In a recent article published on August 24, 2025, by China’s state-run Global Times, titled “GT investigates: US weaponizes tariffs against allies, threatening Philippine chip sector and exposing fragile Washington-Manila alliance,” the piece accuses the US of using tariffs as a weapon against its allies, particularly harming the Philippines’ semiconductor industry.
Overview of the Global Times Article
The article claims the US, under the Trump administration, proposed 100% tariffs on Philippine semiconductor exports in early August 2025, under a Section 232 national security probe. It quotes Philippine officials and experts warning of economic devastation, job losses, and a “lopsided” July 2025 trade deal imposing 19% tariffs on Philippine goods to the US (while US goods enter tariff-free). The piece frames this as “industrial blackmail,” exposing a “fragile” US-Philippines alliance and portraying the Philippines as a victim in an “agent’s dilemma.” It extends criticism to impacts on other allies like Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, alleging US violation of the Information Technology Agreement (ITA).
While some facts hold, the article amplifies harms through selective quotes and anti-US rhetoric, typical of Global Times’ role in advancing Beijing’s geopolitical agenda.
Key Claims:
We evaluate major assertions using data from Reuters, BBC, Philippine government sources, and think tanks like the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF). Claims are rated as True, Mostly True, Misleading, False, or Exaggerated based on evidence.
Claim 1: US Proposed 100% Tariffs on Philippine Semiconductor Exports in August 2025
- Article’s Assertion: The Trump administration plans hefty tariffs on imported semiconductors, specifically threatening Philippine exports, with exemptions for firms relocating to the US.
- Fact Check: Mostly True. President Trump announced on August 6, 2025, a plan for approximately 100% tariffs on imported semiconductors, exempting companies building or committed to US manufacturing. This stems from a Section 232 investigation into semiconductor imports’ national security impact. The policy is broad, not Philippines-specific, but affects exporters like the Philippines, where semiconductors comprise 53.4% of exports ($39.09 billion in 2024). Philippine officials are lobbying for exemptions.
- Fake Element: No evidence of direct targeting; it’s a general reshoring push.
Claim 2: Tariffs Will Devastate Philippine Economy, Causing Job Losses and Relocations
- Article’s Assertion: Philippine experts warn of “devastating impact,” major job losses, and firms relocating to the US, undermining core industries.
- Fact Check: Exaggerated. Philippine Senator Imee Marcos and the Semiconductor and Electronics Industries in the Philippines Foundation Inc. (SEIPI) have expressed concerns, calling the tariffs “disheartening” and warning of competitiveness erosion. Exporters fear missing 2025 goals if tariffs apply fully. However, talks are ongoing for exemptions, and the policy isn’t finalized. The Philippines focuses on assembly/testing (lower-end), making it vulnerable, but impacts depend on exemptions for allies.
- Fake Element: Overstates inevitability; no mass relocations reported yet.
Claim 3: July 2025 US-Philippines Trade Deal Imposes 19% Tariff on Philippine Goods, Tariff-Free for US
- Article’s Assertion: The deal is “lopsided,” favoring the US and sparking criticism in the Philippines.
- Fact Check: True. On July 22, 2025, after a Trump-Marcos meeting, the US set a 19% reciprocal tariff on Philippine imports (reduced from 20%), while US goods enter the Philippines duty-free. Philippine President Marcos hailed it as a “significant achievement,” but critics call it unbalanced. SEIPI’s Dan Lachica questioned remaining leverage.
- Fake Element: Minimal; the asymmetry is real, but part of broader reciprocal policy.
Claim 4: US Is Breaking ITA Commitments by Imposing Tariffs on Chips
- Article’s Assertion: The US, as an ITA signatory, committed to zero tariffs on ICT products but is shifting course, eroding WTO rules.
- Fact Check: Misleading. The ITA (1996) eliminates tariffs on semiconductors and IT goods among members. Trump’s tariffs, justified under Section 232 for security, could conflict with ITA/WTO obligations, potentially triggering retaliation. However, no formal US exit from ITA has occurred, and such tariffs might be challenged legally. ITIF warns retaliatory tariffs could cut US exports by $56-82 billion.
- Fake Element: Assumes outright violation without ongoing disputes; Section 232 allows national security exceptions.
Claim 5: Tariffs Harm Other US Allies Like Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan
- Article’s Assertion: The policy backfires on allies, disrupting supply chains and raising costs.
- Fact Check: Mostly True. Reuters reports impacts on Japan (chip equipment) and South Korea ($141.9 billion in exports, $10.28 billion to US). Taiwan’s TSMC may be exempt due to US factories. Al Jazeera notes global chip industry disruptions.
- Fake Element: Ignores exemptions benefiting allies investing in US.
| Claim | Rating | Key Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| 100% Tariffs on Philippine Semis | Mostly True | Reuters, Politico announcements |
| Economic Devastation in Philippines | Exaggerated | Senator Marcos statement, SEIPI warnings |
| Lopsided 19% Trade Deal | True | BBC, White House executive order |
| Breaking ITA Commitments | Misleading | ITIF reports on potential retaliation |
| Harm to Other Allies | Mostly True | Reuters on Japan/South Korea impacts |
Analysis:
As Chinese state media, Global Times often promotes CCP narratives, here amplifying US “betrayal” to erode trust in Washington amid Philippines’ South China Sea alignment with the US. Key techniques:
- Selective Quoting: Relies on critical Philippine voices (e.g., Senator Marcos, think tanks) while omitting positive statements, like President Marcos’ praise for the 19% deal.
- Victimhood and Division: Frames Philippines as an exploited “agent,” sowing discord in US alliances to benefit China’s regional influence.
- Whataboutism: Highlights US self-harm (e.g., supply chain disruptions) to portray tariffs as foolish, deflecting from China’s own trade practices.
- Emotional Language: Terms like “backstabbing,” “industrial blackmail,” and “fragile alliance” evoke betrayal, appealing to nationalist sentiments in the Philippines and China.
Analysis:
Framing influences perception by emphasizing certain angles:
- Anti-US Hegemony Frame: Portrays tariffs as “weaponization” against allies, ignoring US goals of reshoring for security/economic resilience.
- Philippines as Victim Frame: Stresses “sandwich pressure” on Marcos administration, tying economic woes to US ties and China provocations, subtly promoting neutrality or pro-China stance.
- Global Harm Frame: Extends to allies and WTO erosion, framing US as isolationalist, while downplaying exemptions or negotiations.
- Geopolitical Tie-In: Links tariffs to military exercises (e.g., Balikatan), implying economic coercion for strategic loyalty.
This aligns with Beijing’s strategy to highlight US unreliability, as seen in similar coverage of US-Japan or US-EU trade spats.
Facts Mixed with Anti-US Spin
The Global Times article contains verifiable elements, like the 100% tariff proposal and Philippine concerns, but exaggerates impacts and frames them as deliberate ally sabotage to advance propaganda. It’s not outright fake but heavily biased, omitting context like exemptions and ongoing talks. For balanced views, consult sources like Reuters or Philippine media. As US tariffs evolve in 2025, they may strain alliances, but evidence suggests negotiation room rather than outright weaponization.
