Wing Thye Woo: "U.S. - China Trade War Paused — but for how long?"
(The first episode of the Awani International weekly discussion program Woo.Says released on May 14, 2025)
Awani International, the international affairs news service under Malaysia’s leading news network Astro Awani, is known for its in-depth analysis of geopolitical strategy, power competition, and the shifting architecture of the global order. On 14 May 2025, Awani International inaugurated a weekly discussion between Professor Wing Thye Woo (University Chair Professor at Liaoning University, China, and Distinguished Professor Emeritus at University of California Davis, USA) and Ms Melisa Idris (Senior News Editor at Awani International). Woo.Says is the name of this new weekly discussion series, and its primary objective is to unpack the deeper dynamics and future trajectories of US-China relations and their implications for the world.
In the first episode, "U.S.-China Trade War Paused — but for how long?", Professor Woo offered a sharp and often humorous assessment of the structural tensions underlying the tariff war, the evolving balance of power between Washington and Beijing, and the cascading effects of global supply chain realignment. The text below is an edited summary of the interview.
Melisa Idris: Professor Woo, you’ve been closely observing US-China relations for decades. What initially drew you to study the dynamic between these two powers?
Prof. Wing Thye Woo: I grew up during a time when the world was rigidly divided between communism and capitalism. That binary world order shaped my early understanding of global politics. What fascinated me was witnessing the transformation of the centrally planned economies to market economies. China’s voluntary economic reform from 1978 onward was an act of self-revolution, demonstrating a remarkable capacity for self-correction. In contrast, the implosion of the Soviet Union exemplified what happens when a system fails to self-correct.
This victory of the US in the Cold War shows the superiority of the market economy in meeting the needs of the people. But with Donald Trump’s re-election, I now wonder if and when the US would be correcting the flaws in its political system. It is simply astonishing that the US, the most scientifically advanced country in the world could so easily turn its back on science — calling climate change a religion and cutting research funding. Still, I remain optimistic that a more enlightened elite will eventually emerge to lead the US forward.
Melisa Idris: Let’s talk about the recent development—both the US and China agreed to reduce tariffs significantly. Does this 90-day pause in the trade war surprise you?
Prof. Woo: Not really. The triple-digit tariffs had essentially decoupled the two economies. Given how deeply intertwined the two production networks are with each other, a sudden rupture like this could only inflict severe pain on both sides. The real question is: why would they do this to themselves? What Trump presented as a "victory" is hardly convincing — it’s just both sides lowering their guns, not a true concession. China has grown too large to be bullied. This was a test of endurance, and both economies suffered. In the US, retail stores were closing because most toys and Christmas decorations come from China. In China, factories were shutting down. Also, third countries were flooded with redirected goods, which caused frustration among US allies.
Melisa Idris: So why was Trump’s claim of “victory” unconvincing?
Prof. Woo: Because the US extracted no real concessions. Lowering tariffs mutually is not a strategic win — it’s a stalemate. It proves that bullying China is no longer viable. China, too, has a “big stick,” and now it’s about who can tolerate more pain. For instance, when tariffs wenit into effect at midnight of April 9, the US stock market plummeted and the dollar weakened rapidly. Within 14 hours, Trump reversed course for all countries — except China. But even that strategy is flawed. Goods from China could easily be rerouted through third countries. US customs checks less than 1% of incoming containers, making the enforcement practically impossible. Either the system becomes corrupt, or the ports become paralysed.
Melisa Idris: Is this 90-day ceasefire truly meaningful, or merely a pause?
Prof. Woo: It’s likely a temporary easing. The current tariff levels may remain, but practical pressures — like smuggling and global sourcing — will push them down to around 10%, like the standard rate applied to most other countries. But the US strategy lacks focus. If the aim was to bring manufacturing jobs back, it should have targeted specific industries. Instead, it applied blanket tariffs to sectors like toys and textiles, which realistically are not coming back. To insist on complete self-sufficiency is to embrace poverty.
Melisa Idris: You mentioned earlier that China is no longer willing to play the supplicant. Can you elaborate?
Prof. Woo: In Trump’s first term, Chinese officials travelled to Washington D.C., giving the appearance of negotiating under duress. This time, the talks took place in neutral territory—Switzerland. That shift signifies a demand for mutual respect. China’s message was clear: "You fired first; we retaliate. Now let’s sit down and talk like adults." Trump misjudged China’s resolve. His tactic of expecting world leaders to “kiss the ring” in D.C. backfired. China refused to play along.
Melisa Idris: And how do you view Trump’s approach now, more broadly?
Prof. Woo: Trump knows when to announce a strategic retreat. He had promised quick solutions to major conflicts like Gaza and Ukraine, but in the first 100 days of his term, he has achieved little success. He has reversed many of his policies under pressure — from rehiring dismissed government workers to restoring climate data for protesting farmers. His policy reversals embarrass many Americans because they are not strategic retreats but failed outcomes of dramatic attention-grabbing gambits that had not been thought through.
Melisa Idris: Thank you, Professor Woo. As always, your insights remind us that beneath the headlines, the real dynamics of power and strategy are far more complex. The tariff war may have paused, but the broader power contest between the US and China is far from over. We look forward to continuing this conversation next week.
