Big news is coming. It is worth noting that the selection and specifications of the US delegation to trade negotiations in China are called the most luxurious team in history. Why did the United States choose to talk at this time? How will the two sides go back and forth? How should China deal with it? In response to these problems, we invited Mei Xinyu, a researcher at the Research Institute of the Ministry of Commerce, and asked him to analyze this topic. Lineup Trump sent his entire economic team to China, which is not exaggerated by the new Zurich newspaper in Switzerland. See the US presidents special envoy and finance minister Mnuchins super luxury lineup - American ambassador to China Blin Stader; Secretary of Commerce Ross; trade representative Wright F Ze; Kudelo, director of the National Economic Commission; Navarro, President trade adviser Navarro; President Eizenstat. In addition to these people, the federal governments economic team has few remaining points. Since the United States unilaterally announced the opening of Chinas 7 major export textiles and the contemporary Sino US trade friction curtain in 1979, there has never been a trade dispute between China and the United States in the past 40 years. In the bilateral trade dispute between the United States and other countries, such a lineup delegation is also unprecedented. There is no doubt that the willingness of the United States to visit the negotiations is a great progress, compared with the initiative to provoke the beginning of the trade war between China and the United States, which has not been negotiated at the beginning of the trade war. The super luxurious lineup also shows the importance of the US side in coordinating Sino US economic relations through negotiations. Moreover, because this trade war is not open to itself, it is appropriate for them to negotiate in China instead of us. US Treasury Secretary, Moin motivation Why did the United States choose to send a regiment to China at this time? For the US, the epic trade war in China and the United States, no matter how the decision maker is entitled to the art of trading, is indeed in a timely manner from the edge of the cliff. This is because, with the enormous economic and trade volume of China and the United States, the close of bilateral economic and trade relations, the trade war with the record of world trade history with the amount of trade involved in the case will inevitably make both sides pay a real heavy price. The worries of the industry, the shock of the financial market, and the growing discontent of American politics are becoming more and more unbearable for uncle Sam. In addition, as a counter - party, Chinas peak pressure is at the beginning of the attack by the other side; as an active challenger, the pressure on the US side is increasing with time and increasingly obvious. We can say to the United States responsibly - Do not think that the addition of 25% tariffs will inevitably lead to the limited party to withdraw from the market, to fully recognize the huge share of made in China and its irreplaceable capacity as a production center. Do not think that the only trade embargo initiated by the initiative is impacted by the embargo, and it is necessary to know that the staff of the suppliers do not have to rely on the trade embargo and the northwest wind to fill their full belly, and to find new sales markets. Do not think that the initiative to launch a trade war, and threaten to expand the scale of the trade war, can harvest the cheers of fans and the vote in the mid-term elections. It is important to know that the effect of trade war on raising prices and affecting the peoples livelihood is bound to become increasingly apparent with the passing of time. Now, by the mid November 6th elections, there is still half a year, enough for this effect. It appears more fully. We see the United States first 50 billion - dollar list is trying to avoid the inclusion of consumer goods in the daily use in order to minimize the impact on the daily life of the population. In other words, it is to minimize the impact on the November mid-term elections. For example, under the 84198150 tax number in this list, the tariff goods are stove, stove and microwave oven, except microwave oven, used for making hot drinks or cooking or heating food, not for family purposes; but if the US side is trying to add $100 billion to the amount of trade involved in the case as threatened, it can not be not included in the equivalent. Some of the residents daily consumer goods, and these made in China goods are very high in the United States market, even if imposed tariffs, it is difficult to be replaced and withdrawn from the United States market, but will only raise the price of the US market. It is for this reason that we have witnessed again and again the flexibility of US policymakers in the last ditch. This time, it is not surprising that the United States has launched a trade war from an active provocation to a willingness to negotiate. American trade representative lett Hill Answer So, how should we deal with the US super luxury delegation? The first principle should be that the negotiations between the two sides are based on WTO rules, not on the domestic laws of the United States. Because both China and the United States are members of the WTO, it is the minimum international faith to abide by this principle when there is a trade dispute. Secondly, the so-called negotiations should be a compromise between the two sides, rather than the conditions offered by the US side. When the trade dispute was in full swing in the United States and Japan, the famous American economist and Merton Miller, the Nobel prize winner in 1990, had been impressed by the American government at that time that the American government had consistently imposed on people in the trade negotiations. It had been pungent to mocking the so-called trade negotiations by the American government as Robbers robbing the people; more than 20 years passed. Is there a qualitative leap in the art of communication between the US government? In July 16, 2007, the American Journal of Science published an article entitled Americans are more difficult to understand others than Chinese, and reports the results of a study by Boaz Kessar, a professor of psychology at the University of Chicago and a graduate student. The study found that Americans and other Westerners are very difficult to see things from other peoples perspectives, one of which is the decreasing effect of communication, and the Chinese who live in a society that encourages the collective attitude of the members are better at understanding other peoples views. We are willing to understand longer than to understand the needs of our trading partners, but we will never accept unilateral coercive attempts. Third, we must be prepared for this round of Sino US negotiations. To be successful is best and can not be successful. We also have the courage to face the reality. Even if it is successful, it is likely to experience several rounds of return. In a word, be ready and deal with it. Finally, regardless of the outcome of the Sino US trade war, Chinas determination and pace to expand its openness will not waver. We understand some of the national concerns about economic security, but let us review the history of the nineteenth Century British policy from mercantilism to free trade: abolition of grain law, the abolition of maritime law, the cancellation of privileged companies, and the reduction of tariffs... After a series of measures to achieve industrialization, Britain did not let Britain lose its economic security. Instead, it pushed Britain to the top of the global economic system. During the East Asian financial crisis from 1997 to 1998, when the economic volume was far greater than that of Japan in China, the yen was chosen to devalue the pressure, and Chinese policymakers insisted that the RMB should not devalue. Although China was under tremendous pressure at that time, the result was that China replaced Japan as the stabilizer of Asian economy. Although the scale of Chinas economy did not surpass Japan in 2010, the difference between the two countries in the East Asian financial crisis in 1998 has determined the outcome. Will this history repeat again? Lets wait and see. Source of this article: knight errant editor: Han Jiapeng _NN9841 During the East Asian financial crisis from 1997 to 1998, when the economic volume was far greater than that of Japan in China, the yen was chosen to devalue the pressure, and Chinese policymakers insisted that the RMB should not devalue. Although China was under tremendous pressure at that time, the result was that China replaced Japan as the stabilizer of Asian economy. Although the scale of Chinas economy did not surpass Japan in 2010, the difference between the two countries in the East Asian financial crisis in 1998 has determined the outcome. Will this history repeat again? Lets wait and see.