Asia
China releases white paper on US trade relations
The State Council Information Office of China yesterday released a comprehensive white paper titled “China’s Position on Certain Issues in China-US Economic and Trade Relations,” outlining its official position on ongoing trade disputes with Washington.
The white paper addresses the nature of economic relations between the two countries, the implementation of the Phase One Trade Agreement, compliance with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, and unilateral policies of the US.
In the introduction, Beijing stated that China and the US are the world’s largest developing and developed countries, respectively, emphasizing that economic and trade relations between the two are of great importance for both bilateral and global stability and development.
It noted that since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1979, bilateral trade volume has increased from $2.5 billion to approximately $688.3 billion in 2024.
The white paper stated that the foundation of China-US economic and trade relations lies in the understanding of “mutual benefit and win-win.”
It was noted that the two countries are important trading partners for each other, with rapidly increasing trade in goods and services.
China is the US’s largest goods export market and second-largest source of imports; the US is China’s third-largest export market and second-largest source of imports.
Beijing argued that it does not pursue a trade surplus, and that the trade balance is a result of structural problems in the US economy, the comparative advantages of the two countries, and the international division of labor.
It was reported that when local sales through trade in goods, trade in services, and investments are considered together, the economic benefits obtained by the two countries are roughly balanced.
Additionally, it was stated that China is taking active steps to increase imports through platforms such as the China International Import Expo (CIIE).
The white paper gave extensive coverage to the Phase One Trade Agreement signed on January 15, 2020.
It was argued that the Chinese side has meticulously fulfilled its obligations under the agreement, despite challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic, supply chain disruptions, and global economic recession.
In this context, it was stated that intellectual property protection has been strengthened, market access has been increased in the agricultural and food products and financial services sectors, and forced technology transfer has been prohibited.
In contrast, it was pointed out that the US side has not fulfilled its obligations under the agreement.
According to the white paper, Washington, contrary to the spirit of the agreement, tightened export controls, increased sanctions against Chinese companies, and imposed investment restrictions.
In particular, regarding technology transfer, it was argued that the US, as in the case of TikTok, is forcing companies to sell and preventing investment cooperation under the pretext of “national security.”
In the field of agriculture, it was stated that the US has not recognized China’s avian influenza-free zone status and has not responded to requests for cooperation on pesticides.
It was also claimed that the US has engaged in restrictive and discriminatory practices in financial services and exchange rate issues.
In addition, Beijing emphasized that since joining the WTO in 2001, it has adhered to the principle of free trade and has strictly complied with WTO rules.
It was stated that in this process, more than 2,300 central laws, regulations, and rules, and more than 190,000 local regulations have been reviewed and revised.
It was stated that customs duty rates have been reduced in line with WTO commitments and have even been further reduced unilaterally in recent years.
It was argued that subsidies are provided within the framework of WTO rules and within reasonable limits, and that relevant notifications are made in a timely manner.
The white paper stated that accusations that China creates “overcapacity” and disrupts international markets with “non-market economic behaviors” such as subsidies are “irrational and untrue.”
It was emphasized that such claims are trade protectionism and will harm global supply chains.
On the other hand, it was noted that China is constantly improving its business environment, expanding market access for foreign investments, and treating all domestic and foreign businesses equally.
A significant part of the white paper was devoted to criticizing the US’s unilateral and protectionist policies. It was stated that Washington arbitrarily expanded the concept of “national security,” used export controls as a political weapon (especially in the fields of semiconductors and artificial intelligence), and applied Section 301 and Section 232 customs duties that clearly violate WTO rules.
It was pointed out that the WTO panel found Section 301 tariffs to be against the rules. It was noted that these tariffs did not solve the US trade deficit, but rather increased costs for US importers and consumers.
Similarly, it was stated that Section 232 tariffs applied to steel and aluminum products were used not for “national security” reasons, but to put pressure on other countries in negotiations.
It was warned that US attempts to remove China’s Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status violate WTO rules and would seriously damage bilateral relations.
It was stated that using the fentanyl issue as an excuse to increase customs duties is baseless and will not solve the problem.
Finally, it was pointed out that the “reciprocal customs duties” implemented by the US will harm both the US economy and global trade.
In the conclusion of the white paper, it was reiterated that China and the US are the world’s two largest economies and that cooperation between them is critical for global peace and development.
It was emphasized that it is natural for the two countries to have differences, but these should be resolved through equal dialogue and mutually beneficial cooperation rather than conflict.
Beijing, using the expressions “There are no winners in trade wars, and protectionism is a dead end,” called on the US side to move in the same direction as China, and to act in accordance with the principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation.
It was stated that the two countries can address their concerns through dialogue and jointly promote the healthy, stable, and sustainable development of bilateral economic and trade relations.
Asia
Analysts warn new surge in Chinese exports threatens global markets
Financial Times writer Ryan Avent has written that a fresh, rapid surge in China’s trade surplus could signal a new wave of the “China shock”.
Economists define the “China shock” as a spike in Chinese exports to global markets that intensifies competition for manufacturers in advanced economies and curtails employment in certain sectors.
The term gained widespread currency after China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, accelerating the inflow of inexpensive Chinese goods into the US and other nations.
The US was the country hit hardest by the initial shockwave. Between 1999 and 2011, more than 2 million jobs were lost because domestic producers were unable to withstand the competition.
Avent argued that the effects of the initial wave are still felt across the American economy because China failed to carry out the rebalancing that the world expected.
The share of net exports in China’s gross domestic product contracted during the 2007-2019 period, allowing Western nations to focus on national security and other matters.
Avent reported that the trade surplus is now escalating rapidly once again, posing a threat to the economies of wealthy nations.
The writer pointed to the stagnation of domestic demand following the collapse of the real estate market six years ago as one cause of this surplus. Another prominent factor is the Beijing government’s channelling of massive resources into manufacturing in pursuit of self-sufficiency.
Attention was also drawn to the role of the depreciating yuan. An appreciation of the currency could require China to alter its foreign exchange interventions, reduce purchases of foreign currency and assets, and sell those assets off. That scenario could trigger currency depreciation and rising interest rates in other countries.
The Wall Street Journal also reported in the spring of 2024 on economists’ concerns regarding a potential second wave.
Experts predicted that global markets would once again be flooded with inexpensive goods, stating that China was manufacturing far beyond domestic demand to overcome its economic troubles.
Moreover, it was stressed that China is now competing in high-technology fields such as automobiles, computer chips, and complex machinery manufacturing.
Meanwhile, Vasiliy Kashin, Director of the Centre for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics (HSE) University in Moscow, told the Russian media outlet RBC that the US has imposed sanctions on the Chinese economy since the first shock period, adding that these measures would very likely tighten in the event of a fresh export wave.
According to assessments reported by the Financial Times, this new process could also shake China’s own economy. Alongside rising output, entry-level manufacturing plants across the country are turning toward automation and reducing personnel.
This trend could trigger a painful departure from labour-intensive production, leaving millions unemployed. Manufacturing activities in China that previously capitalised on cheap labour are shifting to other Southeast Asian countries.
The Beijing administration rejected allegations that its industrialisation steps pose risks to other countries. As reported by the Xinhua news agency, China’s Ministry of Commerce stressed that claims of a “China shock 2.0” are groundless. The ministry stated:
“The US and other Western countries have circulated the so-called ‘China shock 2.0’ narrative, asserting that China’s industrial development has shaken Western monopolies and narrowed growth space for Global South countries. This claim is unsupported by concrete data and is entirely unfounded.”
Asia
Iran and China run secret barter network to bypass oil sanctions
Iran is operating a covert, barter-like trade mechanism to bypass sanctions on its oil sales and procure billions of dollars in goods from China, including military hardware.
Speaking to the Reuters news agency, two senior Iranian officials and three sources closely monitoring the matter said the Tehran administration receives credits for goods imported from China instead of cash in exchange for the oil it sells to the country.
The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, emphasised that this method of swapping oil revenues for Chinese goods provides an immediate financial lifeline to the Tehran government at a time when the US has intensified economic and military pressure over its nuclear programme.
China, the world’s largest crude importer, continues to access discounted Iranian oil through this arrangement while shielding its banks and exporting companies from the risk of international penalties.
Although the Washington administration has imposed sanctions on several small-scale Chinese entities facilitating the transport of Iranian oil, it avoids sweeping measures that could shake the global economy.
The US has stepped up its pressure as it seeks to reopen the Strait of Hormuz amid the ongoing war between the two countries.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last month that countries failing to cut commercial ties with Tehran would risk exclusion from the dollar system.
It remains unclear how the barter mechanism has been affected by the US naval blockade imposed on Iran as part of the six-month-old war.
However, since the reimposition of the blockade on 14 July, no shipments of Iranian oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz to China have been recorded.
Beijing and Tehran, which describe Western unilateral sanctions as illegal, refrain from disclosing publicly how they sustain their trade.
Sources state that Tehran introduced this system to obtain pharmaceuticals, vehicles, and communications equipment. Chinese manufacturers are said to have no direct contact with Iran, and there is no indication that they are violating sanctions.
On the other hand, the mechanism was utilised at least once last year under contracts supplying Iran with millions of dollars’ worth of air defence equipment. The sources provided no details regarding the shipments in question, and the transactions were not independently verified.
The United Nations conventional arms embargo returned alongside other sanctions in September 2025 following the collapse of the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers.
Tehran had withdrawn from the terms of the agreement, while Beijing and Tehran described the European nations’ automatic reimposition of sanctions as legally flawed.
Responding to questions from Reuters, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that it had no knowledge of the trade structure in question.
Beijing stated that it opposes unilateral sanctions lacking United Nations Security Council authorisation and having no basis in international law.
Iran’s diplomatic missions in New York and Geneva remained silent on the inquiries. A US official speaking on behalf of the White House stated only that they are working with international partners, including the EU, to prevent Tehran from achieving its nuclear goals.
According to data analytics company Kpler, China purchased more than 80% of the crude oil exported by Iran in 2025. This share equates to an average of 1.4 million barrels per day.
Although the two countries signed a 25-year strategic partnership agreement in 2021 covering energy and infrastructure, the operational details of their cooperation remain largely confidential.
The model in question constitutes only one of the networks through which Iran procures goods and services from China without passing through international banking channels.
A Western official and two other individuals tracking the matter said that a buyer acting on behalf of state-owned Chinese oil company Zhuhai Zhenrong deposited hundreds of millions of dollars each month until this year into ChuXin, a shadow financial entity based in China.
These deposits reportedly represent payment for oil purchased from a Hong Kong-based company linked to the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC).
Approximately 70% of the oil revenues routed through ChuXin is allocated to infrastructure projects in Iran. The remainder is transferred to the accounts of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) established to disburse payments to companies supplying goods to Iran.
Sources close to Iran’s decision-making apparatus confirm the existence of this financial mechanism.
Fund management is shared between a firm acting on behalf of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce and another entity linked to the Central Bank of Iran. When the Central Bank of Iran authorises importers, money transfers are directed to supplier firms. While the name ChuXin does not appear in official records, one source noted that the structure exists solely on balance sheets.
Andrea Ghiselli, an international politics specialist at the University of Exeter, stated that Beijing uses these indirect networks to demonstrate that it will not bow to US secondary sanction threats.
Highlighting that Chinese leaders aim to protect their own banks and firms from being pushed out of the global financial system, Ghiselli said: “They want to create deniability.”
Asia
China leads $54bn capital injection into state banks and insurers
China’s Ministry of Finance will lead a total capital injection of $54 billion into state-owned insurance companies and banks as part of a coordinated push to reinforce the capital structure across the country’s financial system, according to details disclosed by the institutions in statements on Sunday.
China Life Insurance (Group) Co, the country’s largest life insurer, will receive 35 billion yuan ($5.2 billion) in capital support, whilst China Taiping Insurance Group will receive 7 billion yuan.
In a separate announcement, People’s Insurance Company (Group) of China (PICC) said it plans to raise up to 15 billion yuan via a private placement of A-shares to the Ministry of Finance. The company stated that the proceeds will be used to replenish its capital.
The initiative could fortify the financial position of state insurers, which have been called upon to support the equity market with medium- and long-term funds. At the same time, it could position these institutions to help regulatory authorities manage smaller and higher-risk insurance companies.
Financial sector stability
China’s insurance industry has been contending with shrinking profitability caused by prolonged low interest rates. Solvency ratios across numerous small and medium-sized insurers have also deteriorated.
China Export and Credit Insurance Corp stated that the Ministry of Finance will inject 10 billion yuan to boost the company’s core capital. China Reinsurance (Group) announced that it will execute a capital increase of 3 billion yuan.
“The capital injection represents an important step for enhancing the financial sector’s capacity to serve the real economy and promoting high-quality development across the financial and insurance industries,” China Life said in a statement. The insurer added that the capital support will improve the group’s resilience to risks.
Taiping also noted that the funds provided will strengthen the company’s solvency and other core metrics.
Banks benefit from recapitalisation plan
Separately, three state banks announced on Sunday that they will receive capital support totalling 290 billion yuan.
The recapitalisation framework was first announced during the annual parliamentary meetings in March this year. The move broadens a funding mechanism deployed last year to strengthen the capital structures of several other major state-owned lenders.
Agricultural Bank of China and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), two of the country’s largest state-owned lenders, announced plans to raise up to 160 billion yuan and 100 billion yuan, respectively, through private placements of A-shares to the Ministry of Finance, China National Tobacco Corp, and affiliated entities.
Both lenders confirmed that all net proceeds will be deployed to replenish their Core Tier 1 capital. The measure is expected to help sustain credit expansion at a juncture when Beijing is increasingly relying on state lenders to support economic growth.
Weak credit demand remains a persistent headwind for the world’s second-largest economy, while continuing to erode profitability across the banking sector.
Export-Import Bank of China, one of the country’s three policy banks, stated that the Ministry of Finance will inject 30 billion yuan of capital into the institution, thereby bolstering its capital base.
-
Europe5 days agoGermany’s CDU drafts tougher citizenship rules to counter AfD
-
Russia2 weeks agoWhat to know about Russia’s upcoming State Duma elections?
-
Europe2 weeks agoMarine Le Pen leads all 2027 French presidential scenarios, poll shows
-
Diplomacy1 week agoGeoffrey Roberts sees Ukraine war concluding within coming months
-
Middle East2 weeks agoIran expands deterrence as Gulf strikes expose US munitions limits, analysts say
-
Europe1 week agoGerman industrial bosses push for return to 40-hour working week
-
Russia2 weeks agoRussia warns NATO over Arctic militarisation and conflict risks
-
Asia2 weeks agoBOJ faces critical rate decision as US presses for faster hikes
