Values laid out by China and the United States — equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit — will keep trade tensions under control through practical results and stabilize the important trade relationship.
The Geneva agreement on May 11 between China and the United States gave the world a breather. As mutual tariffs were scaled down by 91 percent each way and another 24 percent were suspended for 90 days, phone calls suddenly exploded between Chinese suppliers and American buyers, with cargo shipments to North America booking up immediately in Shanghai, Ningbo, Shenzhen and other leading Chinese ports.
In Washington, leading U.S. business organizations lost no time launching the China Business Conference to convince the Trump administration to secure China’s business future. Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, visited China 10 days after the Geneva meetings and expressed a desire for further investment in China to He Lifeng, the Chinese vice premier.
Events in Geneva were a remarkable success. Most of U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs were scrapped or suspended, kicking off the bilateral trade again. But the fundamental significance goes far beyond, signifying the initial success of the WTO multilateral trading system, the core of which is non-discrimination. It specified tariff rates through negotiations and banned unilateral tariffs on fellow members. China insisted that Trump’s unilateral tariffs were illegal and must be removed as a precondition of trade talks.
The U.S. side, while not scrapping all unilateral tariffs, did take a step in that direction. Before Geneva, China had sued the U.S. over its so-called reciprocal tariffs, accusing it of violating WTO rules. The U.S. accepted consultation with China as the first step toward resolution.
Geneva was also an initial success in relation to the basic principles of the China-U.S. bilateral relationship — equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit. The Geneva discussion itself illustrated the equal status of both. The U.S. side did not force China to yield before scaling down the tariffs. Instead, it was the U.S., not China, that requested the meeting. The U.S. removed or suspended tariffs first, and China did the same in reciprocity. Both sides deemed their bilateral business relationship necessary and agreed a consultation mechanism.
Support of WTO rules and basic principles in the China-U.S. bilateral relationship were the main value of the Geneva talks, signifying not only its initial success but also laying out a pathway for tackling the remaining issues and key concerns.
The current tariff cut is not complete, as levels are still too high. The U.S. only removed 91 percent and suspended 24 percent of the tariffs imposed after April 2 (the reciprocal tariffs), keeping only 10 percent of its worldwide base tariff. It did not remove the 20 percent fentanyl-related tariff nor the tariff imposed during the first Trump term that averaged 15.3 percent, according to U.S. Customs.
Combined, the current tariff level on Chinese goods shipped to the U.S. is 45.3 percent, enough to stop or cut imports from China, depending on the products. According to Chinese Customs, the export volume from China to the U.S. averaged $38.5 billion per month during the first quarter of this year, before Trump’s reciprocal tariffs were applied. It was already considerably lower than the monthly average of $43.7 billion in 2024, and that, in turn, was much lower than the historic high of $48.5 billion in 2022. It fell drastically to $33 billion in April, after the 145 percent tariff was imposed, and is expected to pick up greatly from May assuming that no 24 percent tariff resumes. But it’s unlikely to hit the 2024 level and will probably remain far from the historic high.
On the other side, U.S. exports to China averaged only $12.9 billion per month during the January-April period of 2025, far from its historic high of $ 14.8 billion monthly in 2022.
It is a high priority for China to address and remove the remaining tariffs. Again, WTO rules, equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit are the only base. Just one week after the Geneva meeting, Washington was in a hurry to forget the value. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on May 18 — a mere week after Geneva —that if no agreement is reached during the 90 days, the U.S. will resume its 24 percent tariff on China. This follows the model of the U.S. worldwide reciprocal tariffs, negotiating with other trading partners and the U.S. setting the final tariff rate unilaterally, depending on the yields of the partner.
Apparently, it is still a unilateral tariff, not a WTO rules-based one. It also shows a presumed unequal relationship, with U.S. demanding and China yielding. So China will undoubtedly insist on an unconditional removal of all tariffs and retaliate if the U.S. side does not. In that eventuality, tariffs will escalate again, and the trade war will be revived. But what can Washington get? Nothing. American importers and consumers will fall into chaos again.
The U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security, or BIS, moved even faster. On May 13, two days after Geneva, it announced a global ban of the Huawei Ascend 910 chip, threatening sanctions on all world suppliers who ship to Huawei, thus escalating the high-tech ban on China.
Again, this move went against the Geneva values, as it both contravened WTO rules and the basic principles of the China-U.S. relationship. It was no surprise that China rebuffed this, with retaliatory global sanctions on suppliers following the ban. Again, technology control should be on the agenda of the bilateral consultation, as set up at Geneva, and be handled on the basis of equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit.
The Fentanyl issue should also be a high priority in subsequent bilateral consultations. Again, the 20 percent tariff is against WTO rules and must be dropped. China and the U.S. should, through equal consultation, agree on the specific measures for joint efforts to stop the flow fentanyl. If successful, the fentanyl issue will change to a positive case showing what both countries can achieve through equal and mutual beneficial collaboration.
There should be more equal, mutual respect, and mutual benefit dialogues and consultations between the two sides on all issues of mutual concern, including trade and investment expansion, industrial policies, intellectual property rights, reducing the U.S. trade deficit, etc. — and hopefully on selected deals on two-way trade in the pipeline.
The Geneva value of adherence to WTO rules and basic principles in the China-U.S. bilateral relationship — equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit — will keep trade tensions under control by solving more hot issues and getting more practical results, thus stabilizing the trade relationship between the world two largest economies and benefiting the peoples of the two countries and the world over.
