JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon , who runs the globe's biggest bank by market capitalization, spoke for The Street when he complained Trump's tariffs were“too large, too big and too aggressive” - even if one thinks it's wise to play hardball with foes and allies alike.

Increasingly dire warnings from retailers about empty shelves and photos of idle container ships crowding the shores of Seattle, Los Angeles and Baltimore broke through.

Headlines about several trillions of dollars of stock market losses, talk of a“Trumpcession” and chatter that the so-called“bond vigilantes” showed the White House who's boss left Trump little choice.

The same went for China's stance going into the weekend trade talks in Geneva. Team Xi demanded a goodwill gesture on tariffs; Trump ultimately obliged.

The abrupt detour in phraseology says everything. Around Liberation Day, Trump World argued the US is being“looted, pillaged, raped and plundered by nations near and far.” Now, the chatter is about“the importance of a sustainable, long-term and mutually beneficial economic and trade relationships.”

Observers are free to view this as a split-screen moment. What it really is, though, is the economic equivalent of a lobotomy. This isn't a de-escalation; it's an alternative intellectual universe.

But by now, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer know full well that China is feeling emboldened, not cowed, by the last two weeks. As Team Trump seeks a concessions list from China, Xi's men are demanding to see Trump's.

This won't go down well in Trump World. But then, Trump's rather desperate trade“deal” in name only with the UK set quite a precedent.

Having a trade surplus with the UK, it's an open question why a US leader would spend political capital negotiating with Prime Minister Keir Starmer 's government. The answer: extreme appetite for a perceived win, any win at all.

Here's how University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers sums of Trump's trade“deal” with London:“Laser focused on reducing prices for everyday Americans from Day One, the president has struck a deal that will lower the price of Rolls-Royces, Bentleys, Jaguars, Aston Martins, Range Rovers, and Minis. No other consumer goods received carve-outs.”

Three, Trump's 40-plus-year belief that tariffs are a magic bullet to make America great again.

Trump's most consistent economic view - one might say the only consistent view - through the decades is that Asia is exploiting the US and only import taxes can save the day.

Which other public figure would call tariffs“beautiful” and claim they will“supercharge” the US economy when everyone else knows they're inherently stagflationary?

Nor does Trump appear to understand that retailers and customers pay these levies, not the country shipping goods to Amazon, Target and Walmart. He also believes, wrongly, that tariff“revenues” can replace income taxes in an economy carrying a US$36 trillion-plus national debt .

At present, no one can answer the where-to-now question. The 90-day pause in Trump's 145% tariff created white canvas onto which investors can project their best-case/worst-case scenarios.

“If the US can get the Chinese to commit to meaningful trade rebalancing within 90 days, it would be historic,” says Jamie Cox, managing partner of the Harris Financial Group.“However, the Chinese are quite adept at stalling, so there's still a very steep hill to climb to get a real agreement.”

Here, Team Xi could take a page from former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. In 2018 and 2019, the late Abe managed to slow-walk negotiations with the Trump 1.0 White House.

At the time, Abe cozied up to Trump like no other democratic leader. He flattered Trump ad nauseam, gave him expensive gifts - including a $3,800 golf club - and even nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize .

It didn't win Japan a perfect return . Despite Abe's pleas, Trump exited the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership, the core of Tokyo's effort to contain China economically.

Nor did Trump 1.0 give“friend” Abe a waiver on steel and aluminum taxes. And Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party was none too happy that Trump's weird flirtation with North Korean tyrant Kim Jong Un came at the expense of Japan's national security.

Yet, Abe succeeded in dragging out the clock for so long that a desperate Trump agreed to a bilateral deal that altered nothing of note in US-Japan trade dynamics. In fact, Abe even got Trump to take autos off the table.

As Jeffrey Schott, economist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, notes, the pact“did little more than partly restoring the benefits that Trump recklessly threw away when he pulled the United States out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.”

Sign up for one of our free newsletters

• The Daily Report Start your day right with Asia Times' top stories
• AT Weekly Report A weekly roundup of Asia Times' most-read stories

No doubt, Team Xi is busily strategizing on their own Abe-like dodge, minus the aggressive flattery. Xi's Communist Party , of course, does not have to contest mid-term elections 18 months from now. And Xi knows it.

As such, Beijing is in no hurry to sign a“Phase Two” trade agreement with a US leader almost certain to demand a“Phase Three” round of talks a year from now.

At the same time, US officials are learning the hard way that Trump's chaotic Phase One process prompted China to pivot to other markets.

Today, China's top trading partner is the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) followed by the European Union.

Also, China is actively growing its market share among the BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa – and the Global South. Xi's“Made in China 2025” strategy has been quietly making the nation more self-sufficient.

“De-risking, today, is often described as a Western goal,” economists Brendan Kelly and Michael Hirson wrote in a recent Foreign Affairs article.

“But China has been intentionally pursuing such a strategy for over a decade. A central focus of the Made in China 2025 initiative, which Beijing launched in 2015, was to reduce China's reliance on foreign products. And to morph China into a tech leader in semiconductors, batteries, biotechnology, aerospace and artificial intelligence.”

Yet Kelly and Hirson also doubt China and the Trump administration will ever forge a workable relationship.

“Genuinely delivering on the terms of an ambitious deal would require enormous political commitment from both capitals to overcome the logic of de-risking,” Kelly and Hirson write.

They conclude that“the bottom line is that no matter how much Xi or Trump says he wants a deal, no substantial reconsideration of de-risking is likely to happen in the next four years.”

Trump disputes this assertion, and acerbically so. But the ways in which Xi has Trump's number and this White House is boxed in by financial markets that are calling the shots, it's hard to believe that the tariff truce agreed in Geneva can hold for very long.

Follow William Pesek on X at @WilliamPesek

Sign up here to comment on Asia Times stories Or Sign in to an existing accoun

Thank you for registering!

An account was already registered with this email. Please check your inbox for an authentication link.

• Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
• Click to print (Opens in new window) Print