Advertisement
The tension is not accidental. It reflects the limits of economic statecraft in an interconnected system. For American firms, China remains both a critical market and an integral part of global supply chains. Even after export controls and investment restrictions, the architecture of production – from components to assembly – continues to run through Chinese networks. The idea that these links could be quickly or cleanly severed has always been overstated.
Trump’s approach does not resolve this contradiction so much as acknowledge it. Bringing corporate leaders into the diplomatic orbit is less about softening competition than managing it. If a full decoupling is unrealistic, then the alternative is to shape the terms of interdependence rather than abandon it altogether. Engagement, in this sense, becomes a tool of influence – not a concession.
Advertisement


Don't Miss:
-
Google DeepMind director Cao Liangliang makes a boomerang-return to Hong Kong
-
Philippine president backs defence chief over China sanctions
-
IVF embryo mix-up undisclosed for weeks sparks calls for 24-hour reporting rule
-
New York City races to secure unstable skyscraper after columns buckle and floors sag
-
Hong Kong stocks rise as rallies from Alibaba, SMIC, other tech giants lift market sentiment

Australia’s Grand Nuclear Submarine-Fleet Plan
Joel Seligman and the Shadow SEC
Taiwanese authorities charge executives who helped China’s cyber spies target ICIJ network