The Dispute Over Equitable Trade Markets Between China and the United States: Is It American Bullying or Chinese Self-Isolation?

As the Trade War Rekindles, Chinese Consumers Easily Access Tesla and Starbucks, While the U.S. Market Closes Its Doors to BYD and Huawei

With the trade war rekindling, while Chinese consumers can easily purchase Tesla and Starbucks, the U.S. market has shut its doors to BYD and Huawei. Is the U.S. engaging in bullying under the guise of “national security,” or is China implementing a market blockade under the banner of “national sovereignty”? This uneven trade confrontation highlights the deep-seated contradictions between the two major economies and poses challenges to globalization.

The Big Question of Trade Fairness: Who is Blocking Whom?

Political trade relations commentator Cyrus Janssen posted on the X platform, pointing out that Chinese consumers can freely purchase American brands like iPhone, Tesla, and Starbucks, while Americans are unable to access Chinese brands such as BYD, Huawei, and Luckin Coffee. He questioned when the U.S. would “truly open its market to China.”

-Chinese buy Teslas but Americans can’t buy BYD
-Chinese buy iPhones but Americans can’t buy Huawei
-Chinese buy Starbucks but Americans can’t buy Luckin
-There are more KFC restaurants in China than USA
China has been open to American businesses for over 40 years. In fact every…https://t.co/m6GnU7R6Rt
— Cyrus Janssen (@thecyrusjanssen) May 11, 2025

The article cites Trump’s recent statement claiming “significant progress” in talks with China, indicating that this trade war is far from over. However, public reactions are mixed. @Erickschultz11 commented that while the Chinese market is open to foreign investment, it comes with “forced cooperation, data scrutiny, and political interference,” whereas the U.S. has long tolerated Chinese companies’ unrestricted entry until recently, which suggests that this discussion is gradually shifting from market openness to a tug-of-war over national security and systemic contradictions.

Is It Protection or Bullying? The Doubts Over U.S. Double Standards

The U.S. has been blocking Chinese tech companies for years, with Huawei being at the forefront. Due to allegations of close ties to the Communist Party and involvement in surveillance and data risks, the U.S. placed Huawei on the Entity List, prohibiting it from engaging in technology transactions with American companies. Consequently, Huawei lost support for Google services and significantly retreated from the international market.

(NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang: China’s AI strength should not be underestimated, Huawei is one of the strongest tech companies globally)

Additionally, starting in 2018, the Trump administration imposed tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of Chinese goods under the pretext of “countering technology theft and unfair trade,” claiming it was a necessary self-defense measure. However, many commentators, including The Wall Street Journal, have termed it the “biggest policy mistake” of his presidency: this strategy has not resolved the trade deficit issue; rather, it has harmed the interests of American consumers, blurring the lines between “protection” and “bullying.”

(U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent: AI and quantum technology are crucial for national destiny, focusing on combating Chinese IP theft)

Is China’s Openness a Facade? Institutional Blockades are the Real Barriers

On the other hand, Chinese officials have repeatedly emphasized their welcoming attitude towards foreign investment. From Tesla’s factory in Shanghai to Apple’s supply chain in China, foreign businesses seem to have unobstructed access. According to data from business service provider Acclime, foreign companies can enter the Chinese market through wholly foreign-owned enterprises (WFOE) or joint ventures (JV).

However, in reality, China’s regulation of foreign companies is quite strict. U.S. tech giants such as Google, Facebook, and YouTube are all blocked, with the reason for their blockage cited as “failure to comply with censorship requirements.” While these actions have helped local companies like Baidu and WeChat to grow, they also raise questions about whether selective blockades under the name of “national security” are merely another form of bullying.

(Former Facebook executive exposes that Facebook once collaborated with China on content censorship mechanisms; Xie Jinhai found that content regulation was in place in Shanghai)

The Tug-of-War of Mutual Restrictions: No One is Exempt

Both China and the U.S. seem to be imposing restrictions for their national interests, but this “you block me, I block you” game may ultimately harm the global market itself. Some commentators have pointed out that if BYD enters the U.S. market, Tesla may lose its price advantage; if WeChat can operate legally in the U.S., Meta will also face real competitive pressure.

(Analyzing China’s open-source AI strategy: commercialization combined with hardware strengths to undermine U.S. tech dominance)

However, there are voices indicating that openness should be mutual. The U.S. once attempted to allow Chinese applications like TikTok and WeChat to thrive in the American market but abruptly reversed course under political and security pressure. Meanwhile, China remains steadfast on information censorship and speech control, allowing true fair competition to become an ideal.

Looking at Globalization: Is it Compromise at the Negotiating Table or an Illusory Vision?

The debates stemming from Janssen’s post reflect the bottleneck situation of globalization. The trade tug-of-war between China and the U.S. is no longer confined to import and export data, but has seeped into issues of institutional trust, technological dominance, and value conflicts: achieving genuine market connectivity between both sides is evidently not as simple as lifting tariffs and opening platforms; the real answers may need to return to political sincerity and structural reforms.

In this multidimensional contest, how to balance protecting national interests with adhering to global rules will become a key proposition for the geopolitical landscape over the next decade.

Risk Warning

Investment in cryptocurrencies carries high risks, and their prices may fluctuate wildly, potentially resulting in the loss of your entire principal. Please assess the risks carefully.