Offensive Mercantilism and the Crisis of Liberal International Order: Reinterpreting the U.S.-China Trade War

Year 2025, Volume: 12 Issue: 1, 176 - 202, 22.06.2025

Hikmet Mengüaslan

https://doi.org/10.30803/adusobed.1677331

Abstract

This article employs Jonathan Holslag’s concept of offensive mercantilism as a framework to reinterpret the recent shifts in the U.S.-China economic relations, specifically the Trade War initiated in 2018 by Donald Trump Administration’s decision to increase tariffs against imports from China, as a cataclysmic step for the trajectory of the Liberal International Order (LIO). The article asserts that trade war should be considered not as a mere departure from liberal norms, but as a strategic policy aimed at power projection through coercive economic diplomacy, given the broader structural erosion of U.S. hegemonic capabilities and the rise of alternative economic powers, albeit China. As such, in which ways the resurgence of protectionism and economic nationalism implicates on the U.S.-China economic relations, as well as the international order, guides the research. The findings of the paper suggest that trade protectionism, far from being an anomaly, is increasingly becoming a normalized strategy of economic competition within the multipolar international order. Accordingly, waging trade war as an offensive mercantilist option to contain China’s expanding economic, as well as military, clout, can be identified as a long-term strategy, rather than a short-term tactic, which would likely to be carried on, regardless of the ideological background of the U.S. governments, against perceived threats to the LIO and the U.S. hegemony within it.

Keywords

Offensive Mercantilism , U.S.-China Trade War , Liberal International Order (LIO) , Protectionism , Hegemonic Decline

Saldırgan Merkantilizm ve Liberal Uluslararası Düzenin Krizi: ABD-Çin Ticaret Savaşını Yeniden Yorumlamak

Abstract

Bu makale, Jonathan Holslag’ın saldırgan merkantilizm kavramını kullanarak, ABD-Çin ekonomik ilişkilerinde son dönemde yaşanan değişimleri—özellikle Donald Trump yönetiminin 2018 yılında Çin’den yapılan ithalata yönelik tarifeleri artırma kararıyla başlattığı Ticaret Savaşı’nı—Liberal Uluslararası Düzen’in (LUD) gidişatı açısından yıkıcı bir adım olarak yeniden yorumlamıştır. Makale, ticaret savaşının yalnızca liberal normlardan bir sapma olarak değil, daha geniş çaplı olarak ABD’nin hegemonik kapasitesindeki yapısal aşınma ve Çin başta olmak üzere alternatif ekonomik güçlerin yükselişi bağlamında, amacı ekonomik zorlama yoluyla güç projeksiyonu olan stratejik bir politika olarak değerlendirilmesi gerektiğini savunmuştur. Bu bağlamda, korumacılık ve ekonomik milliyetçiliğin yeniden yükselişinin ABD-Çin ekonomik ilişkileri ve uluslararası düzeni hangi açılardan etkilediği, çalışmanın temel araştırma sorusudur. Makalenin bulguları, korumacılığın bir anomali olmaktan ziyade, çok kutuplu uluslararası düzende ekonomik rekabetin giderek normalleşen bir stratejisi haline geldiğini ileri sürmüştür. Buna göre, Çin’in artan ekonomik ve askeri etkisini sınırlamak amacıyla saldırgan merkantilist bir seçenek olarak ticaret savaşı yürütmenin, kısa vadeli bir taktikten ziyade, ABD hükümetlerinin ideolojik yaklaşımından bağımsız olarak, LUD’ye ve ABD hegemonyasına yönelik tehditlere karşı uzun vadeli bir strateji olarak değerlendirilebileceği iddia edilmiştir.

Keywords

Saldırgan Merkantilizm , ABD-Çin Ticaret Savaşı , Liberal Uluslararası Düzen (LUD) , Korumacılık , Hegemonik Gerileme

References

• Abdal, A., & Ferreira, D. M. (2024). The Cold War 2.0 fallacy: An exploratory study of the diplomatic and commercial relations between China and the US. In C. Suter & P. Ziltener (Eds.), After globalization: The future of world society (pp. 541–566). LIT Verlag GmbH & Co. KG.
• Ajami, R. A. (2020). US-China trade war: The spillover effect. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, 21(1), 1-3. Bellofiore, R., Garibaldo, F., & Halevi, J. (2011). The global crisis and the crisis of European neomercantilism. Socialist Register, 47, 120–146. Bergsten, C. F. (2018). China and the United States: The contest for global economic leadership. China & World Economy, 26(5), 12-37. Blackwill, R. D., and Tellis, A. J. (2015). Revising US grand strategy toward China. Council on Foreign Relations. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.cfr.org/report/revising-us-grand-strategy-toward-china.
• Bown, C. (2019, June 18). China Is Cutting Tariffs—For Everyone Else. Atlantic. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/chinas-two-pronged-trade-war/591877/.
• Bown, C. P. (2021). The US–China trade war and Phase One agreement. Journal of Policy Modeling, 43(4), 805–843.
• Cash, J. and Chen, X. (2025, Jan 21). Trump raises prospects for a negotiated reset on US-China ties. Reuters. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-raises-prospects-negotiated-reset-us-china-ties-2025-01-21/.
• Chan, S. (2021). Challenging the liberal order: The US hegemon as a revisionist power. International Affairs, 97(5), 1335–1352.
• Chan, S., & Hu, W. (2025). Rising states and the liberal world order: The case of China. International Affairs, 101(2), 381–397.
• Cheng, T. J., & Chow, P. C. (2014). The TPP and the pivot: economic and security nexus. In P.C. Chow (ed.)., The US Strategic Pivot to Asia and Cross-Strait Relations: Economic and Security Dynamics (pp. 113-134). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
• Chong, T. T. L., and Li, X. (2019). Understanding the China–US trade war: causes, economic impact, and the worst-case scenario. Economic and Political Studies, 7(2), 185-202.
• Colgan, J. D., and Keohane, R. O. (2017). The liberal order is rigged: Fix it now or watch it wither. Foreign Affairs, 96(3), 36–44.
• Collins, N., & O’Brien, D. (2023). Neo-mercantilism in action: China and small states. International Politics, 60(3), 635–658.
• Cwik, P. F. (2011). The new neo‐mercantilism: Currency manipulation as a form of protectionism. Economic Affairs, 31(3), 7–11.
• De Castro, R. C. (2013). The Obama Administration’s Strategic Pivot to Asia: From a Diplomatic to a Strategic Constrainment of an Emergent China?. the Korean journal of defense analysis, 25(3), 331-349.
• Denemark, R. A. (2024). After globalization: The political economy of mercantilism. In C. Suter & P. Ziltener (Eds.), After globalization: The future of world society (pp. 499–516). LIT Verlag GmbH & Co. KG.
• Deudney, D., & Ikenberry, G. J. (1999). The Nature and Sources of Liberal International Order. Review of International Studies, 25(2), 179-196.
• Deudney, D., & Ikenberry, G. J. (2018). Liberal world: The resilient order. Foreign Affairs, 97(4), 16–24.
• Diamond, J. and Liptak, K. (2017, Nov 9). Trump blames US for trade gap with China. CNN. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/08/politics/donald-trump-xi-jinping-statement/index.html.
• Drezner, D. W. (2019). Economic Statecraft in the Age of Trump. The Washington Quarterly, 42(3), 7–24.
• Duncombe, C., & Dunne, T. (2018). After liberal world order. International affairs, 94(1), 25-42.
• Erdinç, Z. and Aydınbaş, G. (2021). ABD-Çin Ticaret Savaşlarının Ekonomik Faturası. In Ş. Karabulut (Ed.), Teorik Perspektiften İktisadi ve Finansal Olguların Değerlendirilmesi (pp. 225-245). Gazi Kitabevi.
• Garlick, J. (2019). China’s economic diplomacy in Central and Eastern Europe: A case of offensive mercantilism? Europe-Asia Studies, 71(8), 1390–1414.
• Gilpin, R. (1975). Three models of the future. International Organization, 29(1), 37–60.
• Gilpin, R. (1987). The political economy of international relations. Princeton University Press.
• Gompert, D. C. (2022). Four circles: Comprehending the China challenge. Survival, 64(2), 95–110.
• Guoping, G. U. (2022). Three Pillars in the Biden Administration’s China Strategy: Allies, Values, and High-Tech. International Relations and Diplomacy, 10(6), 277-285.
• Gur, N., and Dilek, S. (2023). US–China economic rivalry and the reshoring of global supply chains. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 16(1), 61-83.
• Heijmans, P., Martin, E., & Amin, H. (2022, April 5). US isn’t seeking a ‘divorce’ from China, trade chief says. Bloomberg. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-05/us-not-seeking-divorce-from-china-trade-chief-says.
• Helleiner, E. (2019). Varieties of American neomercantilism: From the first years of the Republic to Trumpian economic nationalism. European Review of International Studies, 6(3), 7–29. Hettne, B. (1993). Neo-mercantilism: The pursuit of regionness. Cooperation and Conflict, 28(3), 211–232.
• Hoekman, B. (2020), Trade Wars and the World Trade Organization: Causes, Consequences, and Change. Asian Economic Policy Review, 15, 98-114.
• Holslag, J. (2017). How China’s new silk road threatens European trade. The International Spectator, 52(1), 46–60.
• Hua, S. (Ed.). (2022). The political logic of the US–China trade war. Rowman & Littlefield.
• Huang, Y. (2016). Understanding China's Belt & Road initiative: motivation, framework and assessment. China economic review, 40, 314-321.
• Ikenberry, G. J. (2011). Liberal leviathan: The origins, crisis, and transformation of the American world order. Princeton University Press.
• Johnson, K., and Gramer, R. (2020). The great decoupling. Foreign Policy, 14. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/14/china-us-pandemic-economy-tensions-trump-coronavirus-covid-new-cold-war-economics-the-great-decoupling/.
• Johnston, A. I. (2019). China in a world of orders: Rethinking compliance and challenge in Beijing’s international relations. International Security, 44(2), 9–60. Jones, L., and Hameiri, S. (2020). Debunking the myth of ‘debt-trap diplomacy’. Chatham house, 19(2020), 657-671.
• Karkour, H. (2022). Liberal modernity and the classical realist critique of the (present) international order. International Affairs, 98(2), 569-586.
• Khong, Y.F. (2020). The US, China, and the Cold War analogy. China Int Strategy Rev. 1, 223–237.
• Kiely, R. (2015). The BRICS, US ‘decline’and global transformations. Springer.
• Kundnani, H. (2017). What is the liberal international order? Policy Essay, No. 17. The German Marshall Fund of the United States. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://blogs.clemson.edu/emerituscollege/files/2018/01/What-is-the-Liberal-International-Order.pdf.
• Lake, D. A. (2020). Whither the liberal international order? Authority, hierarchy, and institutional change. Ethics & International Affairs, 34(4), 461-471.
• Linda, J., & Press, D. G. (2018). Markets or mercantilism? How China secures its energy supplies. International Security, 42(4), 170–204.
• Liu, R., & Yang, S. (2023). China and the liberal international order: A pragmatic and dynamic approach. International Affairs, 99(4), 1383–1400.
• Maihold, G. (2022). A new geopolitics of supply chains: the rise of friend-shoring. (SWP Comment, 45/2022). Berlin: Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik -SWP- Deutsches Institut für Internationale Politik und Sicherheit. Access date: 13.02.2025, https:// doi.org/10.18449/2022C45.
• Malkin, A. (2022). The made in China challenge to US structural power: Indus-trial policy, intellectual property and multinational corporations. Review of International Political Economy, 29(2), 538–570. Mastanduno, M. (2020). A grand strategic transition?: Obama, Trump and the Asia Pacific political economy. In O. Turner & I. Parmar (Ed.), The United States in the Indo-Pacific: Obama's legacy and the Trump transition (pp. 177-192). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
• McMichael, P. (2020). The globalization project in crisis. Alternate Routes: A Journal of Critical Social Research, 31(1). Retrieved May 18, 2025, from http://www.alternateroutes.ca/index.php/ar/article/view/22507
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2019). Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order. International Security, 43(4), 7-50.
• Mueller, M. L., & Farhat, K. (2022). Regulation of platform market access by the United States and China: Neo‐mercantilism in digital services. Policy & Internet, 14(2), 348–367.
• Owen, J. M. (2021). Two emerging international orders? China and the United States. International Affairs, 97(5), 1415–1431.
• Paulson Jr, H. M. (2008). A Strategic Economic Engagement-Strengthening US-Chinese Ties. Foreign Aff., 87, 59-67.
• Petri, P. A., and Plummer, M. G. (2016). The economic effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: New estimates. Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper, (16-2).
• Posen. A. (2018, Feb 13). The Post American World Economy: Globalization in the Trump Era. Foreign Affairs. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/post-american-world-economy.
• Reed, J.R. (2019, June 19). China is lowering tariffs on other countries amid trade war with the US. CNBC. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/19/china-lowers-trade-barriers-for-other-countries-amid-us-tensions.html.
• Ross, R.S. (1999). Engagement in US China Policy. In A. Johnston & R.S. Ross (eds.), Engaging China: The Management of an Emerging Power (pp. 180-211). Routledge.
• Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International regimes, transactions, and change: Embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2), 379–415.
• Savic, B. (2025, Feb 7). China readies its legal arsenal for a trade war with Trump. GIS Report. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/china-trump-trade-war/.
• Sharma, S. D. (2020). Trump and the end of an era? The liberal international order in perspective. The International Spectator, 55(3), 82–97.
• Starrs, S., and Germann, J. (2021). Responding to the China challenge in techno-nationalism: Divergence between Germany and the United States. Development and Change, 52, 1122–1146.
• Stokes, D. (2018). Trump, American hegemony and the future of the liberal international order. International Affairs, 94(1), 133-150.
• Tankersley, J. (2024, May 14). How Biden’s Trade War with China Differs from Trump’s. New York Times. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/14/us/politics/biden-trump-china-trade.html.
• Thorbecke, C. (2025, April 22). Chinese AI’s Secret to Withstanding the Trade War. Bloomberg. Access date: 18.05.2025, https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-04-22/china-s-ai-startups-can-withstand-the-trade-war.
• van Apeldoorn, B., Veselinovič, J., de Graaff, N. (Eds) (2023). Theorizing Trump: A Critical Political Economy Approach. In: Trump and the Remaking of American Grand Strategy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
• Viner, J. (1948). Power versus plenty as objectives of foreign policy in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. World Politics, 1(1), 1–29.
• Weiss, J. C., & Wallace, J. L. (2021). Domestic politics, China's rise, and the future of the liberal international order. International Organization, 75(2), 635–664.
• Yi, X. (2005). Chinese foreign policy in transition: Understanding China's “peaceful development”. The Journal of East Asian Affairs, 19(1), 74–112.
• Zhang, H. (2022). China and climate multilateralism: A review of theoretical approaches. Politics and Governance, 10(2), 50-60.
• Zhao, S. (2016). Xi Jinping’s Maoist revival. Journal of Democracy, 27(3), 83-97.