Changes

m
→‎The Trump Doctrine: clean up, typos fixed: wouldn’t → wouldn't
Line 10: Line 10:  
Coercing those countries into subordinating themselves to the [[US]] (whether by [[tariff]]s, force, [[subversion]], etc.) would result in [[Trump 2.0]] obtaining influence over their [[energy]] [[export]]s and [[trade]] ties, which could be [[weapon]]ized to pressure [[China]]. What the US wants from China is for it to agree to a lopsided [[trade]] deal that would then be replicated with the [[EU]] and the US; other partners for, as the new [[2025 National Security Strategy]] states, "rebalanc[ing] [[China]]'s [[economy]] towards household consumption".
 
Coercing those countries into subordinating themselves to the [[US]] (whether by [[tariff]]s, force, [[subversion]], etc.) would result in [[Trump 2.0]] obtaining influence over their [[energy]] [[export]]s and [[trade]] ties, which could be [[weapon]]ized to pressure [[China]]. What the US wants from China is for it to agree to a lopsided [[trade]] deal that would then be replicated with the [[EU]] and the US; other partners for, as the new [[2025 National Security Strategy]] states, "rebalanc[ing] [[China]]'s [[economy]] towards household consumption".
   −
The implied goal is to coerce China into correcting its overproduction, which is responsible for its unprecedented global exports that displaced [[the West]]'s leading role in world trade and led to enormous influence over the [[Global South]], thus restoring the West's global market share and influence. Such a radical policy change would have major [[economic]] and therefore [[political]] repercussions that could destabilize China, not to mention ending its superpower rise, so it wouldn’t be done voluntarily.
+
The implied goal is to coerce China into correcting its overproduction, which is responsible for its unprecedented global exports that displaced [[the West]]'s leading role in world trade and led to enormous influence over the [[Global South]], thus restoring the West's global market share and influence. Such a radical policy change would have major [[economic]] and therefore [[political]] repercussions that could destabilize China, not to mention ending its superpower rise, so it wouldn't be done voluntarily.
    
{{DEFAULTSORT:Colby, Elbridge}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Colby, Elbridge}}
Block, SkipCaptcha, apieditor, Automoderated users, Bots, edit, ratelimit-exempt
59,485

edits