevant fields who point to a zoonotic jump as Covid’s most likely source.
The Journal of Virology (8/1/24) noted that the “preponderance of scientific evidence indicates a natural origin for SARS-CoV-2.” Nevertheless, the journal reported, “the theory that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in and escaped from a lab dominates media attention, even in the absence of strong evidence.” The immunobiologists and other scientists who wrote the essay spelled out the danger of “lab leak” myth:
Despite the absence of evidence for the escape of the virus from a lab, the lab leak hypothesis receives persistent attention in the media, often without acknowledgment of the more solid evidence supporting zoonotic emergence. This discourse has inappropriately led a large portion of the general public to believe that a pandemic virus arose from a Chinese lab. These unfounded assertions are dangerous…[as] they place unfounded blame and responsibility on individual scientists, which drives threats and attacks on virologists. It also stokes the flames of an anti-science, conspiracy-driven agenda, which targets science and scientists even beyond those investigating the origins of SARS-CoV-2. The inevitable outcome is an undermining of the broader missions of science and public health and the misdirecting of resources and effort. The consequence is to leave the world more vulnerable to future pandemics, as well as current infectious disease threats.
It is hard to believe that the world’s scientists have conspired to create research suggesting zoonotic jump (Globe and Mail, 7/28/22; Science, 10/10/22; PNAS, 11/10/22; Scientific American, 3/17/23; Nature, 12/6/24) for the sole purpose of covering up a lab leak. The Times and Journal’s unquestioning acceptance of the lab leak hypothesis endorses it as the expense of scientific research that says otherwise, and assumes that China’s government is guilty until proven innocent.
More importantly, the goal of reviving the lab leak idea seems completely divorced from preparing for the next pandemic or protecting public health. If anything, the Trump administration is making it more difficult for scientists to guard against future viral dangers, given its many cuts to scientific and medical research (All Things Considered, 2/10/25; STAT, 4/1/25; Scientific American, 4/11/25).
Recent articles giving credence to the lab leak hypothesis serve the Trump administration’s mission of reducing medical research and protections for public health, and have the side benefit for MAGA of stirring up nationalist rage against China. It’s harder to understand what people genuinely interested in protecting humanity from the next pandemic get from listening to intelligence agencies rather than scientists.
As the U.S.-China trade war heats up, businesses in major export hubs in southeastern China are announcing factory “holidays” – halting production and slashing employee wages and work hours – while turning to social commerce platforms to sell stockpiled goods, as they grapple with a sharp drop in overseas orders.
It’s a phenomenon sweeping across China’s export-driven provinces like Zhejiang, Guangdong, and Jiangsu, where manufacturers – weighed down by a large backlog of unsold merchandise – are issuing a flurry of “holiday notices” to announce they are suspending operations at factories.
Video: Trade war with US triggers wave of factory “holidays” in China’s export hubs
To clear large piles of inventory, companies are now resorting to selling the leftover export goods through social commerce platforms, such as TikTok and Taobao, at heavily marked-down rates.
Merchandise ranging from yoga pants and footwear to home appliances and blankets — originally intended to be exported to the U.S. — are now being sold online by Chinese export companies or their employees at bargain prices, multiple videos reviewed by RFA on Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok, show.
The world’s two largest economies have been engaged in an escalating tariff war that threatens to roil global trade and upend supply chains, while sparking growing concerns over a full U.S.-China decoupling.
On Thursday, Trump struck a more conciliatory tone, expressing confidence that Washington and Beijing could reach a deal on tariffs “over the next three to four weeks.”
President Donald Trump to reporters in the Oval Office, April 17, 2025. At rear is Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.(Alex Brandon/AP)
This follows the U.S. administration’s move to exempt certain products, including smartphones and laptops, from the recently announced duties.
But in China’s top tech-oriented export strongholds like Dongguan city in Guangdong province, Suzhou in Jiangsu, and Jiaxing in Zhejiang, the immediate fallout of the trade dispute is apparent in factory floors filled with towering stockpiles of unshipped goods.
Stockpiles of unsold goods
In a sprawling 20,000-square-meter warehouse in Jiaxing – a prefecture-level city where exports made up 75% of the total trade volume of 481.84 billion yuan (US$66.51 billion) in 2024 – heaps of merchandise originally meant to be exported now lie abandoned, according to a video posted by an unnamed Douyin user.
He noted that products once valued at over US$100 in the U.S. market now struggle to sell even at deeply discounted rates of a few dollars.
“The tariff war has caused a lot of foreign-trade leftover goods,” he said.
“Any piece of clothing here can sell for US$100 dollars (in the U.S.), but now it is being sold by tons, and the average price of one piece is only a few cents, and still no one is buying it … It’s impossible to survive.”
U.S. footwear brand Crocs’ signature rubber clogs – which typically retails for $30-$70 a pair in the U.S. – are now being offloaded for mere pennies in China, the vlogger said.
Crocs has production facilities in China. In February, it projected Chinese imports will account for about 15% of its inventory and that its fiscal 2025 profits could decline by about $11 million due to tariff headwinds.
But even products that have historically been targeted solely for the domestic market have not been spared, as U.S. tariffs threaten China’s slow and still-fragile consumer sentiment recovery, buoyed by a slew of stimulus measures to drive consumption.
Take the case of the iconic 400-year-old traditional Chinese knife brand Zhang Xiaoquan. Exports account for less than one percent of the Hangzhou, Zhejiang-based company’s annual sales, but its knives are being sold by the tons at the price of just a few cents per knife, the vlogger said in a video post on Douyin.
Pivot to social commerce
Further north in Jiangsu’s Suzhou city – where foreign trade volume hit a record 2.62 trillion yuan (US$358.9 billion) in 2024 – one factory is pushing its employees to sell its overstocked blankets online, another video posted on Douyin by an employee showed.
According to the employee of Suzhou Lively Home Textiles Factory who posted the video, a factory manager managed to sell more than 60 blankets by tapping his own relatives, friends, and acquaintances to whom he made half those sales.
At the same factory, which mainly produces blankets, employees were also informed that their working hours will be reduced and that only their basic wages would be paid, due to the challenges in exporting to the U.S.
“We are now facing a trade war, which has affected our orders … If you have a good job outside, you can leave,” the factory manager can be seen telling nearly 100 female employees, in the same video posted on Douyin.
As more people take to selling online, e-commerce companies say they are finding it hard to compete with heavily discounted prices of leftover export goods being sold via social commerce platforms.
“With the new tariffs in the trade war, it is impossible to make a profit. In general, business in all sectors is not good this year,” Zhang, an e-commerce entrepreneur in Yangzhou, Jiangsu, told RFA.
Like the other businessmen and experts RFA interviewed, Zhang provided only his first name for safety reasons.
Reliance on exports
China’s so-called “troika” of consumption, investment, and trade that drives the country’s economic growth actually only has one left: foreign trade, Chen, a Guangdong-based scholar, told RFA.
“China has little domestic demand because the average income of Chinese people accounts for too low a proportion of GDP, so their consumption capacity is not good. China cannot afford to lose the U.S. market,” he added.
To be sure, the intensifying tariff war has put to the test Chinese President Xi Jinping’s “dual circulation” strategy – which designated China’s domestic market as the mainstay of its economy and emphasized a reduction in traditional reliance on export-led growth.
Experts argue that China remains highly reliant on the U.S., its top export market, to which it exported goods worth $438.9 billion in 2024.
“I have worked in the manufacturing industry for more than 10 years and I understand clearly the ratio of China’s population to manufacturing. This economic situation (now) can be said to be unprecedented (and not seen) in decades,” said Chen Xiang, who previously worked as a manager in export factories in Zhejiang, Jiangsu and Guangdong – where many have now issued “holiday notices.”
One clothing export company in Jiangsu province issued a holiday notice announcing a suspension in production from mid-April until end-June.
Meanwhile, an electrical appliances manufacturer in Guangdong’s Dongguan city announced a one-month shutdown citing a lack of orders.
RFA also found that dozens of companies in Zhejiang – where exports accounted for 70% of the province’s gross domestic product in 2024 – had posted holiday notices.
In Zhejiang, more than 50% of its export companies are expected to stop production and take a “long holiday,” after the Labor Day public holiday on May 1.
“It’s like this in Jiangsu, Zhejiang, with even more factories in Guangdong now closed. People in some places can hardly survive. With tariffs increased to this extent, China-U.S. trade is almost decoupled,” Chen told RFA.
In 2024, China’s total manufacturing output reached 40.5 trillion yuan (US$5.65 trillion). Foreign trade volume – exports and imports – was 43.85 trillion yuan (US$6.1 trillion), of which exports accounted for 25.45 trillion yuan (US$3.49 trillion).
Edited by Tenzin Pema and Mat Pennington
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Qian Lang for RFA Mandarin.
As the U.S.-China trade war heats up, businesses in major export hubs in southeastern China are announcing factory “holidays” – halting production and slashing employee wages and work hours – while turning to social commerce platforms to sell stockpiled goods, as they grapple with a sharp drop in overseas orders.
It’s a phenomenon sweeping across China’s export-driven provinces like Zhejiang, Guangdong, and Jiangsu, where manufacturers – weighed down by a large backlog of unsold merchandise – are issuing a flurry of “holiday notices” to announce they are suspending operations at factories.
Video: Trade war with US triggers wave of factory “holidays” in China’s export hubs
To clear large piles of inventory, companies are now resorting to selling the leftover export goods through social commerce platforms, such as TikTok and Taobao, at heavily marked-down rates.
Merchandise ranging from yoga pants and footwear to home appliances and blankets — originally intended to be exported to the U.S. — are now being sold online by Chinese export companies or their employees at bargain prices, multiple videos reviewed by RFA on Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok, show.
The world’s two largest economies have been engaged in an escalating tariff war that threatens to roil global trade and upend supply chains, while sparking growing concerns over a full U.S.-China decoupling.
On Thursday, Trump struck a more conciliatory tone, expressing confidence that Washington and Beijing could reach a deal on tariffs “over the next three to four weeks.”
President Donald Trump to reporters in the Oval Office, April 17, 2025. At rear is Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.(Alex Brandon/AP)
This follows the U.S. administration’s move to exempt certain products, including smartphones and laptops, from the recently announced duties.
But in China’s top tech-oriented export strongholds like Dongguan city in Guangdong province, Suzhou in Jiangsu, and Jiaxing in Zhejiang, the immediate fallout of the trade dispute is apparent in factory floors filled with towering stockpiles of unshipped goods.
Stockpiles of unsold goods
In a sprawling 20,000-square-meter warehouse in Jiaxing – a prefecture-level city where exports made up 75% of the total trade volume of 481.84 billion yuan (US$66.51 billion) in 2024 – heaps of merchandise originally meant to be exported now lie abandoned, according to a video posted by an unnamed Douyin user.
He noted that products once valued at over US$100 in the U.S. market now struggle to sell even at deeply discounted rates of a few dollars.
“The tariff war has caused a lot of foreign-trade leftover goods,” he said.
“Any piece of clothing here can sell for US$100 dollars (in the U.S.), but now it is being sold by tons, and the average price of one piece is only a few cents, and still no one is buying it … It’s impossible to survive.”
U.S. footwear brand Crocs’ signature rubber clogs – which typically retails for $30-$70 a pair in the U.S. – are now being offloaded for mere pennies in China, the vlogger said.
Crocs has production facilities in China. In February, it projected Chinese imports will account for about 15% of its inventory and that its fiscal 2025 profits could decline by about $11 million due to tariff headwinds.
But even products that have historically been targeted solely for the domestic market have not been spared, as U.S. tariffs threaten China’s slow and still-fragile consumer sentiment recovery, buoyed by a slew of stimulus measures to drive consumption.
Take the case of the iconic 400-year-old traditional Chinese knife brand Zhang Xiaoquan. Exports account for less than one percent of the Hangzhou, Zhejiang-based company’s annual sales, but its knives are being sold by the tons at the price of just a few cents per knife, the vlogger said in a video post on Douyin.
Pivot to social commerce
Further north in Jiangsu’s Suzhou city – where foreign trade volume hit a record 2.62 trillion yuan (US$358.9 billion) in 2024 – one factory is pushing its employees to sell its overstocked blankets online, another video posted on Douyin by an employee showed.
According to the employee of Suzhou Lively Home Textiles Factory who posted the video, a factory manager managed to sell more than 60 blankets by tapping his own relatives, friends, and acquaintances to whom he made half those sales.
At the same factory, which mainly produces blankets, employees were also informed that their working hours will be reduced and that only their basic wages would be paid, due to the challenges in exporting to the U.S.
“We are now facing a trade war, which has affected our orders … If you have a good job outside, you can leave,” the factory manager can be seen telling nearly 100 female employees, in the same video posted on Douyin.
As more people take to selling online, e-commerce companies say they are finding it hard to compete with heavily discounted prices of leftover export goods being sold via social commerce platforms.
“With the new tariffs in the trade war, it is impossible to make a profit. In general, business in all sectors is not good this year,” Zhang, an e-commerce entrepreneur in Yangzhou, Jiangsu, told RFA.
Like the other businessmen and experts RFA interviewed, Zhang provided only his first name for safety reasons.
Reliance on exports
China’s so-called “troika” of consumption, investment, and trade that drives the country’s economic growth actually only has one left: foreign trade, Chen, a Guangdong-based scholar, told RFA.
“China has little domestic demand because the average income of Chinese people accounts for too low a proportion of GDP, so their consumption capacity is not good. China cannot afford to lose the U.S. market,” he added.
To be sure, the intensifying tariff war has put to the test Chinese President Xi Jinping’s “dual circulation” strategy – which designated China’s domestic market as the mainstay of its economy and emphasized a reduction in traditional reliance on export-led growth.
Experts argue that China remains highly reliant on the U.S., its top export market, to which it exported goods worth $438.9 billion in 2024.
“I have worked in the manufacturing industry for more than 10 years and I understand clearly the ratio of China’s population to manufacturing. This economic situation (now) can be said to be unprecedented (and not seen) in decades,” said Chen Xiang, who previously worked as a manager in export factories in Zhejiang, Jiangsu and Guangdong – where many have now issued “holiday notices.”
One clothing export company in Jiangsu province issued a holiday notice announcing a suspension in production from mid-April until end-June.
Meanwhile, an electrical appliances manufacturer in Guangdong’s Dongguan city announced a one-month shutdown citing a lack of orders.
RFA also found that dozens of companies in Zhejiang – where exports accounted for 70% of the province’s gross domestic product in 2024 – had posted holiday notices.
In Zhejiang, more than 50% of its export companies are expected to stop production and take a “long holiday,” after the Labor Day public holiday on May 1.
“It’s like this in Jiangsu, Zhejiang, with even more factories in Guangdong now closed. People in some places can hardly survive. With tariffs increased to this extent, China-U.S. trade is almost decoupled,” Chen told RFA.
In 2024, China’s total manufacturing output reached 40.5 trillion yuan (US$5.65 trillion). Foreign trade volume – exports and imports – was 43.85 trillion yuan (US$6.1 trillion), of which exports accounted for 25.45 trillion yuan (US$3.49 trillion).
Edited by Tenzin Pema and Mat Pennington
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Qian Lang for RFA Mandarin.
The US imposed new sanctions on a Chinese refinery on 17 April, accusing it of purchasing more than $1 billion worth of Iranian oil, allegedly funding Tehran’s government and its regional allies. The move comes as Iran’s oil exports hit record highs, and nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran are set to continue in Rome this weekend.
The Treasury Department announced on Thursday the sanctions against a refinery in Shandong province, which it says received dozens of shipments of Iranian crude, including from companies affiliated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The US also blacklisted several vessels and companies tied to the shipments.
WASHINGTON — Americans continue to have an unfavorable opinion of China, but for the first time in five years, their attitudes have softened somewhat, with a decline in the share of those who view it as an enemy of the United States, a survey by Washington-based Pew Research Center showed.
The survey, conducted amid escalating U.S.-China trade tensions, found more than half of all Americans say the tariff hikes will be more bad than good for the U.S. and for themselves, while a significant majority (75%) have little or no confidence that Chinese President Xi Jinping will do the right thing regarding international affairs.
Survey findings on American views of China(Pew Research Center)
According to the survey, which was released on Thursday, 77% of all Americans have an “unfavorable opinion” of China – down from 81% in 2024 in the first significant year-over-year decline recorded since 2017 – signaling an apparent softening in overall American sentiment towards China.
Within that, the share of Americans who have a “very unfavorable opinion” of the U.S.’s biggest geopolitical rival declined 10 percentage points to 33%.
The portion of Americans who see China as an “enemy” of the U.S. also decreased to 33%, from 42% a year earlier.
When asked an open-ended question on which country posed the greatest threat to the U.S., 42% of Americans named China. But that’s also down from 50% in 2023.
Survey findings on American views of China(Pew Research Center)
Americans are more likely to have negative views of China the older and more conservative they are, the survey results showed.
Older Americans are much more likely than younger adults to call China an enemy, with 47% of those aged 65 and older and 40% of those aged 50 to 64 holding this view, compared with 19% of those in the 18-29 age group.
In comparison, younger Americans are most likely to see China as a competitor, with 61% of adults under 30 saying this.
Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, attitudes toward China are softening even as they remained more critical of the country than Democrats and Democratic-leaning respondents, the survey found.
The percentage of Republicans who have an “unfavorable opinion” of China fell 8 percentage points, to 82%, with a 16-percentage-point decline to 43% in those who have a “very unfavorable” view.
By comparison, 72% of Democrats have an unfavorable view, including 24% who hold a “very unfavorable” opinion, down from 30% in 2024.
The Pew survey was based on responses from 3,605 U.S. adults who were surveyed from March 24 to 30 using a random sampling of residential addresses with demographic weighting to represent the U.S. adult population.
View on tariff increases
Before the survey was fielded, U.S. President Donald Trump had imposed – in February and early March – tariffs totaling 20% on imports from China citing its role in fentanyl trade. China retaliated with tariffs on U.S. agricultural products and other measures.
Since then, in the escalating tit-for-tat tariff increases that have ensued, Trump has imposed 145% tariffs on Chinese imports, while Beijing has responded with 125%.
Survey findings on American views of China(Pew Research Center)
The Pew survey data showed Americans remain skeptical about the effects of the increased tariffs on China, with 52% saying they will be bad for the U.S., and a similar share (53%) saying they will be bad for them personally too.
Only 24% of Americans think the increased tariffs will be good for the U.S. and just 10% say it’ll be good for them personally, the survey found.
And yet, 46% of Americans say trade between the world’s two largest economies benefits China more, according to the survey results.
Edited by Greg Barber
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Tenzin Pema for RFA.
Trade makes many folks materially better off by enabling a local abundance of resources or skills to be shared across a wider area. However, increased trade often worsens economic inequality and depletes and pollutes the environment faster than would otherwise happen. Therefore, eco-localists see trade as a mixed benefit whose unintended negative impacts must be carefully managed.
Globalization of trade raises the stakes of both benefits and risks. On the risk side of the ledger, taken to the extreme, it leads to a world in which everything is for sale, all resources are depleted, pollution is everywhere, labor is exploited to the maximum degree, and everything is owned by a tiny number of super-rich investors and entrepreneurs.
Less than 100 days into President Donald Trump’s second term, international academic workers find themselves at the intersection of a crackdown on immigrants and political intrusion into higher education. The Department of Education has stripped several universities of billions of dollars in federal funding over alleged “campus antisemitism” and DEI policies, and has threatened to do the same to…
TAIPEI, Taiwan – Taiwan’s ruling party now requires its members to report their plans before visiting China, including Hong Kong and Macau, in response to growing concerns over Chinese espionage.
Taiwan and China have repeatedly accused each other of spying, with Taiwan arresting several individuals it claims were recruited by Beijing to gather intelligence or influence public opinion. Beijing typically denies any involvement in espionage activities targeting Taiwan, calling the accusations “groundless” or “politically motivated.”
Lai Ching-te, Taiwan’s president and chairman of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, or DPP, announced Wednesday that all party members must now report in advance and submit a follow-up report if they travel to China or have contact with individuals linked to the Chinese government.
“Any betrayal of the party’s core values for personal gain must be met with strict disciplinary action and the harshest legal consequences,” Lai told the party’s weekly meeting.
In addition to the requirement to report China visits, Lai also issued measures such as enhanced internal education for party members to strengthen awareness of national security and legal responsibilities. He also demanded stricter oversight of legislative and local council aides, with party caucuses tasked with developing specific protocols and training programs.
The moves follow recent Chinese espionage cases against the DPP.
According to Taiwan’s law enforcement, a current presidential adviser and a former foreign ministry staffer are accused of working together to help DPP members recruited by China gather classified information, including details of Taiwan’s president and vice president’s official visits to diplomatic allies.
Apart from that, a former DPP aide at the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan’s parliament, is suspected of receiving cash and cryptocurrency from Chinese intelligence agencies while abroad. He is reported to have provided classified information from the Legislative Yuan.
“The DPP is a natural target for infiltration,” Lai said of the cases, pointing out that in recent years, some former party officials dramatically shifted their stance on national sovereignty after leaving office, which he sees as a reflection of China’s long-term infiltration efforts.
Ho Cheng-Hui, the deputy secretary-general of Taiwan National Security Institute, said that conventional espionage cases involve top-tier officials such as a military general or a higher-up government official, but in Taiwan’s recent cases, political aides have become a primary target.
With access to sensitive information, government officials are now potential risks, said Ho, adding that the administration’s new measures are a step in the right direction, but “much broader reforms are still needed.”
“Strict control over classified documents should be enforced, ensuring that only authorized individuals – ideally just one person – can view such materials,” Ho told Radio Free Asia.
“Aides or secretaries should not be allowed access. Additionally, regular audits and random inspections should be implemented,” said Ho, highlighting the need for comprehensive background checks and access control based on security clearance.
Ho also stressed the importance of “preventive measures.”
“Focusing solely on punishment after incidents occur often means the damage has already been done,” he explained.
Taiwan’s Premier Cho Jung-tai said Thursday the government will strengthen national security by updating civil servant background checks. A proposal is expected within two weeks, with plans to refine vetting based on access to classified data and introduce regular or random reviews.
China sees Taiwan as a breakaway province that must eventually reunite, even by force if necessary, even though the democratic island has been self-governing since it effectively separated from mainland China in 1949 after the Chinese civil war.
Beijing views Lai, a pro-independence advocate, as a separatist and has increased military drills, economic pressure, and diplomatic isolation to counter his leadership.
Edited by Taejun Kang and Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alan Lu for RFA.
TAIPEI, Taiwan – Taiwan’s ruling party now requires its members to report their plans before visiting China, including Hong Kong and Macau, in response to growing concerns over Chinese espionage.
Taiwan and China have repeatedly accused each other of spying, with Taiwan arresting several individuals it claims were recruited by Beijing to gather intelligence or influence public opinion. Beijing typically denies any involvement in espionage activities targeting Taiwan, calling the accusations “groundless” or “politically motivated.”
Lai Ching-te, Taiwan’s president and chairman of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, or DPP, announced Wednesday that all party members must now report in advance and submit a follow-up report if they travel to China or have contact with individuals linked to the Chinese government.
“Any betrayal of the party’s core values for personal gain must be met with strict disciplinary action and the harshest legal consequences,” Lai told the party’s weekly meeting.
In addition to the requirement to report China visits, Lai also issued measures such as enhanced internal education for party members to strengthen awareness of national security and legal responsibilities. He also demanded stricter oversight of legislative and local council aides, with party caucuses tasked with developing specific protocols and training programs.
The moves follow recent Chinese espionage cases against the DPP.
According to Taiwan’s law enforcement, a current presidential adviser and a former foreign ministry staffer are accused of working together to help DPP members recruited by China gather classified information, including details of Taiwan’s president and vice president’s official visits to diplomatic allies.
Apart from that, a former DPP aide at the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan’s parliament, is suspected of receiving cash and cryptocurrency from Chinese intelligence agencies while abroad. He is reported to have provided classified information from the Legislative Yuan.
“The DPP is a natural target for infiltration,” Lai said of the cases, pointing out that in recent years, some former party officials dramatically shifted their stance on national sovereignty after leaving office, which he sees as a reflection of China’s long-term infiltration efforts.
Ho Cheng-Hui, the deputy secretary-general of Taiwan National Security Institute, said that conventional espionage cases involve top-tier officials such as a military general or a higher-up government official, but in Taiwan’s recent cases, political aides have become a primary target.
With access to sensitive information, government officials are now potential risks, said Ho, adding that the administration’s new measures are a step in the right direction, but “much broader reforms are still needed.”
“Strict control over classified documents should be enforced, ensuring that only authorized individuals – ideally just one person – can view such materials,” Ho told Radio Free Asia.
“Aides or secretaries should not be allowed access. Additionally, regular audits and random inspections should be implemented,” said Ho, highlighting the need for comprehensive background checks and access control based on security clearance.
Ho also stressed the importance of “preventive measures.”
“Focusing solely on punishment after incidents occur often means the damage has already been done,” he explained.
Taiwan’s Premier Cho Jung-tai said Thursday the government will strengthen national security by updating civil servant background checks. A proposal is expected within two weeks, with plans to refine vetting based on access to classified data and introduce regular or random reviews.
China sees Taiwan as a breakaway province that must eventually reunite, even by force if necessary, even though the democratic island has been self-governing since it effectively separated from mainland China in 1949 after the Chinese civil war.
Beijing views Lai, a pro-independence advocate, as a separatist and has increased military drills, economic pressure, and diplomatic isolation to counter his leadership.
Edited by Taejun Kang and Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alan Lu for RFA.
TAIPEI, Taiwan – Taiwan’s ruling party now requires its members to report their plans before visiting China, including Hong Kong and Macau, in response to growing concerns over Chinese espionage.
Taiwan and China have repeatedly accused each other of spying, with Taiwan arresting several individuals it claims were recruited by Beijing to gather intelligence or influence public opinion. Beijing typically denies any involvement in espionage activities targeting Taiwan, calling the accusations “groundless” or “politically motivated.”
Lai Ching-te, Taiwan’s president and chairman of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, or DPP, announced Wednesday that all party members must now report in advance and submit a follow-up report if they travel to China or have contact with individuals linked to the Chinese government.
“Any betrayal of the party’s core values for personal gain must be met with strict disciplinary action and the harshest legal consequences,” Lai told the party’s weekly meeting.
In addition to the requirement to report China visits, Lai also issued measures such as enhanced internal education for party members to strengthen awareness of national security and legal responsibilities. He also demanded stricter oversight of legislative and local council aides, with party caucuses tasked with developing specific protocols and training programs.
The moves follow recent Chinese espionage cases against the DPP.
According to Taiwan’s law enforcement, a current presidential adviser and a former foreign ministry staffer are accused of working together to help DPP members recruited by China gather classified information, including details of Taiwan’s president and vice president’s official visits to diplomatic allies.
Apart from that, a former DPP aide at the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan’s parliament, is suspected of receiving cash and cryptocurrency from Chinese intelligence agencies while abroad. He is reported to have provided classified information from the Legislative Yuan.
“The DPP is a natural target for infiltration,” Lai said of the cases, pointing out that in recent years, some former party officials dramatically shifted their stance on national sovereignty after leaving office, which he sees as a reflection of China’s long-term infiltration efforts.
Ho Cheng-Hui, the deputy secretary-general of Taiwan National Security Institute, said that conventional espionage cases involve top-tier officials such as a military general or a higher-up government official, but in Taiwan’s recent cases, political aides have become a primary target.
With access to sensitive information, government officials are now potential risks, said Ho, adding that the administration’s new measures are a step in the right direction, but “much broader reforms are still needed.”
“Strict control over classified documents should be enforced, ensuring that only authorized individuals – ideally just one person – can view such materials,” Ho told Radio Free Asia.
“Aides or secretaries should not be allowed access. Additionally, regular audits and random inspections should be implemented,” said Ho, highlighting the need for comprehensive background checks and access control based on security clearance.
Ho also stressed the importance of “preventive measures.”
“Focusing solely on punishment after incidents occur often means the damage has already been done,” he explained.
Taiwan’s Premier Cho Jung-tai said Thursday the government will strengthen national security by updating civil servant background checks. A proposal is expected within two weeks, with plans to refine vetting based on access to classified data and introduce regular or random reviews.
China sees Taiwan as a breakaway province that must eventually reunite, even by force if necessary, even though the democratic island has been self-governing since it effectively separated from mainland China in 1949 after the Chinese civil war.
Beijing views Lai, a pro-independence advocate, as a separatist and has increased military drills, economic pressure, and diplomatic isolation to counter his leadership.
Edited by Taejun Kang and Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alan Lu for RFA.
TAIPEI, Taiwan – U.S. President Donald Trump said that Washington and Beijing were in talks on tariffs, expressing confidence that the world’s two largest economies would reach a deal over the next three to four weeks.
The U.S. and China are waging a tit-for-tat trade battle, which threatens to stunt the global economy, after Trump announced new tariffs on most countries. Specifically, the U.S. has imposed tariffs up to 145% on Chinese imports, prompting China to retaliate with tariffs reaching 125% on American goods.
“We are confident that we will work out something with China,” he said during a late Thursday afternoon executive order signing in the Oval Office.
“Top officials” in Beijing had reached out to Washington “a number of times” said Trump, adding that the two sides have had “very good trade talks” but that more remained, though he offered no evidence of any progress.
Asked about timing on any agreement, Trump said: “I would think over the next three to four weeks.”
Trump declined to say if he had spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping.
He also declined to say whether he would raise further the current tariffs he has imposed on Chinese imports but said: “I may not want to go higher, or I may not want to even go up to that level. I may want to go to less, because, you know, you want people to buy.”
Trump also expressed confidence that the sale deal of Chinese social media app TikTok he seeks would be forthcoming.
“We have a deal for TikTok but it is subject to China so we will delay it until this thing gets worked out,” he said, adding that the deal would not take more than “five minutes” to finalize after discussions take place.
Trump said earlier in April that China’s objections to new U.S. tariffs stalled a deal to sell off TikTok and keep it operating in the United States.
Trump administration officials have been working on an agreement to sell the U.S. assets of the popular social media app, owned by China-based ByteDance, to an American buyer, as required by a bipartisan law enacted in 2024. But this also requires China’s approval.
Trump’s remarks came a few hours after China’s commerce ministry said it had been maintaining working-level communication with its U.S. counterparts.
“China’s position has been consistent – it remains open to engaging in economic and trade consultations with the U.S. side,” commerce ministry spokesperson He Yongqian said.
Noting that the unilateral imposition of tariffs was entirely initiated by the U.S. side, she quoted an old Chinese saying “It is the doer of the deed who must undo it” to urge the U.S. to correct its approach.
“We urge the U.S. to immediately cease its maximum pressure tactics, stop coercion and intimidation, and resolve differences with China through equal dialogue on the basis of mutual respect,” she said.
Nvidia chief’s visit to China
Jensen Huang, chief executive of U.S. chipmaker Nvidia, said on Thursday that China was a “very important market” for his company after the U.S. imposed a ban on sales of its H20 artificial intelligence chips to the country.
“We hope to continue to cooperate with China,” Huang said in a meeting with Ren Hongbin, head of the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade, cited by China’s state-run broadcaster CCTV.
Huang arrived in Beijing earlier in the day at the invitation of the trade organization.
His visit comes at a time when the U.S. imposed restrictions on the export of Nvidia’s H20 chips to China, tightening its grip on advanced AI technology trade with Beijing as part of Washington’s strategy to pressure China amid an ongoing tariff battle.
Nvidia said Tuesday it was notified by the U.S. government on April 9 that exporting its H20 chips to China would now require government approval. It separately said that the restriction would remain in place indefinitely.
While the H20 chip has relatively modest computing power, it has other features that make it suitable for building high-performance computing systems.
The U.S. government reportedly based its decision on concerns that the H20 chips could be used in or adapted for Chinese supercomputers. Until now, the H20 was the most advanced artificial intelligence chip legally exportable to China.
The H20 chip gained attention following its use by DeepSeek, a Chinese AI startup, which in January unveiled a cost-effective and competitive AI model trained using the chip.
Huang reportedly met DeepSeek founder, Liang Wenfeng, in Beijing, to discuss new chip designs for the AI company that would not trigger the new U.S. bans.
Edited by Mike Firn.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Taejun Kang for RFA.
Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived in Malaysia on Tuesday, April 15 for a highly anticipated state visit. With this move, Xi seeks to promote China as a reliable alternative to an escalating trade war with the United States.
Xi embarked this week on a Southeast Asia tour that has already taken him to Vietnam and will also include Cambodia, with Beijing trying to position itself as a stable alternative to US President Donald Trump’s punitive tariff regime.
Xi said he was “looking forward to … further deepening the traditional friendship” between China and Malaysia, CCTV, a Chinese state broadcaster, reported. He said he would “have an in-depth exchange of views” in meetings with Anwar and king Sultan Ibrahim, according to CCTV.
