Skip to main content

US and China Shake Hands Again: Tariffs Cut, Bargains Rise – Who Wins? Who Loses? Who Pretends Nothing's Wrong?

Published on October 31, 2025

The internet exploded again after this round of US-China negotiations. Many focused on one number – tariffs reduced from 57% to 47%, as if it could instantly rejuvenate the global economy. But the truth is far more complex than a single tariff.

Breaking down the nine points summarized in the chart, we find that this round of US-China negotiations was actually a typical example of "both sides made conciliatory statements, but neither side loosened their grip on the other's position."

① US Reduces Tariffs by 10 Basis Points The reason given was elegant: "China is taking strong action to curb fentanyl."

Simply put, it's "You help me eradicate fentanyl, I'll help you sell your goods cheaper."

In plain terms, this diplomatic rhetoric means:

"I give face, you give action, let's not make things awkward for each other."**

② China Promises to Buy US Soybeans This is actually the most traditional bargaining chip; the US farmers, the voting bloc, had to give it up.

Trump needs to garner votes, and soybeans are a necessary "political maneuver."

③ Rare Earth Export Restrictions Extended for One Year

This is even more crucial!

Rare earths are not ordinary commodities; they are strategic weapons.

A one-year extension?

Frankly, it's telling the US:

"Don't rush, I haven't turned my back. But don't think this is a free gift."

④ US Allows Nvidia to Continue Selling Chips to China

But note this:

This cannot include the most advanced Blackwell chips.

In other words:

"I'll sell, but not the most expensive." The US always offers limited easing of restrictions.

⑤ US Suspends Port Fees for Chinese Ships

This is a medium-sized bargaining chip, more symbolic than practical.

Polite rhetoric: To ease tensions.

Substance: Giving the other side a little sweetness, but not much.

⑥ Trump to Visit China Next April; ⑦ Xi to Visit the US Next October A two-way trip?

Don't be naive.

This is more like a mutual confirmation: "Although we often clash, this relationship must continue."

⑧ Trump even said he would give this meeting a score of 12 out of 10. Don't laugh, this is typical Trump style:

"I won, I won big."

⑨ The person who wrote this summary summed up these seven years in one sentence:

From 2018 to 2025, we've gone full circle, like returning to the starting point.

This sentence is particularly powerful.

Because it reveals the reality:

Seven years of conflict, seven years of tug-of-war, in the end, neither China nor the US can break away from each other.

Attitude/Viewpoint: This is not negotiation, this is the ironclad reality of "mutual necessity"

My exclusive viewpoint is simple, but many people are unwilling to face it:

✅ 1. China and the US are not cooperating, but "cooperating out of necessity due to mutual dependence."

All the actions in this negotiation prove one thing:

"

Decoupling is a false proposition, slowing down is the real trend, and continued entanglement is the real reality. ** **The US needs China's supply chain and rare earth elements;

China needs the US market and financial system.

Neither country can form a complete economic landscape without the other's missing piece.

This isn't "friendship," it's "you can't live without me, and I can't live without you."

✅ 2. The US Logic: I can loosen restrictions, but I won't completely give you freedom.

The Blackwell chip ban demonstrates that the US will always try to cripple you at crucial junctures.

The US is currently employing a "two-pronged strategy":

  • Superficial tariff reductions → easing tensions

  • Continued blockade of core technologies → controlling vital points

This is the core strategic rhythm of the US:

"Make money when you can, contain when you can."

✅ 3. China's Logic: I can cooperate, but retain countermeasures.

The most typical example is rare earth elements.

China understands: selling rare earth elements isn't about "selling minerals," it's about "selling strategy."

A one-year extension is not a concession, but rather:

“I’m giving you a year to breathe, but I can take it back at any time.”

This is a smart strategy and a necessary bargaining chip.

✅ 4. Both sides are putting on a show, but for their own domestic audiences.

—The US needs to tell farmers: I’ve placed soybean orders with you!

—China needs to tell its domestic audience: We’ve stabilized the situation! Tariffs have decreased!

Diplomacy often isn’t about persuading the other side, but about persuading one’s own people.

✅ 5. The deepest reality: By 2025, there will be no winners, only “two inseparable boulders.”

Seven years of friction, three administrations, hundreds of sanctions lists…

And the result?

Tariffs still need to be negotiated, chips still need to be sold, soybeans still need to be bought, and heads of state still need to exchange visits.

Therefore, my view is clear:

"

There is no so-called “decisive victory” in Sino-US relations, only “the necessary continued mutual competition.”

This negotiation is not the end, but the beginning of the next round of entanglement.

Conclusion: Great powers will not truly embrace, but they will never truly part ways.

As Jon, who has long written about international relations, I see a world not as black and white, but as a complex mix of grays.

This round of negotiations between China and the US is like two people who have been fighting for seven years, but at the same time, they still have to run a company together—they argue, but they still need to make money, and cooperation must continue.

In the coming years, China and the US will continue to:

  • Impose sanctions on one side

  • Loosen restrictions on the other

  • Confrontate on one side

  • Cooperate on the other

Like a play that never ends.

But at least, this negotiation tells us one thing:

"

Great powers may not love each other, but they need each other.

"

The world may be turbulent, but it will not easily fall into disorder.