Each of the three leading Asian participants in the current stage of the Great World Game, namely China, India and Japan, has responded in a rather characteristic way to the “tariff war” declared by the 47th President of the USA.

On the vicissitudes of Donald Trump’s “tariff war”

It is not easy to follow the rapid evolution of the “tariff war” declared by the 47th President of the United States against almost the entire world, and especially against countries that were recently its closest allies.

And, in general, the moral cost of the method chosen by the new US president to force negotiations on the accumulated problems in trade relations with both recent allies and a number of other countries of importance appear negligible. At least, it is negligible compared to what will happen to the global economy if the participants in the emerging negotiation process fail to reach some kind of compromise.

This is not the first time that the US administration has had recourse to this option. It is worth looking back to the Plaza Accord of 1985, concluded at the height of the Cold War, when the question first arose as to which side had borne the greatest cost. The Federal Republic of Germany and Japan, whose economies were growing rapidly, had to hit the brakes in order to keep their main ally afloat, which was in dire financial straits.

Japan sends a delegation to the US for tariff talks

The view that the 30-year stagnation of the Japanese economy that followed the Plaza Accord was accompanied by an increase in its qualitative characteristics is worth considering. According to this view, far from being a period of lost time, the whole period was a transition from quantity to quality. It was the high quality of the Japanese economy that allowed Japanese business to move from selling finished consumer products in the United States to transferring their production processes to US territory (and also to other countries) and to buying up uncompetitive American companies. The latest and largest example of this type of transaction may be the proposed merger between Japan’s Nippon Steel and US Steel, although the deal has been in limbo for a year and a half.

The high quality of Japan’s economy is undoubtedly reflected in the fact that its annual trade surplus with the US stands at $70 billion. In Washington, however, they attribute this mainly to the “unfairness” of Tokyo’s tariff policies. Even during his first presidency Donald Trump criticized then-Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on this subject, although Abe largely ignored the comments.

But now “Big Brother” has really gotten angry, and the amount at stake, in particular, the above-mentioned sum, is high enough to continue pretending that all is well in the allies’ relationship, and that there is no need for Washington to worry. It therefore appears that Japan will be one of the first countries to agree to talk to Washington in order to achieve some compromise. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and President Donald Trump have already had a preliminary telephone conversation on this subject. The talks are likely to become more concrete during the visit to Washington of a government delegation led by Japan’s Minister of Economic Revitalization, Ryosei Akazawa, scheduled for the end of April. This means that Japan has decided to meet the three-month deadline given by Donald Trump to its trade partners to resolve the issues that have arisen.

However, there have also been noticeable attempts by the Japanese leadership to develop a “Plan B” by, for example, establishing relations with the People’s Republic of China, Brazil and the “Global South” as a whole, as well as with Europe. In this context, the visit of NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte to Tokyo, where he was received by Shigeru Ishiba on April 9, was particularly noteworthy.

India has no wish to escalate relations with Donald Trump either

The fact that India was determined to find a compromise on one of the main issues raised by the newly elected US President was clear from the fact that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi held talks with Donald Trump during the latter’s inauguration ceremony. At this point it is worth noting, once again, that Narendra Modi was the second of the state leaders whom Donald Trump felt it necessary to talk to person-to-person immediately after the inauguration. This is a clear indication of the special importance attached in both countries to the maintenance and further development of bilateral relations.

As for the tariff problem, it is likely to be resolved in the negotiations on the more general issue of a bilateral Trade Agreement, the first tranche of which is expected to be concluded “by the fall of 2025”. This date was mentioned in an announcement of the April 7 telephone conversation between Indian Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. A week earlier, the same issues were discussed during a visit to India by Assistant US Trade Representative Brendan Lynch.

China has taken a firm stance

So far, the PRC has, at least outwardly, adopted a firm and uncompromising stance on the claims put forward by Donald Trump. The phrase “fight to the end” has become commonplace in the rhetoric of all Chinese government officials. Beijing’s possible search for some kind of compromise with Washington in this matter is not being helped by the deteriorating political relations between the two countries. In this regard, we note again that the newly appointed Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is Elbridge Colby, whose name is associated with the designation of the PRC as a major threat to US interests back in the 2018 National Defense Strategy.

His immediate superior, Pete Hegseth, also laid on the anti-Chinese rhetoric with a trowel during his first trip abroad, which, most notably, included stops in the Philippines and Japan. The US Department of Defense and the US Congress have both consistently pursued a policy of full support for Taiwan, advocating full statehood for the island.

As for the tariff war with China, which has now begun in earnest, there is a sense of optimism in the US, judging by the interview with US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent on the FOX Business Channel. In that regard, and judging by certain signs, such as Beijing’s reaffirmation of the “path of openness” of its own economy, Scott Bessent’s positive outlook on the prospects for resuming negotiations with China is not unreasonable.

Beijing should be prompted to resume these negotiations by the obvious futility of the initial attempts to create an “anti-Trump coalition” of China’s neighbours, all of whom, without exception, queued up for the “kissing ceremony” referred to above. The process of improving China’s relations with the EU, also referred to, has not progressed beyond the stage of statements, and, what is more, there are very serious obstacles on the way to such a goal. The main thing, however, seems to be that many of the PRC’s European partners are rather preoccupied with the problem of how not to be late in taking a more or less decent place in the above-mentioned queue.

And the author’s sympathies are entirely on their side. There simply cannot be any other strategy today, given the growing global lunacy.

Vladimir Terekhov, expert on the issues of the Asia-Pacific region. Courtesy 

https://journal-neo.su/2025/04/21/leading-asian-players-in-the-face-of-donald-trumps-tariff-war/