American politicians have a long history of mangling economic-policy debates. Some recognize reality, like when George H.W. Bush characterized so-called supply-side tax cuts as “voodoo economics.” But far too many to distort economic statistics and analysis to score political points – think of “Modern Monetary Theory” or “deficit scolds.”

Despite is softer sound when compared with decoupling, de-risking will not enhance U.S. national security. Unexpected consequences will follow as countries grow more cautious in choosing trading partners. Nor will de-risking enhance U.S. competitiveness. Rather, it will hinder innovation and suppress productivity.

Redefining trade and economic relationships to achieve balance and prevent excessive dependence in strategic sectors has emerged as a key protectionist policy and geopolitical tool among major global powers. And while policies like dumping, dual circulation, security and development, or decoupling and de-risking, all share a common objective, each major power must determine its own mechanisms for course correction.

A change to softer rhetoric by the United States seems aimed at placating its domestic business community, but the ultimate objective of containing China hasn’t changed. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said there’s a big difference. We shall wait and see.

James F. Downes, Mathew Wong and Man Hoo So argue that the EU-China relationship has evolved considerably over recent years into a growing global rivalry in 2023. They argue that whilst the EU has become more interventionist towards China in 2023, there exists large divisions within the core EU institutions alongside EU member states towards relations with China.

Adjustments in European and American strategies may offer hope for a return to normal relations with China. The EU and U.S. should dump their political prejudices against China, take care of the common security of the world, try to remove risks and truly cooperate with China.

Hiroshima highlighted the decline of Western influence in global economic governance. The group’s inherent inadequacy arises from the desperate effort by a small group of member nations to maintain their dominant position in the world.