Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Us China Relations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Journalist: tariffs could trigger a U.S.–China trade war; both sides nonetheless have leverage to strike a deal
Summary
Dexter Roberts said a tariff increase by the United States could prompt immediate Chinese retaliation, that China and the U.S. both have incentives to de-escalate, and he described items that could form the basis of a deal or a confrontation, including agricultural purchases, TikTok negotiations and technology restrictions.
Dexter Roberts, a journalist who has reported from China, told the Montana World Affairs Council conference that an imminent wave of tariffs proposed by the incoming U.S. administration could prompt swift Chinese retaliation and risk a wider trade conflict.
Roberts outlined why China and the United States might prefer a negotiated accord: China is still recovering consumer confidence and would want to avoid a disruptive trade war; the U.S. risks adding to inflation and unsettling financial markets if tariffs on Chinese goods become broader. Roberts said both sides therefore have negotiating levers that could be used to de-escalate.
He described concrete items that could form part of a deal: Chinese purchases of U.S. agricultural products and energy, continued purchases of U.S. Treasury securities, enhanced Chinese cooperation on reducing flows of fentanyl precursors, and limits on Chinese currency devaluation. On the U.S. side, Roberts listed possible concessions that could be negotiated back from current policy: easing some technology and investment restrictions, reconsidering the future of permanent normal trade relations, and allowing Chinese investment in U.S. manufacturing—especially electric vehicle factories—if they create domestic jobs.
Roberts noted high-profile specific flashpoints. He described the deadline tied to a U.S. law involving TikTok and said that, without a buyer for the U.S. subsidiary or an administrative extension, the platform’s U.S. operations faced removal. He also described tighter U.S. export- and investment-controls on advanced semiconductors and related technologies and how those measures have grown under recent administrations.
Regarding China’s posture, Roberts discussed mechanisms Beijing has used to respond to U.S. trade measures, including rapid retaliatory tariffs and enforcement actions against foreign companies operating in China. He cited the Chinese "anti-foreign sanctions" framework in recent years and said regulators had summoned U.S. firms, such as Walmart, over business conduct they deemed potentially disruptive to the domestic market.
Roberts referenced a recent visit by U.S. Senator Steve Daines to China and a meeting he said took place with Premier Li Qiang, and he said those talks touched on fentanyl precursors and the possibility of a Xi Jinping–Donald Trump summit. Roberts described reports that President Trump had expressed interest in a summit and said tariffs being announced on "Liberation Day" could postpone any such meeting.
Roberts warned that domestic U.S. political figures and some legislators would oppose a broad rapprochement with Beijing, especially where national security and human-rights issues intersect. He said that while a dramatic reversal toward a summit and de-escalation is possible, the outcome is uncertain and depends on rapid policy choices on both sides.
Audience questions then shifted the session toward a brief discussion of treaty credibility, Taiwan and whether past verbal assurances about NATO expansion carried binding weight; Roberts and the panel did not announce any negotiated outcomes or formal actions.
