context: Despite rising frictions, PRC–US interdependence in trade, industry, advanced tech and supply chains still constrains a full-blown decoupling split. While US tariff hikes may have paused due to domestic blowbacks, Washington is applying pressure on other fronts under the notion of 'economic security', not least tech restrictions and striking trade deals with partners that have provisions to box out PRC trade. These moves will fuel market swings, promoting cycles of volatility coupled with sporadic realist concessions.
‘Economic securitisation’ is reshaping PRC–US ties by turning trade into a security tool and weaponising interdependence, explains Gao Cheng 高程 University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences vice president
- concept and characteristics
- a state recasts economic issues outside the security realm as security concerns, e.g. economic issues
- triggers include perceived harm to great-power rivalry or major diplomatic shocks
- security logic overrides economic logic so trade shifts from ‘ballast stone’ of the bilateral relationship to potential ‘security threat’
- economic interdependence becomes a geopolitical tool
- real-world context
- Post-Cold War globalisation deepened interdependence without ending great power rivalry
- recent shocks in Israel–Palestine, Russia–Ukraine, PRC–US trade war are leading to more regionalised supply chains
- some states disrupt or ‘weaponise’ mutually beneficial ties, intensifying the security dilemma
- changing logic of PRC–US relations
- US perceived threat of the PRC does not depend on Beijing's friendly gestures or bilateral trade volume
- it comes down to the extent of how trade benefits or erodes the US’ hegemony
- interdependence once cushioned frictions, now disputes span economy and security as the US feels dissastisfied over relative gains
- US perceived threat of the PRC does not depend on Beijing's friendly gestures or bilateral trade volume
- US’ interests and position
- prioritises relative gains and asymmetric advantage
- the PRC is cast as driving roughly half the US trade deficit and as a source of asymmetric vulnerability when it acquires advanced US tech
- but outright decoupling faces pushback at home and from international allies
- this is why the US ties trade with PRC as a 'security concern'
- prioritises relative gains and asymmetric advantage
- US policy practice and evolution
- since 2017, US strategy documents have promoted the notion of ‘economic security is national security’
- section 232 and 301 actions, tariffs, investment curbs and decoupling push took hold under Trump and persisted under Biden
- following two administrations, US economic security measures have matured and become more precise in targeting the PRC
- this led to shakier supply-chain trust abroad, higher inflation and welfare loss at home for the US
- future trends and PRC countermeasures
- a second Trump term would intensify securitisation and ‘weaponisation’ of economic dependence
- Beijing should
- focus on its long-term priorities and shape a more favourable international environment
- map vulnerabilities in dependency networks globally and strengthen response mechanisms in anti-sanctions and risk management
- advance independent key technologies, optimise industrial chains and diversify markets to raise resilience
- expand multilateral co-operation and, as part of the ‘global south’, promote an open rules-based order that constrains over-securitisation