Trump’s New Trade Policy:Concepts, Agendas and Constraints

During the 2016 US presidential election campaign, Donald Trump identified trade policy reforms along with taxation, regulatory policy reforms and energy policy reforms as the four major reforms in his economic plan. He also put forward a roadmap for the reforms in trade policy. Since taking office, the Trump administration has gradually fulfilled the campaign promises on trade issues, including withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement, nominating a hawkish head in charge of trade, promoting renegotiation on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), strengthening law enforcement on trade,etc. After a year in power, the foreign trade policy framework of the Trump administration has taken shape, and a series of new policies have been introduced. Accurately understanding and evaluating the administration’s trade concepts, agendas and their internal contradictions is of great significance in grasping the trend of US foreign trade policy.

事实上，印刷工业的服务对象已拓展到各行各业，广告、标签、票证、磁卡、标牌、电路板、显示屏、织品、陶瓷、玻璃、建筑、家装，等等。印刷，可谓无处不在。“印刷的使命，就是传承文明，传递美丽”，徐建国理事长坚定地告诉我们，印刷行业是朝阳产业，但“具体技术、商业模式会发生变化”。

Basic Concepts of Trump’s Trade Policy

Trade policy reform is an important part of the Trump administration’s economic plan, and reflects the economic concepts of President Trump himself and his policy team. The Trump administration regards the increase of domestic investment and net exports as a prerequisite for economic growth, and argues that economic globalization and the failure of previous administrations in trade, tax, regulatory and energy policies have led to a decline in US domestic manufacturing investment and long-term negative net exports. Therefore, in order to address the shrinking manufacturing industry and the large trade deficits, the US needs to implement a series of structural reforms, including trade reforms.

Crux of US economic problem lies in declining domestic investment and large trade deficits

Trump’s trade policy team believes that among the four factors that drive a country’s GDP growth, namely consumption, government spending, investment and exports, domestic investment can improve the total economic output while outbound investment only provides employment and tax revenues for foreign countries. They also believe that negative net exports will erode a country’s total economic size, so that reducing trade deficits is conducive to economic growth.1 Peter Navarro, “Why the White House Worries About Trade Deficits,” The Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition), March 6, 2017, A.17; Peter Navarro and Wilbur Ross, “Scoring the Trump Economic Plan: Trade,Regulatory, and Energy Policy Impacts,” Donald Trump website, September 29, 2016, p.5, https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Trump_Economic_Plan.pdf. Over the past 15 years, the decline of US economic growth rate has been primarily due to structural problems in investment (especially in non-residential fixed investment) and net exports. The relocation of a large number of factories, a decline in domestic investment and long-term negative net exports have all directly contributed to the reduction of GDP growth,brought about a continual decrease of job opportunities in manufacturing,and led to a sharp rise in government debt and even the outbreak of financial crisis.2 Robert E. Lighthizer, “Evaluating China’s Role in the World Trade Organization over the Past Decade,”Testimony before the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, June 9, 2010, p.15. In the view of the Trump administration, the decline in domestic investment and the long-term negative net exports are not only a periodic phenomenon caused by macroeconomic factors such as an ageing population, reduction of the labor force and a low savings rate, but are also a problem caused by economic globalization and the policy mistakes of previous administration.

The mainstream school of economic studies believes that economic globalization, through the trans-national flow of products, capital and people, can improve the level of international division of labor and the efficient allocation of productive factors, and promote overall growth of the world economy and the productivity of all countries. In the view of Trump’s economic policy team, however, economic globalization over the past decades has greatly constrained the growth of US domestic investment, enlarged the US trade deficits and seriously damaged the US economy, especially the manufacturing sector. Before the 1980s, US enterprises substituted capital for labor in domestic factories to improve productive efficiency, but with the acceleration of globalization, more and more American businesses have tried to maximize their profits by moving their factories and production bases to countries with lower costs. This large-scale relocation has not only reduced domestic investment and GDP growth, but also further increased America’s trade deficits by importing more products from these factories. Although globalization has stimulated US exports, yet the growth rate of imported goods has far exceeded the growth rate of exports. During his campaign, Trump put forward the slogan of “American economic independence.” He advocated the slowdown of globalization, and emphasized economic sovereignty and reduced dependence on foreign economies. This is largely due to his belief that current economic globalization is not beneficial to the US.3 Donald J. Trump, “Declaring American Economic Independence,” speech at the Alumisource Factory in Monessen, Pennsylvania, June 28, 2016.

Economic globalization is main cause of declining domestic investment and increasing trade deficits

学生对学校多媒体教学环境总体满意。多媒体教学能形象、生动地展现教学内容，教学效果极佳。但若使用不当，会适得其反，这是教学过程中值得探讨的问题。

随着人口数量的增长，城市的基础设施、住房、交通、教育等方面的发展均面临着巨大挑战。各国政府十分关注城市发展规划与环境之间的协调关系。随着数字城市、云计算、物联网及移动互联网技术的发展，智慧城市俨然成为当今社会发展的一个前沿话题。“中国制造2025”国家战略规划中提到了物联网，认为它是实现智慧化城市建设的技术基础。借助物联网，有利于提高智慧城市水平，为居民创造更好的生活。

基于需要层次论和当代大学生的现状，可将社交需要和尊重需要作为激励因素，突出沙盘实训课程对学生社交需要和尊重需要的满足。根据ERG理论，可突出沙盘实训课程对学生相互关系和谐的需要和成长需要的作用。根据双因素理论，学习本身的收获和乐趣及被同学、老师所认可，可作为激励学生学习积极性的动力。根据成就需要理论，在沙盘实训课程中，追求经营成功，把事情做好的成就需要；承担责任、影响他人、参与竞争的权力需要以及团队合作、沟通理解的归属需要都能得到很好的体现。

Failed trade policy adds to globalization shock on US economy

Trump’s policy team believes that bad trade agreements signed by the United States and widespread unfair trade practices abroad have impeded the rebalance of trade. In their view, Washington has been dominated by a group of internationalists who supported economic globalization, and their trade policy is a complete failure, resulting in the US accession to a number of bad trade agreements and connivance in discriminatory policies by its main trading partners. As US Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross said, “The decline in US manufacturing employment and the fall in US productivity,and associated slower US growth rates and stagnant wages, have ... been greatly accelerated and amplified by a series of bad trade deals and chronic currency misalignments that prevent trade from coming back into balance.”4 Wilbur Ross, “Trump Campaign Benefits from Criticism of Trade Imbalances,” Financial Times, August 29, 2016, p.11. In addition, the Trump administration also feels that most countries have failed to adopt market-based economic policies. Mercantilism and “cheating”in trade are prevalent worldwide, making trade a zero-sum game. In their view, the previous US administrations were indifferent to the massive unfair trade practices and were remiss in taking decisive measures to deal with them,thus resulting in other countries gaining asymmetrical benefits from trade and achieving faster economic growth than the US.

Tougher trade policy needed to promote economic growth

我期待这一天的到来，我渴望早日回报父母的养育之恩，我要让三爹和母亲看到，我今生有幸做他们的儿子，是一件多么值得骄傲的事情。

Objectives and Priorities of Trump’s Trade Policy

The Trump administration aims to increase investment in domestic manufacturing, eliminate long-run trade deficits and achieve 3% annual economic growth through the implementation of trade policy reforms based on the principle of “America First.” In imports, it will strictly enforce US trade laws to prevent a distorted domestic market caused by foreign dumping, subsidies and other unfair practices; in exports, it hopes to overcome foreign market barriers and expand US exports to the world; in the area of international trade rules, it is intent on preventing other countries’interpretation of trade rules that would do harm to American interests, and will work to update the rules in line with evolving US interests. Over the past year, the Trump administration has established the following four priorities to achieve the above objectives:

Strengthening punishment for “unfair trade practices”

Since the establishment of the WTO, successive US administrations have actively supported the organization’s role in managing global trade and promoting trade liberalization, including supporting other economies’accession to the WTO and strictly implementing the rulings made through the dispute settlement mechanism. However, the Trump administration thinks that multilateral trade mechanisms, as represented by the WTO,are promoted and established by a “pro-establishment” camp, and that these mechanisms allow the asymmetry between rights and duties and have become increasingly bureaucratic bodies that often adjudicate against US interests, and thus seriously handicap its unilateral trade actions.5 Shawn Donnan, “Trade Shake-up: Why the US President Has Taken Aim at WTO,” Financial Times,March 3, 2017, p.6. Because of its suspicion of the WTO and its desire to eliminate the shackles of WTO rules, the Trump administration strongly emphasizes the US prerogative in taking unilateral actions and objects to other countries’ restrictions on the US trade policy through the WTO dispute settlement mechanism.

In order to bypass the WTO mechanism, the Trump administration,shortly after taking office, instructed the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) to draft a list of legal mechanisms which the US could resort to in imposing unilateral sanctions on its trade partners.6 Shawn Donnan and Demetri Sevastopulo, “US Looks to Bypass WTO Dispute System,” Financial Times, February 27, 2017, p.4. Considering that other countries might sue the US over such actions through the WTO, Trump even threatened to withdraw from the WTO if the organization obstructed the US from maintaining the interests of its domestic industries and workers. Although the US is less likely to quit the WTO, this stance shows that the Trump administration tends to define this multilateral mechanism from a much narrower perspective, regarding the WTO as a reflection of the collective will of its members rather than an independent institution in global economic governance. In the annual trade policy agenda released in March 2017, the Trump administration specifically cited the WTO and domestic legal provisions in pointing out that the United States had clearly defined the WTO’s role in the management of international trade during the Uruguay Round negotiations, and stressed that rulings made by the WTO dispute settlement bodies should not automatically lead to legal or behavioral changes by WTO members,including the US. The document indicated that “no provision of any of the Uruguay Round agreements, or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, that is inconsistent with any law of the United States shall have effect.”7 Office of the United States Trade Representative, The President’s 2017 Trade Policy Agenda, March 2017, p.3.

In order to get rid of the constraints from multilateral trade regulations, the Trump administration has changed the “strong binding”position on trade rules upheld for decades, and sought ways to weaken the multilateral dispute settlement system. The United States Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer spoke highly of the effectiveness of the non-binding dispute settlement system under the GATT framework, and believed that the compulsory dispute settlement mechanism under the WTO framework went beyond the mandate given by WTO members,so that reforms of the WTO are now needed.8 Robert Lighthizer, “U.S. Trade Policy Priorities,” keynote remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, September 18, 2017, https://www.csis.org/analysis/us-trade-policy-priorities-robertlighthizer-united-states-trade-representative. In addition, in recent renegotiations on NAFTA, the US has also sought to establish an advisory rather than a mandatory dispute settlement mechanism, and is trying to set up a “sunset provision” in NAFTA, which stipulates that the agreement would be automatically terminated after five years unless all three signatories agree to renew the deal.9 Jenny Leonard, “U.S. NAFTA Sunset Proposal Ties Termination to Trade Deficit, Sources Say,” Inside US Trade, Vol. 35, Issue 39, September 29, 2017, p.5.

Getting rid of constraints from multilateral trade rules

如图8所示,设相控阵偏转聚焦的焦点与法线的夹角为θ，超声换能器的阵元数目为n,相邻阵元中心间距为d,焦距为F,tn为第n个阵元的激励时间,则晶片位置、延迟、焦距和偏转角度应该满足以下关系式:

The Trump administration believes that the current global economy has been distorted by unfair non-market behaviors, and that widespread subsidization, currency manipulation, and intellectual property theft have constituted “economic aggression” against the US. The “unfair trade practices” have seriously damaged the interests of US workers, farmers and enterprises, and posed threats to American national security. Therefore,strict implementation of trade laws is required to “counter unfair trade practices” which violate international rules.10 The White House, National Security Strategy of the United States of America, December 2017, pp.19-20. In this respect, the countries which have large trade deficits with the US become the main targets.

显性渗透。如湘教版地理必修二第四章第二节人地关系思想的演变，介绍了现代人地关系的发展。引用了德国地理学家拉采尔、法国地理学家白兰士等地理学家的观点理论，或直接引入地理学中的一些经典理论，如“和谐论”“中心地理论”等经典理论。

Since taking office, the Trump administration has frequently resorted to trade enforcement measures such as anti-dumping and countervailing investigations to combat so-called unfair trade practices. From the time Trump took office to mid-April 2017, the US Department of Commerce launched 24 such investigations on imported steel, chemicals, timber, and rubber products with a value of over US$2.3 billion, and made preliminary or final rulings on 34 investigations impacting more than $3.6 billion of imports.11 U.S. Department of Commerce, “Statement of U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross on Today’s Trade Enforcement Actions,” April 18, 2017, https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2017/04/statement-us-secretary-commerce-wilbur-ross-todays-trade-enforcement. In order to raise the anti-dumping tariff, the US Commerce Department, for the first time, invoked Section 504 of the 2015 Trade Preferences Extension Act, and has adopted a more rigorous approach when assessing dumping margins.12 U.S. Department of Commerce, “Department of Commerce Finds Dumping of Oil Country Tubular Goods from the Republic of Korea in Groundbreaking Ruling,” April 11, 2017, https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2017/04/department-commerce-finds-dumping-oil-country-tubular-goods-republi. In terms of investigation procedure, the Trump administration has also initiated more active trade relief procedures by changing the past practice under which investigation applications were submitted by domestic corporations or labor organizations.13 Wilbur Ross, “Free and Fair Trade for American Workers and Business,” April 13, 2017, https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2017/04/13/free-and-fair-trade-american-workers-and-businesses. At the end of November 2017, the Commerce Department announced anti-dumping and countervailing investigations into imports of China’s aluminum alloy products, the first ever self-initiated investigation in more than a quarter century. Because traditional trade relief measures are time-consuming and must meet certain standards, the Trump administration favors some unusual approaches, including levying direct tariffs through executive orders or tax reform, opening national security investigations into imported steel and aluminum products by invoking Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act, and launching intellectual property rights and technology transfer investigations into China’s trade practices by invoking Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act.

In order to enhance law enforcement in trade, in his budget plan to the Congress for the 2018 fiscal year, Trump significantly increased funding to those trade enforcement divisions such as the International Trade Administration under the Commerce Department and the Bureau of International Labor Affairs under the Labor Department.14 Executive Office of the President of the United States, Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the U.S. Government: A New Foundation for American Greatness, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2018-BUD/pdf/BUDGET-2018-BUD.pdf. On March 31, 2017, Trump signed two executive orders to crack down on violations of trade and customs law and to ensure a thorough collection of antidumping and countervailing tariffs. He also instructed the Commerce Department to coordinate with other agencies in making an overall assessment of the US trade deficits and other countries’ violation of trade rules, so as to provide evidence for stepped-up trade law enforcement in the future.

②建立主管部门牵头、有关部门参加的联席会议制度，定期分析会商水环境监管情况，建立统一、高效、协调的监管机制。

Proceeding from the conservative concept of small government and big market, the Trump administration opposes excessive expansion of government power, restricts government intervention in the market, and has put forward a plan to reform the US regulatory system. However, Trump’s trade measures, aimed at promoting a return of manufacturing to the US and reduction of trade deficits, represents a continuous intervention on players in the market, which runs counter to the government regulatory reform he proposed. In order to reduce the burden on enterprises and consumers,Trump has also cut the corporate and personal income taxes. However,the measures that strength trade relief and increase tariffs on imported goods will inevitably lead to higher prices for imported intermediate and consumer goods, thereby placing a heavier burden on US companies and consumers. Although the practice to encourage enterprises to move their overseas factories back to the US through financial support and tax subsidies is attractive, the cost of moving back is too high to be sustainable, and local and federal governments will have to shoulder greater fiscal burdens,which runs contrary to the cost-cutting goal the administration pursues.In addition, some protective trade measures of Trump will also disrupt the regional and global supply chains in various sectors, and weaken the international competitiveness of US enterprises, which is unfavorable for the revitalization of American manufacturing.

Since taking office, the Trump administration has taken various measures to promote exports. For example, an undersecretary for trade and foreign agricultural affairs was created under the Department of Agriculture to help expand the export of agricultural products; and despite opposition within the Republican Party, the administration submitted its nomination for the leader and board members of the US Export-Import Bank in order to support the bank’s greater role in promoting American exports. Believing that there are long-term tariff and non-tariff barriers which restrict US exports to the overseas market, the Trump administration has made it clear that it would overcome trade barriers through tougher measures and strive for more market access for American business, including threatening withdrawal from the US-ROK free trade agreement to pressure South Korea to cancel nontariff barriers on imported cars. Trump has also publicly attacked Canada on the country’s dairy supply management mechanism, and launched a “Section 301” investigation against China regarding intellectual property rights protection and technology transfer. Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act will become a powerful tool for the Trump administration to force open overseas markets to American exports. According to the legal authorization of Section 301, the US can investigate trade barriers and violations of trade rules by other countries, and retaliate against those countries which discriminate or damage the interests of American exports, including suspension of or even withdrawal from trade agreements, and imposing tariffs or quotas on foreign imports. While the section was an important means of opening up markets in Japan, the European Union, Brazil and India in the 1980s, Washington has been more reliant on the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism in dealing with its accession to overseas markets since 1995. Now, due to lack of trust in the WTO, the Tump administration is again more inclined to invoke Section 301, and force its trading partners to make concessions on market access by means of unilateral pressures.

因此，在确定体育赛事权属的同时，如何分配体育赛事转播权所产生的收益，也是需要明确的一大法律问题；而这一问题又与垄断问题密切相关。

The readjustment of Trump’s trade policy, to a large extent, reflects the return of American traditional economic nationalism, that is, putting more emphasis on manufacturing, economic sovereignty and trade protectionist policies. Drawing on the experience of the Reagan administration, Trump also wants to maintain the competitiveness of the US economy by taking more offensive and tougher measures on trade issues. Trump’s trade policy caters to the domestic populist demands, and is supported by the traditional manufacturing industry and trade unions from the northeastern region as well as some Democrats in the Congress. However, the logic and practices of Trump’s trade policy contain multiple inherent contradictions, which will greatly impede the implementation of his agenda.

Reviewing negotiated trade agreements

The Trump administration believes that the real effects of most trade agreements signed by the US since the late 1980s have been contrary to their intended results, and have led to a huge increase in trade deficits and a great loss of manufacturing jobs. Therefore, it is necessary to review those trade agreements, including withdrawing from or renegotiating the “bad”agreements, and achieve more favorable trade agreements through tough and smart negotiations.

To this end, Trump signed an executive order in late April 2017,instructing the Department of Commerce and the USTR to conduct a comprehensive reassessment of trade agreements and relations between the US and those WTO members with whom the US have huge deficits.The first round of negotiations on the revision of NAFTA, which covers strengthening of intellectual property rights protection, supervision and regulation, government procurement, labor, environment, digital trade and state-owned enterprises, started in mid-August 2017, which, if successful,would become a template for revising other agreements like the US-ROK free trade agreement. In the National Security Strategy released in December the same year, the Trump administration made it clear that it wanted to reshape and reform the WTO to ensure that the organization would improve its efficiency and ability in its rulings on “unfair” trade practices.17 The White House, National Security Strategy of the United States of America, 2017, pp. 40-41.

Concerning the approach of negotiation, out of a belief that multilateral negotiations will weaken its bargaining power, the Trump administration has insisted on seeking better terms for American businesses and workers through bilateral rather than multilateral means. Soon after taking office,Trump announced a permanent withdrawal from the TPP, and instructed the USTR to start bilateral talks to “promote American industry, protect American workers, and raise American wages.”18 The White House, “Presidential Memorandum Regarding Withdrawal of the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations and Agreement,” January 23, 2017, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-25/pdf/2017-01845.pdf. After the US withdrew from the TPP, the administration started bilateral talks with Japan, Vietnam and other Asia-Pacific countries in order to replace the regional trade agreement.19 Jenny Leonard and Jack Caporal, “Navarro Outlines Trade Priorities to Finance, Ways and Means Lawmakers,” Inside US Trade, Vol. 35, No. 7, February 17, 2017, p.2. Because of its deep suspicion of the multilateral approach, Trump and his policy advisers once even expressed intention to start bilateral talks with individual EU member states to replace the negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). They also adopted a positive attitude towards bilateral trade negotiations with the UK after its exit from the EU.

Internal Contradictions of Trump’s Trade Policy

Since the end of World War II, for the sake of its global strategic interests, the US has often made asymmetric concessions to its allies and strategic partners on market access, and supported the most-favorednation treatment under the GATT/WTO framework. However, the Trump administration believes that such unilateral trade liberalization has dragged down the US economy and prevented other countries from opening their markets to the US. To this end, the Trump administration focuses on mutual benefits and reciprocity in promoting access to foreign markets.As Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross put it, “if we have a country that has big trade barriers against us, we should logically have similar trade barriers against them. And if there’s a country that has relatively few barriers against us, we should have relatively few against them.”15 The White House, “Press Briefing by Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross on Executive Order on Trade Agreement Violations and Abuses,” April 4, 2017, https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/04/28/press-briefing-secretary-commerce-wilbur-ross-executive-order-trade; “Trump Administration and World Financial Officials Clash Over Trade,” Reuters, April 21, 2017, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-imf-g20/worries-over-trump-policies-cloud-start-of-imf-world-bank-meetings-idUSKBN17M0EP. Trump himself has also repeatedly claimed that he would achieve fair trade by forcing other countries to reduce tariffs through “the protective policy.”16 The White House, “Remarks by President Trump in Joint Address to Congress,” February 28, 2017,https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-joint-address-congress. In order to retain its right to exert pressures on other countries through trade protectionist actions, the Trump administration has refused to have“opposition to protectionism” written into the communiqués of the G20 and G7 meetings of finance ministers and central bank governors held in the first half of 2017.

Misunderstanding relationship between trade deficits and manufacturing development

In the view of the Trump administration, trade deficit and decline in investment, especially the relocation of manufacturing abroad, reflects the weakening of the US economy, which needs to be rectified through economic reforms, including readjustment of the trade policy. However,economic analyses have shown that trade deficit under the current account goes hand in hand with capital surplus under the capital account, and the countries that enjoy trade surplus with the US tend to invest their export revenues in real estate, factories, equipment and financial assets of the US,among which most investment does not require repayment as seen in debt.In addition, trade deficit, in many cases, is a sign of economic prosperity,which means strong purchasing power of a country’s currency and consumer demand. In fact, most economic prosperity in the US history appeared at a time when the country’s trade deficits rapidly increased. The US had a trade surplus during most of the 1930s, but the economy in that period was very much depressed.20 “How to Think About the Trade Deficit,” The Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition), March 10, 2017,A.14.

Manufacturing employment in the US is currently at a low level compared to the total number of workers employed, but the manufacturing output is at a record high. In fact, the manufacturing industries transferred from the US to other countries are mainly low value-added ones, which is a result of international division of labor based on factor endowments in different countries in the context of global economic integration.Considering that the overall unemployment rate of the US is not high,if some low value-added manufacturing industries were forced back to the US, it would immediately lead to rising labor costs, and compel enterprises to increase inputs into automated production in order to offset the costs,causing greater structural labor problems in the long run.21 Erik Kobayashi-Solomon, “Donald Trump’s ‘Investment’ Strategy Doomed to Failure,” Forbes,December 7, 2016, https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkobayashisolomon/2016/12/07/donald-trumpsinvestment-strategy-doomed-to-failure/#58729c901538. Therefore, while Trump’s victory in the presidential election was largely due to support from low-income voters along the “rust belt” because of his commitment to bringing back manufacturing jobs to the US, the implementation of his trade policy may ultimately hurt the interests of these voters.

郝桂芹匆匆洗漱一下,就拿起遥控器,找她每日必看的韩剧了。卢一平打开文档,准备接着炮制那个不娱他人只娱自己的小中篇了。这段时间,由于事杂心乱,这篇东西在手头儿已经搁置多日了。卢一平打算连开几个夜车,一口气把它整出来算了。整一会儿,没整出什么名堂。卢一平觉得今晚的心绪特乱,乱得就像乌鱼触脚一样,无法收拢。他扶着健盘,试图着梳理一下思绪。梳一会儿,没梳出什么名堂。总感到心里头有股暗流,在无法按捺地往来涌动。这种涌动,不受节制,不受调理,无羁无绊,无止无歇。带给他的,是心浮气躁,是思绪烦乱。卢一平叹口气,点燃一支烟,感到今晚很难再有好的状态了。于是,他推开键盘,走出书房,来到阳台了。

Protectionist measures not helpful in removing trade deficits and reviving US manufacturing

The Trump administration hopes to eliminate trade deficits and promote manufacturing investment by strengthening enforcement of trade laws, increasing tariffs, restricting imports and carrying out bilateral trade negotiations. These propositions are politically attractive, but they will not help achieve the desired goals; instead they may even harm the American economy. Since trade deficits emerge mainly through a variety of macroeconomic factors such as domestic private savings, investment and government spending, narrowing deficits with individual countries will not achieve the goal of slashing overall deficits unless the root cause of trade imbalance is resolved.22 Stephen Roach, “Trump Is Suffering from Trade Deficit Disorder,” Financial Times, March 8, 2017,p.13; Martin Wolf, “The Folly of Donald Trump’s Bilateralism in Global Trade,” Financial Times, March 14,2017, p.9; Joseph E. Gagnon, “We Know What Causes Trade Deficits,” Trade & Investment Policy Watch,Peterson Institute for International Economics, April 7, 2017, https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investmentpolicy-watch/we-know-what-causes-trade-deficits. Besides, due to the trade diversion effect,bilateral trade arrangements can only affect the sectoral and geographical distribution of deficits, but will not fundamentally eliminate the deficits.

To prevent the relocation of US enterprises, Trump, soon after taking office, warned those enterprises which have transferred their businesses overseas that he would punish the transferred factories by increasing tariffs and restricting access to government procurement. In order to get more government subsidies and support on issues such as reducing corporate tax and relaxing regulation, some companies in automobile, household appliance and toy industries have revealed plans to increase domestic investment or suspend relocating factories abroad. Judging from the market feedback,however, the decision of enterprises on investment destination is still based on consideration about production cost and sales demand. It is difficult for the Trump administration to block the transnational production strategy of US enterprises with the trade policy tool.23 Danielle Paquette, “Trump Said He Would Save Jobs at Carrier, The Layoffs Start July 20,” The Washington Post, May 24, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/05/24/here-is-thenumber-of-jobs-carrier-is-moving-to-mexico-after-trump-said-hed-save-them.

In response to a declining domestic investment and rocketing trade deficits in the US economy, the Trump administration advocates not only reforms in taxation, regulatory and energy policies, but also a comprehensive readjustment of trade policy. In order to slow down corporate relocation and eliminate long-standing deficits, the Trump administration has begun to change the passive trade policies pursued by previous administrations,and adopted more aggressive and tougher measures, including branding“free trade” as purely an “ivory tower theory,” and taking more proactive and frequent protective measures to help the development of American manufacturing industry; in the fight against unfair trade practices, it puts more emphasis on bypassing the WTO and resorting to unilateral trade sanctions against other countries; and in its endeavor to change the current trade rules and sign beneficial trade deals, it uses bilateral rather than multilateral negotiations to maximize the US influence.

Conflicts with other economic reforms

Expanding overseas markets with tough measures

Trump’s restriction of imports and threaten to bypass the WTO and impose unilateral sanctions on trade partners will also invite other countries to follow suit and take countermeasures, including restricting the import of American agricultural products, high technology and high value-added industrial products and services, and making themselves less dependent on American goods. Under such circumstances, trade Frictions in the world will surely intensify, and may even be likely to evolve into a trade war, thus inevitably dragging down the world economy. If the Trump administration could focus on tax cuts, infrastructure and regulatory reforms in the next few years, the US economic growth rate would reach 3-4%. However, if a trade war similar to that in the 1930s was launched,all the achievements would be ruined.24 Robert J. Barro, “How to Engineer a Trump Boom,” The Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition), March 28, 2017, A.17. Therefore, even though some industries in the US could profit from trade protection, the entire US economy would have to pay a heavy price.

Constraints from Domestic Politics

Since the US Constitution gives the president great power in foreign affairs, and the Congress over the past century has, through legislation,granted the president considerable authority in making trade policies,Trump has relatively great power and a wide range of policy tools at hand to promote his trade agenda, including withdrawal from trade agreements and imposing higher tariffs on imported goods. Although enterprises and local governments, when their interests are affected, can challenge Trump’s trade policy in the court or pressure the Congress to curtail the president’s authority through new legislation, these procedures are either timeconsuming or subject to presidential veto. Therefore, if the president was intent on maximizing his authority, he could push forward and implement his trade agenda without substantial constraints from the Congress or the Supreme Court in the short term.25 Gary C. Hufbauer, “Could a President Trump Shackle Imports?,” in Assessing Trade Agendas in the U.S. Presidential Campaign, PIIE Briefing 16-6, Peterson Institute for International Economics, September 2016, pp.5-16. However, in the long run, the Trump administration’s trade reform will still be constrained by domestic public opinion, interest groups from the agricultural sector and other priorities on the policy agenda.

Lack of public support

Despite growing populism, the general public of the US still strongly supports foreign trade. Since the conclusion of trade debate during the 2016 presidential election campaign, the attitude of the American people towards trade has changed greatly. At present, most Americans hold a positive attitude towards trade. The Gallup poll in early February 2017 showed that 72% of respondents believed that foreign trade provided opportunities for economic growth. The figure, which exceeded by a significant margin the 58% who believe this in 2016, is the highest since the end of the Cold War.26 Art Swift, “In US, Record-High 72% See Foreign Trade as Opportunity,” Gallup, February 16, 2017. According to a Wall Street Journal and NBC News poll, 43%, the highest percentage since the poll was conducted in 1999, of Americans believe that free trade with foreign countries is beneficial to the US, while only 34% of respondents think that free trade is detrimental to US interests. In 2016, the two figures were 27% and 43% respectively.27 Jacob M. Schlesinger, “Public Support for Free Trade Climbs,” The Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition), February 27, 2017, A.4. In order to consolidate its political basis, the Trump administration has to take into account the attitude of the mainstream public on international trade when promoting its policy agenda. In particular, when negative effects of his trade policy starts to emerge and the public opinion rebounds in favor of trade, the administration will face greater pressure from the general public.

⑫南京大学历史系编:《日本帝国主义在南京的大屠杀》，1979年版(内部出版);高兴祖:《日军侵华暴行 南京大屠杀》，上海人民出版社1985年版。

Discontent from agricultural interest groups

Trump’s new trade policy, which largely prioritizes strengthening the US manufacturing industry, has led to considerable discontent on the part of the states with a substantial agricultural base. On one hand, Trump’s protection of the domestic manufacturing industry would bring about retaliation by other countries against American agricultural products, and result in direct damage to the interests of American farmers and relevant enterprises. On the other hand, in future trade negotiations, if the Trump administration took a tough stance on manufacturing, it would be difficult to achieve compromise on agricultural trade from other countries.28 Catherine Boudreau, “The Trade War Comes to the Prairie: What’s Good for Manufacturers Could Be a Big Problem for Farmers,” Politico, February 13, 2017, https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/02/trade-war-rural-voters-000312; Shawn Donnan, “Farm Belt Fears a Trump Trade War,” Financial Times,April 17, 2017, p.11. At present, agricultural interest groups in the US and congressmen from agricultural states have begun to pressure the government on the issues of NAFTA talks and relations with major trading partners, asking the latter to ensure that the interests of agricultural export would not suffer losses as a result of the trade policy.Considering that most core Trump supporters in the 2016 election are from the central and western agricultural states, the administration would have to evaluate the impacts on agricultural exports before resorting to extreme trade measures.29 Ashley Parker et al., “‘I Was All Set to Terminate’: Inside Trump’s Sudden Shift on NAFTA,” The Washington Post, April 27, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/i-was-all-set-to-terminateinside-trumps-sudden-shift-on-nafta/2017/04/27/0452a3fa-2b65-11e7-b605-33413c691853_story.html.

Divided views in the Congress

无线通信网络中网络通信的内容是通过开放性的无线信道传送的。在这个开放性的通道上所有具有无线设备的人都可以对无线信道上的信息进行获得，加大了信息窃听风险。在有线通信网络上要进行信息窃听只能通过搭线的方式来实现，同时还要对通信电缆进行特殊处理，操作难度大，且容易被发现。无线通信窃听相对容易，因此无线通信网络信息外泄的风险也更大。移动用户信息泄露后会导致用户被无线跟踪，或者被攻击和干扰，给用户带来不必要的危害与损失。

The two chambers of the US Congress are currently dominated by the Republicans who support foreign trade. Even those Democrats who oppose trade liberalization do not agree with Trump’s extreme measures such as withdrawing from NAFTA, boycotting the WTO or imposing high tariffs on imported goods. Leaders of both parties in the Congress have expressed their clear opposition to the White House position on restricting imports and weakening the multilateral trade mechanism. Although the Congress, in the short term, is unable to revoke the trade authority granted to the president by legislation, there are three ways available to constrain the administration’s extreme trade measures. First, the Congress has the constitutional power to levy tariffs and manage foreign trade. Congressional approval is required for any trade legislation and trade agreements proposed by the president before they take effect. If Trump wants to carry out reforms or renegotiate international trade agreements, he must win support from the Congress. Second, the principal trade officials nominated by the president need the Senate’s confirmation, and the Congress can also influence the trade policy through its control of the federal budget. Finally, the Congress can constrain the government’s trade power by taking advantage of other policy issues. Besides trade, the Trump administration’s priorities also include health care, immigration and tax reform, and all these reforms require congressional support. To win votes for his plan on these issues,Trump has to consider the concerns of the Congress with regard to his trade policy. For example, in order to win Republicans’ support for his tax reform,Trump once decided to postpone the release of the Section 232 investigation report on imported steel and aluminum products indefinitely. In addition,in the case of previous administrations, a strong public support helped the president win votes from the Congress.30 “Ross Fears ‘Irritating’ Congress on Trade, Says 232 Actions ‘A Question of Timing’,” Inside US Trade Daily Report, September 25, 2017. However, given his low popularity rating early in office, Trump would be at a disadvantage in a tussle with the Congress.31 Michael C. Bender, “The Wall Street Journal/NBC News Poll: Trump’s Approval at Historical Low,”The Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition, February 27, 2017, A.4.

Conclusion

Because of the inherent contradictions between policy objectives and practices, as well as constraints from domestic public opinion, interest groups from the agricultural sector, mainstream political elites and the Congress, Trump’s new trade policy faces many challenges in its implementation. Therefore, adjustments to both the objectives and means of the policy will be necessary. In fact, compared with his remarks during the election campaign and the early days of his presidency, Trump has already moderated his tone on foreign trade policy. For example, Trump appointed some elite supporters of foreign trade as core members of his policy team. With regard to NAFTA, in contrast to his earlier claim that the agreement had been a “disaster” for the US that needs to be overhauled,and threaten of the US withdrawal, Trump has recently indicated that only some revisions to the agreement are needed. In addition, while he threatened during the election campaign to impose high tariffs on goods from China, and list China as a “currency manipulator,” Trump began to highlight dialogue and cooperation with China soon after taking office.The leaders of the two countries, at their Mar-a-Lago meeting in April 2017, decided to establish the China-US Comprehensive Economic Dialogue as one of the four pillars of bilateral comprehensive dialogue,and early harvests in economics and trade have since been achieved under the framework of a 100-day action plan. As with the US-Europe economic and trade relations, while Trump had initially wanted to bypass the EU and started bilateral trade talks with individual EU member states, he has reiterated the willingness to develop economic and trade ties with Brussels under the EU framework after encountering strong opposition from the EU.

However, taking into account the demands of his main political supporters and the economic nationalist ideology still held by Trump and his core advisers, the Trump administration will continue to invest considerable political resources to fulfill at least some of his campaign promises. Therefore, the administration is more likely to strike a balance between the interests of the agricultural and traditional manufacturing sector, between economic sovereignty and international obligations, and between trade liberalization and trade protection. On one hand, under the existing international legal and regulatory framework, the Trump administration would step up trade law enforcement concerning key countries and key industries, through a more active and frequent use of trade remedy instruments, to protect sensitive domestic industries. The US would also be likely to strengthen its bargaining power in negotiations through unilateral trade measures. On the other hand, the US would still attach importance to dialogue and cooperation with its major trading partners, in order to avoid a trade war that might ultimately damage its own economic interests. The US would also make efforts to win more favorable trade and investment rules and greater market access for American businesses.