跳至主要内容

A Summer of Smoke and Mirrors: How Trump’s “Trade Wins” Are Really a Game of Three-Card Monte


The drama began a few weeks ago. Readers kept writing in: “Washington is on a tariff-winning streak—Japan, Europe, now South Korea. It’s tightening a noose around China. Can you explain?”

My answer then was: wait. The moment Seoul showed its hand, the whole illusion would collapse.
That moment arrived at dawn today. President Trump took to Truth Social and—speaking only for himself—declared that the U.S. and South Korea had “reached a deal.” The bullet points were vintage Trump: a 15 % tariff on Korean goods, $350 billion in Korean investment in the U.S., and a promise to buy $100 billion of American energy.
Now that all three marquee U.S. allies have delivered their lines, we can finally pull back the curtain. What looked like a diplomatic sweep is, in fact, a three-ring circus of empty promises, mutual sabotage, and nervous back-pedaling.
Act I: Japan—The Deal That Isn’t
Trump’s July 22 announcement read like a surrender document: 15 % tariffs on Japanese products, $550 billion in new Japanese investment, and a pledge to “fully open” Japan’s market.
Look closer and the parchment turns to tissue paper.
• The $550 billion has no roadmap—no sectors, no timelines, no joint statement. Washington talks of a U.S.-run fund; Tokyo says it’s merely offering loan guarantees to Japanese firms that decide, on their own, where to place the money.
• Market access? Tokyo immediately added fine print: agricultural quotas are “unchangeable.”
• Deadline? Try finding one. Two years? Ten? The heat death of the universe? None is mentioned.
Most surreal of all, there is no signed text—just dueling press releases that contradict each other paragraph by paragraph.
Act II: Europe—The Vanishing Commitments
Four days later in Scotland, Trump and European Commission President von der Leyen emerged with similar fanfare: 15 % tariffs, $600 billion in European investment, and $750 billion in energy purchases.
Within hours, Brussels walked it back.
• The $600 billion, officials explained, is “a private-sector aspiration.” If firms don’t volunteer, the Commission can’t compel them.
• The $750 billion in LNG and crude? Only if Europe’s utilities agree—good luck with that when spot prices are cheaper elsewhere.
Again, no treaty, no signature—just another ghost agreement.
Act III: South Korea—Seoul Signs Up, Sort Of
Which brings us to this morning’s Korean chapter. Same 15 % tariff anchor, new eye-popping numbers: $350 billion in green-field investment, $100 billion in energy contracts.
Yet the joint statement is missing—because none exists. The Blue House, like Tokyo and Brussels before it, offered only a vague “shared understanding,” the diplomatic equivalent of an IOU written on a cocktail napkin.
Intermission: Why Trump Needs These Ghost Wins
Zoom out and the timing is too neat to be coincidence.
• July 22: Japan “deal.”
• July 27: Europe “deal.”
July 28–29: Stockholm, round three of U.S.–China trade talks.
Trump wanted to walk into that Swedish conference room with a head full of imaginary wind: Look, Beijing, we’ve stitched up the entire industrialized world—your move.
Beijing, unmoved, simply noted that Washington had quietly asked for a 90-day extension of the tariff cease-fire—Washington’s third such timeout since April. Global markets blinked. Allies fumed.
Backlash: Allies Discover They’re on the Menu
Tokyo, Brussels, and Seoul now realize the same thing: the 15 % tariff is real; everything else is vaporware that Trump intends to convert into hard cash later—at their expense.
Panic set in.
• Hours before the Stockholm talks began, EU officials clarified that aircraft, chemicals, chip gear, generics, and critical minerals would remain tariff-free—swatting aside Trump’s 15 % bravado.
• The next day, Japan’s lead negotiator, Akira Amari, held an impromptu press conference: Tokyo prefers a quick presidential proclamation locking in the 15 % duty; a formal bilateral treaty can wait—translation: we’ll swallow the tariff but stall on the money.
Both messages were aimed less at Washington than at Beijing: “Big brother China, please stand your ground. If you fall, we’re dessert.”
Finale: China Holds the Fork
Which leads to two questions Washington, Tokyo, Brussels, and Seoul should be asking:
  1. Why should Beijing sit idle while the U.S. tries to turn its friends into fixed-price lunch specials?
  2. Why should Beijing shield anyone still busy banning its EVs, meddling in the Taiwan Strait, or patrolling the South China Sea?
    The answer, of course, is price. The more Washington tries to strong-arm its allies, the more leverage Beijing gains—not to be encircled, but to set the menu.
Epilogue: Keep Calm, Carry On
For the rest of us, the script is still being written. But one line is already inked: the only seat guaranteed at the feast is China’s. Japan, Europe, and South Korea are still negotiating whether they’re diners or dishes.
So relax, finish dinner, get some sleep. In the end, power is the only cuisine that matters—and right now, China is holding the carving knife.

评论

此博客中的热门博文

Why China's Seizure of Three Tunnel Boring Machines Has India’s Bullet Train Project Stuck in Neutral

June 24, IndiaNet – India’s first high-speed rail line, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train, has hit yet another roadblock. Three massive tunnel-boring machines (TBMs), ordered from Germany’s Herrenknecht AG but manufactured in Guangzhou, China, have been stuck in Chinese customs for eight months. The delay has frozen progress on a critical 12-kilometer undersea tunnel, marking the project’s ninth major setback. The Stuck Machines The TBMs were supposed to arrive in India by October 2024. Instead, they sit in a bonded warehouse in Guangzhou, with no clear timeline for release. India’s National High-Speed Rail Corporation (NHSRC) blames Beijing for “deliberate obstruction,” while Chinese authorities remain silent. The Mumbai-Ahmedabad corridor—India’s first bullet train, modeled on Japan’s Shinkansen—was supposed to slash travel time between the two cities from 7 hours to 2. Funded largely by a ¥1.25 trillion ($15 billion) Japanese loan at 0.1% interest over 50 years , the project was sl...

Open-Source Intelligence Analysis of the 2025 India-Pakistan Military Standoff

  In the recent India-Pakistan standoff, open-source intelligence (OSINT) channels have played an extremely important role in information dissemination and intelligence analysis. Various open-source platforms, including social media, commercial satellite imagery, vessel and aviation tracking data, news reports, and military forums, have collectively formed a "second front" for battlefield situational awareness, helping all parties to promptly understand and verify the dynamics of the conflict. However, the reliability of different OSINT channels varies, and it is necessary to cross-reference them to obtain the most accurate intelligence possible. Below is an analysis of the main channels: Social Media (Twitter/X, Facebook, etc.) Social media platforms are among the fastest sources for disseminating information about the conflict. A large number of first-hand witnesses, journalists, and even soldiers post photos, videos, and written reports through social media. For example, r...

A Historic Moment: The US-China Geneva Joint Statement

  Today, many friends have left messages in the backend, asking me to discuss the US-China Geneva Joint Statement and what it means. Let’s get straight to the conclusion: with the announcement of this statement, today has become a historic moment. But why do I say that? Let’s first look at the main content of the statement. The US has committed to canceling the 91% tariffs that were imposed on April 8th and 9th. The 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd will be suspended for 90 days, with only 10% retained. We are doing the same: canceling the 91% retaliatory tariffs, suspending the 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd for 90 days, and retaining 10%. In simple terms, both sides are returning to the status quo before Trump announced the “reciprocal tariffs” on April 2nd, and then each adding an additional 10%. How should we view this outcome? Let’s first look at what Bercow said before heading to Geneva. He stated that he didn’t expect to reach any agreement with the Chinese ...