U.S.–China policy drifts
- With tariffs stalled, U.S. policy toward China is described as drifting without a clear replacement doctrine. - The pause in the tariff agenda gives Beijing room to cast itself as the steadier actor while Washington looks divided. - Analysts say that ambiguity raises planning risks for firms and could complicate supply-chain decisions in a weaker global economy. (reuters.com)
More than a year into Donald Trump’s second term, Washington’s China policy is being described by analysts and officials as adrift after the tariff strategy that anchored it was partly knocked out in court. (wkzo.com) Trump returned to office in 2025 promising tariffs would reset ties with Beijing, but Reuters reported those moves have not fundamentally changed China’s trade or military behavior. A planned May 14-15, 2026 trip to China for talks with Xi Jinping now looms over a policy debate inside Washington. (wkzo.com; aljazeera.com) The biggest break came on February 20, 2026, when the Supreme Court struck down sweeping tariffs Trump had imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act in a 6-3 ruling. SCOTUSblog said the court held that the 1977 law lets a president regulate commerce during emergencies, but not impose tariffs on that scale. (scotusblog.com) Since then, Reuters said the administration has sent mixed signals, including briefly adding major Chinese firms to a Pentagon military-linked blacklist and then pulling the list about an hour later. Reuters also said Trump approved some artificial-intelligence semiconductor sales to China within minutes of his own government calling Chinese access to those chips a national security threat. (wkzo.com; kelo.com) That leaves companies planning factories, sourcing and inventories with a moving target instead of a settled doctrine. The Peterson Institute for International Economics said U.S. goods exports to China in 2025 were 26% lower than in 2024, and estimated they would have been nearly 60% higher without Trump’s trade wars. (piie.com) The tariff fight also did not stay inside trade law. SCOTUSblog said the justices did not decide how importers should be refunded for duties already paid, and CBS News reported businesses could be owed nearly $150 billion after the ruling. (scotusblog.com; cbsnews.com) White House spokesperson Kush Desai pushed back on the idea of drift, telling Reuters that Trump’s trade agenda had “flipped the script” on decades of policy that hollowed out the U.S. industrial base. Critics told Reuters the combination of reversals, court losses and improvised dealmaking has weakened Washington’s hand against Beijing. (wkzo.com) Beijing has not changed its core posture, but Washington is heading into a presidential trip with fewer clear tools and more visible contradictions. For exporters, chipmakers and manufacturers, the immediate fact is simpler: the old tariff playbook is damaged, and no replacement has fully taken its place. (wkzo.com; scotusblog.com)
