China refuses to buy American grains. Six days of silence later, the U.S. Embassy in China declares China a "hostile nation."

On August 12, 2024, U.S. President Donald Trump called on China to increase its imports of soybeans from the United States.

However, China did not comply and instead chose to redirect large grain orders to Brazil, importing 8 million tons of miscellaneous grains.

The U.S. expressed dissatisfaction with this move and, after six days of silence, issued a statement on August 18 through social media, labeling China as a "hostile country."

This statement immediately sparked widespread controversy and discussion.

In fact, this is not the first time the U.S. Embassy in China has made such remarks.

Previously, the U.S. Embassy in China has made inappropriate statements, such as sensationalizing the “forced labor” accusations related to Xinjiang or promoting the idea of “U.S.-Japan peace” on the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II.

Behind these actions, the U.S. is essentially expressing strong dissatisfaction with China.

So, why is the U.S. doing this? What is its purpose? And how might these actions impact China-U.S. negotiations?

Firstly, this statement from the U.S. aims to express dissatisfaction with China’s response to the U.S.-China trade friction.

Since the outbreak of the U.S.-China trade war, China has taken decisive measures, including adjusting its supply chains and implementing export controls on rare earths, among others.

These measures have targeted vulnerable areas of the U.S., forcing the Trump administration to reconsider its negotiation strategy with China.

Although the two sides have held three rounds of talks and achieved some preliminary results, they have yet to reach an agreement in certain key areas, especially regarding supply chain recovery and military rare earth exports.

Take the agricultural supply chain as an example. From China’s perspective, supply chain diversification has become an inevitable trend.

By adjusting the supply chain, China can gain strategic advantages on multiple levels.

Firstly, this move can provide China with more leverage in trade negotiations with the U.S.

The U.S. often imposes tariffs based on excessive confidence in its own market, forcing other countries to sign unequal trade agreements.

However, as the world’s second-largest economy, China is willing to import large quantities of U.S. agricultural products, but after the U.S. imposed additional tariffs, the trade between the two countries faces the risk of decoupling.

To change this situation, China will inevitably need to reduce its imports of U.S. products, especially agricultural products, to enhance its bargaining power in negotiations.

After China stopped importing U.S. soybeans, Brazil quickly filled the market gap and became China’s largest soybean supplier.

This shift not only reflects China’s gradual decoupling from the U.S. supply chain but also elevates China-Brazil trade cooperation to a new level.

Brazil can meet China’s demand for soybeans not only because of the long-term cooperation between the two countries in the agricultural sector but also due to Brazil’s relatively competitive pricing advantage.

Therefore, overall, China’s reduction of U.S. soybean and other agricultural imports is actually about gaining more bargaining chips and reducing dependence on the U.S. market by strengthening trade ties with other countries.

As this trend intensifies in the future, the U.S. may continue to express dissatisfaction through social media platforms, but this will not change China’s strategy of continuing to adjust its supply chain.

In addition to expressing dissatisfaction with China, the U.S. Embassy’s statement also reveals an important goal of the U.S. in China-U.S. trade negotiations — creating negotiation leverage.

As the negotiation process progresses, the two sides have yet to reach agreement on some key issues, which has led the U.S. to take continuous measures to gain an advantage in future talks.

For example, the U.S. recently announced a halt to the production of H20 chips for the Chinese market and continued to stir up the issue of the “illegality” of Chinese e-cigarette exports.

These actions are undoubtedly aimed at accumulating leverage for the upcoming U.S.-China negotiations, especially regarding tariff issues, where the U.S. hopes to exert pressure.

However, this approach is likely to have more negative long-term effects on China-U.S. negotiations.

The continued escalation of such statements from the U.S. Embassy could deepen the divide between China and the U.S., making negotiations even more complicated.

While the Trump administration hopes to increase its leverage in negotiations with China through these measures, in the long run, this could result in further tensions in China-U.S. relations, and the likelihood of favorable progress in talks will significantly decrease.

For China, being labeled a “hostile country” by the U.S. presents a challenge.

In the face of frequent “goodwill” gestures from the U.S., China needs to remain highly alert, as this “goodwill” often carries a deceptive nature.

China-U.S. negotiations should always be based on equality and mutual benefit, and China must take a firm stance, especially on issues related to core national interests, with no compromise.

Only by doing so can the U.S. recognize China’s bottom line in trade talks and engage in effective communication on that basis.

If the U.S. continues to treat China as a “hostile country,” future China-U.S. negotiations may struggle to achieve ideal results.

China should continue to reduce dependence on the U.S. through supply chain adjustments and increasing trade with other countries while maintaining a firm position at the negotiation table and avoiding unilateral pressure from the U.S.

The U.S. reaction to China’s halt in soybean imports has further escalated trade friction between the two countries.

These series of actions by the U.S. are not only a strong expression of dissatisfaction with China’s stance but also a way for the U.S. to create leverage in the China-U.S. negotiations.

For China, it is essential to clearly recognize that the fundamental change in the U.S.’s stance toward China is unlikely to happen easily.

Therefore, in the upcoming China-U.S. negotiations, China should firmly maintain its position and enhance its bargaining power by adjusting its economic strategy to ensure that national interests are not harmed.