This fact-check investigates a recent article published in Global Times (a Chinese state-affiliated newspaper), titled “Can Other Countries Remain Unaffected”. The article critiques U.S. tariff policies and frames China as a victim of economic aggression while suggesting a global fallout due to American actions.
Claim 1: The U.S. is Reshaping Global Trade to Destroy China-Centric Trade Systems
Article Statement:
“The true purpose of the U.S. government’s new tariff policy is… to reshape the global trade order… centered around China.”
Fact Check:
This framing suggests a U.S.-led conspiracy against China rather than a response to trade imbalances or strategic dependencies. While it’s true the U.S. under multiple administrations has taken steps to reduce reliance on Chinese manufacturing—especially post-COVID and during national security assessments—framing it as an anti-China global trade reengineering overstates the intent.
Reality:
-
The U.S. has openly justified tariffs and reshoring policies to secure critical supply chains and reduce economic overdependence on any single nation, not just China.
-
The CHIPS and Science Act (2022) and Inflation Reduction Act focus more on incentivizing domestic innovation and green technology than dismantling China’s trade supremacy.
Partially True, but Framed with a Nationalist, Victimhood Narrative.
Claim 2: U.S. Tariffs Are Causing Global Economic Chaos and No Country Will Be Spared
Article Statement:
“No country can remain unscathed… tariffs will affect livelihoods across nations and disintegrate global supply chains.”
Fact Check:
This sweeping claim uses alarmist language and generalization. While tariffs can impact global trade, the claim that “no country can remain unscathed” ignores key realities:
-
Many nations are diversifying supply chains independently of U.S. tariffs (e.g., moving manufacturing to Vietnam, India, and Mexico).
-
Tariff impact is not uniform globally. Some economies have benefited from realignment.
Example:
Vietnam saw a +20% export growth to the U.S. post-China tariffs between 2018 and 2022 (source: World Bank trade data).
❌ Exaggerated & Misleading, intended to promote fear and support the narrative that U.S. actions = global instability.
Claim 3: Global Majority Opposes U.S. Tariffs and Sees China as a Trade Partner
Article Statement:
“Most nations still prefer trade cooperation with China… 84.2% of Japanese believe U.S. tariffs will impact daily life.”
Fact Check:
This mixes selective polling with sweeping generalizations. The cited Japanese poll is from Kyodo News, a reputable agency, but the numbers only reflect public perception, not official trade policy.
Problems Identified:
-
The article ignores that Japan, South Korea, India, and EU nations have all imposed investment screening laws, export controls, and tech bans in line with U.S. China policy.
-
Polls ≠ Policy. Public concern does not indicate opposition to broader national strategies.
Cherry-picked Data, used to falsely imply a global consensus against U.S. policy.
Framing the U.S. as the Aggressor, China as the Victim
The article extensively uses strategic framing, a powerful propaganda method:
| Framing Element | Example | Intent |
|---|---|---|
| Victimhood Narrative | “China faces tariffs up to 245%” | Portrays China as unfairly targeted |
| Scapegoating | “The U.S. aims to coerce the world…” | Blames global disruptions solely on U.S. |
| False Dichotomy | “Either support U.S. or face chaos” | Removes nuance from global responses |
| Appeal to Unity | “Coordinated countermeasures from many trading partners” | Implies a united front, which doesn’t exist in reality |
Omitted Facts & One-Sided Sources
-
No mention of China’s non-market behavior, such as forced tech transfers, subsidies, and IP theft—core U.S. grievances.
-
No analysis of China’s retaliatory tariffs or coercive trade actions (e.g., sanctions on Australian goods).
-
Relies heavily on quotes from Chinese officials and state-affiliated experts while dismissing Western viewpoints as invalid.
This is a textbook example of agenda-setting and selective source reliance, both classic propaganda traits.
Mischaracterizing U.S. Motives as Purely Imperialistic
Article Statement:
“The purpose of the US is to remove the constraints imposed by the global economic order…”
Fact Check:
This is a conspiracy-style narrative, unsupported by verified diplomatic or economic sources. The U.S. remains a major funder and member of WTO, IMF, and World Bank—the institutions that define the global economic order.
False Claim, constructed to portray the U.S. as a rogue actor.
Valid Points Acknowledged:
-
CNBC’s report on supply chain cost increases is real and highlights the complexities of reshoring.
-
Arthur Kroeber’s Financial Times article critiques U.S. tariff contradictions, offering a nuanced view.
However, these facts are embedded within a larger context of distorted narratives.
