Chinese cars and factories flooding EU market, and blows up protectionist tariff system Substack

In the US, the tariff schedules on Chinese EV's were 100%. In Europe, the tariff rates varied, from 17% to 38%.

The EU tariffs, it was believed, were too high for Chinese companies to profitably sell cars in the EU markets, and analysts expected Chinese brands to pivot to more friendly countries.

But China's carmakers doubled down in Europe instead, and exported record volumes of hybrid vehicles, which were exempted from the tariff systems. They also broke ground on major factory projects, which will come online beginning next year. At that time, all that production will be tariff-exempt.

Regulators in Europe face two major problems: they need mass-market adoption of new-energy vehicles if they hope to meet their strict emissions standards, and it is only Chinese cars that build at price points that will attract millions of new buyers.

But they will do so at the expense of European and American and other Asian automakers, who cannot compete with Chinese brands on price.

Good read. This is what I have been saying all along: the US is unleashing the Chinese industrial capacity to start a mercantilist warfare to kill off European industries. Expect to see US finance capital harvesting Europe like they did the USSR.

This is because exports have to go somewhere if a portion of demand is suddenly curbed, and all the exporters now find themselves embroiled in a dog-eat-dog competition to lower their costs to capture an ever thinning slice of the market.

The only way out of this is for China to expand its consumer base and create an alternative source of demand, otherwise most exporters will get killed simply for not being able to compete with Chinese products in both quality and price.

The true wildcard of this conflict is China.

If China truly wields its economic power, this conflict will END in 72 hours, and a truce signed by the end of this week, with American military presence being forced at least a thousand kilometers out.

Like, what are the Western countries going to do if China stops the flow of treats to their countries? The threat of rare earth export is a stern reminder of just how much of their industries rely on China. Good luck trying to invade China.

It’s only a matter of political will.

On Ukrainian TV, they literally went “Musk made the Sig Heil Salute, means he’s our guy!”

Cutting off oil is Canada's nuclear option. What would it mean if it happens?

An excellent analysis of how Canada can fight back against Trump’s threat of annexation.

Remember, not all crude are the same. American refineries are mostly geared toward the Canadian and Venezuelan heavy crude that they have to import. The domestic shale production are mostly light sweet crude that they don’t have the capacity to refine, and have to export.

Change is in the air, and surely I’m not hallucinating?

Three weeks ago, Trump put out a very short statement that the US and China should work together. Ever since, Chinese media have sprung into action.

Immediately the week after, the People’s Daily (in conjunction with Global Times) put out a featured call for submission of “US-China cooperation and friendship stories” followed by an editorial “China and the US should extend the list of cooperation, and enlarge the cake of mutual cooperation” (Dec 26th, 2024, in Chinese).

Last week, Qiushi, the CPC theory website, reposted the People’s Daily opinion piece on “The significance of friendship and cooperation for the people between China and the US” (Jan 4th, 2025, in Chinese) and a corresponding piece on their English outlet, “China, United States should inject more certainty, positive energy into world” (Jan 6th, 2025):

China and the U.S. should work together to promote an equal and orderly multipolar world and a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization, let the light of peace reach all corners of the world, and ensure that more development gains will be shared more fairly by people across the world.

"There are few certainties in world affairs. What we do know is that without much greater cooperation between the U.S. and China, the world will be in dire straits," said an American scholar when analyzing the future development of China-U.S. relations.

China-U.S. cooperation may not solve all problems, but few problems can be solved without China-U.S. cooperation. The U.S. should fulfill its responsibilities as a major country, stand on the right side of history, and work together with China to strengthen dialogue and communication, properly manage differences, and expand mutually beneficial cooperation, so as to inject more certainty and positive energy into the world.

Zhong Sheng is a pen name often used by People's Daily to express its views on foreign policy and international affairs. The views don't necessarily reflect those of Qiushi Journal.

I also checked the English outlets. Global Times editorial puts out several opinion pieces including “1+1>2 is the right path for US-China technological interaction” (Jan 3rd, 2025) urging for increased technological cooperation of both countries especially quantum computing.

Concurrently, on January 6th, “Chinese foreign ministry slams US ‘small yard, high fence’ strategy, vows to safeguard WTO-centered multilateral trading system” blasting the Biden administration for not respecting the (neoliberal) WTO free trade order and criticizing protectionism:

"Free trade is an inevitable requirement for global economic development, with the fundamental goal of achieving mutual benefit and promoting common development. Engaging in protectionism and building 'small yard, high fence' significantly disrupts global supply chains and damages the common and long-term interests of all countries," the spokesperson said.

lol

And on the same day an editorial piece titled “What do Tesla’s ‘record high’ sales in China reveal?” that praised Tesla as an exemplary model of foreign investor’s success in China and why more foreign companies should come invest in China:

China has become an important part of Tesla's global landscape, and this is not an isolated case. Currently, over 70,000 American companies are investing and operating in China, with annual sales exceeding $600 billion. Qualcomm and Intel derive two-thirds and one-quarter of their global revenues, respectively, from the Chinese market. Among Apple's 200 major suppliers, 80 percent are based in China. In 2023, about 60 percent of McDonald's new stores globally were opened in China. Shanghai became the first city in the world to have 1,000 Starbucks stores. These facts demonstrate that Washington's trade sanctions and technological restrictions against China are unpopular and cannot hinder American companies' enthusiasm for expanding in the Chinese market. This situation is determined by the essence of mutually beneficial cooperation in economic and trade relations between China and US, as well as the objective laws of economic development at play.

Tesla's "report card" serves as a mirror, reflecting China's status as "an important engine of global economic growth" from both production and market perspectives, while showcasing the solid fundamentals and positive development prospects of the Chinese economy. Tesla's thriving presence in China can particularly be attributed to the country's open, inclusive, and mutually beneficial cooperative attitude.

Meanwhile, still on January 6th, China's two major stock exchanges hold meetings with foreign institutions:

The two exchanges reiterated their commitment to further opening up China's capital markets, expressing hopes that foreign institutions will jointly drive comprehensive reforms and achieve high-quality development.

SCMP (not affiliated with CPC) also put out articles from international relations “experts” like “China-US ties may improve if Trump goodwill signals ‘manifest in tangible actions’” (Jan 4th, 2025) and an opinion piece “Why Trump’s return opens door for China to reform capital markets” (Jan 5th, 2025) about why China should open up its capital markets for foreign investors to come in to save its economy lol. Pretty concise read if you want to understand how the libs think.

These are just a sample of the articles and opinion pieces. Overall, I haven’t seen so many articles that signal the thawing of US and China relationships in such a short period. I think we are likely heading towards a rapprochement between the two countries, and a return to a (renewed) status quo. Both countries have realized that they cannot live without one another, and that it is in their self-interests to return to the existing world order after Covid and the Ukraine war.

Wall Street will be happy to enter the Chinese financial markets (and the Belt and Road), the consumption driven by large scale foreign investments will save both China’s economy and allowing further growth and poverty alleviation, while reigniting the US oil and gas boom under Trump. The dollar hegemony is retained and Trump will be happy to declare victory on trade deficit reduction and some token “bring back American jobs” on a limited scale.

Unfortunately, it looks like China’s gonna save the US empire from its crisis once again, and the medium term outcome also means certain victory for Israel.

The questions to follow up on are: are there any forces within the US that will actively undermine this effort? Will the neocons accept it? Maybe Trump give them the war with Iran that they’ve always wanted? Which also brings us to the question of who else benefit from such (re-)arrangement? Will Europe (poised to be the biggest loser) be forced to import Chinese goods under US order to further destroy their industrial capacity? What happens to Palestine, Lebanon, Russia, Iran and the other major players?

By the way, I absolutely do not accept the irony regarding Putin's statement that military tasks in Syria were solved brilliantly by Russia. They were solved brilliantly at that time. No irony. Russia preserved Syria as a state and gave it 8 years of a quiet life.

But circumstances tend to change, and those who, resting on their laurels, do not feel this, lose. Putin won the war in Syria, but lost the peace. The saddest thing is that such a matrix can be reproduced today (as it is regularly reproduced with dreary predetermination) with Ukraine.

You can win the war but still lose the peace. Can Putin keep the peace in Ukraine? That’s the question.