Trump’s Trade Deal Smoke and Mirrors

The recent summit between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping has left many wondering about the substance behind the trade agreements announced during their meeting. On the surface, it appears to be a mixed bag - some promising announcements, but also plenty of ambiguity and uncertainty.

From the White House’s perspective, the trip seems to have been a modest success. Boeing stands to gain from China’s reported agreement to purchase at least 200 aircraft, with potential for this number to balloon to 750 planes in the future. Mr. Trump also claimed that China has agreed to buy more US oil and agricultural products, including “billions of dollars’ worth” of soybeans from American farmers.

However, experts note that specifics on these deals remain scarce, with no concrete commitments or binding language in sight. This is consistent with China’s history of making verbal promises only to renege on them later. Mr. Trump’s own track record provides evidence of this pattern; during his 2017 visit to China, he secured a deal for the state-owned China Energy Investment Corporation to invest nearly $84 billion in shale gas and chemical manufacturing projects in West Virginia, but these plans ultimately dissolved.

The lack of concrete progress from the summit raises questions about Mr. Trump’s negotiating style. His tendency to prioritize showmanship over substance has led some to wonder if he is simply playing a game of smoke and mirrors. This approach would be consistent with his previous trade agreements, which have often focused on creating a positive narrative rather than securing meaningful results.

However, not everyone shares this skepticism. Wendy Cutler, a former negotiator in the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, noted that both sides are describing the meeting as an opportunity to stabilize their relationship and engage on economic issues. This new framework includes the establishment of a Board of Trade, which would mediate trade disputes between the countries and potentially lift tariffs on billions of dollars’ worth of goods.

While this development could be seen as a positive step forward, it remains to be seen whether these agreements will materialize into actual results. As Cutler pointed out, “this isn’t their one and only meeting,” suggesting that both sides may be taking their time before announcing concrete deals. Ultimately, the takeaway from this summit seems to be that Mr. Trump’s trade dealmaking is more focused on appearances than substance, with a greater emphasis on creating a positive narrative around his trip rather than securing meaningful agreements for American businesses and workers.