Beijing not desperate for an agreement, former Australian prime minister says



[ad_1]

Negotiators of US President Donald Trump are expected to meet with Chinese trade officials this week to conclude a trade deal.

Donald J. Trump tweet: "…. Guess what, it's not going to happen! China has just informed us that they (the Deputy Prime Minister) were now coming to the United States to make a deal. Let's see, but I'm very happy with more than $ 100 billion a year in tariffs filling the coffers of the United States … great for the United States, not for China! "

However, according to former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, any assumption in Washington that Beijing is "economically desperate" for an agreement is not "well placed".

"The Chinese have implemented a whole series of stimulus measures, growth has been restored, including some tax breaks for the private sector, and China is entering into these negotiations from May 2019 into a much stronger economic situation". it was only six months ago, the government said. Rudd, who is now president of the Asia Society Policy Institute, based in New York.

Rudd told CNBC's "Squawk Box Asia" that Chinese media insisted "time and time again" that the Asian giant's economy was "resilient".

"Social media is preparing for the possibility that the Chinese economy will continue even in the absence of a trade agreement, so what I see here is a low level of defiance", Rudd said.

Ongoing trade talks between the United States and China appeared to turn sour when Trump was threatened on Sunday to toughen US sanctions against some Chinese products from 10% to 25% if no agreement is reached. Friday. Another series of fresh taxes will follow "shortly", he added.

At a rally in Florida on Wednesday, Trump said his recent threat to raise tariffs came from the fact that Beijing had "broken the deal" in trade talks with Washington.

Rudd, for one, said that the "drama of recent days" seems to be going in the direction of "American frustration" because the Beijing negotiating text "does not include a reference to China incorporating the proposed changes to the bilateral agreement into Chinese law. "

[ad_2]

Source link