ABD-Çin Ticaret Savaşı: Asimetrik Korkak Tavuk Oyunu Çerçevesinde Bir Analiz

Öz

Uluslararası ticaret teorileri, serbest ticaretin ülkelerin karşılaştırmalı üstünlüklere sahip oldukları malların üretiminde uzmanlaşmalarına imkân tanıyarak tüm taraflara refah artışı sağladığını ileri sürmektedir. Bununla birlikte, devletler çoğu zaman yerli sanayilerini korumak, dış ticaret dengesizliklerini azaltmak veya stratejik sektörleri desteklemek amacıyla tarifeleri artırarak ticaretin önüne çeşitli engeller koyabilmektedir. Bu tür korumacı uygulamaların karşılıklı hale gelmesi, bir gümrük vergisi sarmalını tetikleyerek ticaret savaşı olarak adlandırılan sürece yol açmaktadır. 2017 yılında Donald Trump’ın ABD başkanlığına gelmesiyle birlikte ABD ile Çin arasında başlayan ticaret savaşı, günümüzde daha da derinleşmiş bir hal almıştır. Bu savaşın temelinde, ABD’nin Çin karşısında hızla büyüyen ticaret açığı ve küresel hegemonyasının zayıfladığına dair kaygıları ile birlikte, Çin’in uluslararası sistemde giderek artan etkisi bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı da ABD–Çin ticaret savaşını oyun teorisi çerçevesinde incelemek ve oluşturulan dört senaryo üzerinden ülkelerin optimal stratejilerini ortaya koymaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, asimetrik Korkak Tavuk Oyunu modeli uygulanmıştır. Çalışmanın sonuçları, tarafların tam iş birliğine yönelmek yerine risk içeren stratejileri tercih etmeleri durumunda her iki ülkenin toplam refah düzeyinde kayıplar yaşayacağını göstermektedir. Ayrıca, ABD’nin daha ihtiyatlı ticaret stratejileri izlediği senaryolarda, Çin’in daha esnek veya agresif hamleler aracılığıyla daha yüksek kazanç elde edebileceği ortaya konmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ticaret savaşı
• Oyun teorisi
• Korkak tavuk oyunu

The U.S.-China Trade War: An Analysis within the Framework of an Asymmetric Chicken Game

Öz

International trade theory asserts that free trade facilitates countries’ specialization in the production of goods for which they possess comparative advantages, thereby enhancing welfare across all participants. Nevertheless, states frequently implement trade barriers, such as increased tariffs, to protect domestic industries, reduce external trade imbalances, or support strategic sectors. The reciprocal application of such protectionist measures can trigger a tariff spiral, leading to what is commonly referred to as a trade war. Following Donald Trump’s ascent to the U.S. presidency in 2017, the trade conflict between the United States and China emerged and has since deepened considerably. The underlying factors of this conflict include the rapidly widening U.S. trade deficit with China, concerns over the erosion of U.S. global hegemony, and China’s increasingly influential role within the international system. This study aims to examine the U.S.-China trade war within a game-theoretic framework and to identify the countries’ optimal strategies across four constructed scenarios. To this end, an asymmetric Chicken Game model has been employed. The findings indicate that when the parties opt for riskier strategies rather than full cooperation, both countries experience losses in overall welfare. Furthermore, in scenarios where the U.S. pursues more cautious trade strategies, China may achieve higher gains through more flexible or aggressive moves.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Trade war
• Game theory
• Chicken game

Kaynakça

1. Abbott, P. C. (1996). Implications of game theory for international agricultural trade. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 78(3), 738–744.
2. Alexa, I. V., & Toma, S. V. (2012). The correlation between game theory and international trade. Annals of the University Dunarea de Jos of Galati: Fascicle I, Economics & Applied Informatics, 18(2), 67–74.
3. Askari, G., Gordji, M. E., Shabani, S., & Filipe, J. A. (2020). Game theory and trade tensions between advanced economies. European Research Studies Journal, 23(Special Issue 1), 50-65.
4. Altieri, C. (2021). United States and China: A game theoretical approach to international trade (Master’s thesis). LUISS University.
5. Amiti, M., Redding, S. J., & Weinstein, D. E. (2019). The impact of the 2018 tariffs on prices and welfare. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(4), 187–210.
6. Bekkers, E., & Schroeter, S. (2020). An economic analysis of the US-China trade conflict (WTO Staff Working Paper No. ERSD-2020-04). World Trade Organization.
7. Bouët, A., Sall, L. M., & Zheng, Y. (2024). Trump 2.0 tariffs: What cost for the world economy? (Policy Brief No. 49).
8. Bown, C. P. (2019). The 2018 US-China trade conflict after forty years of special protection. China Economic Journal, 12(2), 109–136.

9. Carvalho, C. (2025). Trump and game theory: Tariffs as a geopolitical strategy. SSRN Working Paper. Erişim adresi: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5180046
10. CEBR. (2023, December). World economic league table 2024: A world economic league table with forecasts for 190 countries to 2038. Erişim adresi: https://cebr.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/WELT-2024.pdf
11. Conybeare, J. A. C. (1987). Trade wars: The theory and practice of international commercial policy. Columbia University Press.
12. Conybeare, J. A. C. (1988). Managing international trade conflicts: Explanations and prescription. Journal of International Affairs, 41(1), 75–91.
13. Correa, H. (2001). Game theory as an instrument for the analysis of international relations. Ritsumeikan Annual Review of International Studies, 14(2), 187–208.
14. Davis, B. (2024). How Washington Learned to Stop Worrying and Embrace Protectionism. Foreign Policy. Erişim adresi: https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/06/22/ccp-beijing-chinese-investment-sovereign-wealth-funds-book-review/
15. El Namaki, M. S. S. (2018). Trump, Xi and game theory. Scholedge International Journal of Business Policy & Governance, 5(5), 1-6.
16. Ferguson, T. S. (2020). A course in game theory. World Scientific Publishing.
17. Fudenberg, D., & Tirole, J. (1991). Game theory. MIT Press.
18. Gibbons, R. (1992). A primer in game theory. Prentice Hall.
19. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1994). Protection for sale. American Economic Review, 84(4), 833–850.
20. Ha, J. (2017). Impact of Trump administration’s proposed policies on the United States and China. PIIE Briefing: US-China Cooperation In A Changing Global Economy içinde (ss. 34–41). Peterson Institute of International Economics.
21. Hao, L.-Y., & Ji, X.-J. (2012). Game analysis on trade strategy of international trade. Advances in Asian Social Science (AASS), 3(4), 722-724.
22. Harrison, G. W., & Ruström, E. E. (1991). Trade wars, trade negotiations and applied game theory. The Economic Journal, 101(406), 420-435.
23. Heifetz, A. (2012). Game theory: Interactive strategies in economics and management. Cambridge University Press.
24. Heiss, A. (2021). Game theory: Basic process for finding Nash equilibria. Erişim adresi: https://econsp21.classes.andrewheiss.com/resource/game-theory/
25. Hughes, R. (2007). A modified prisoners’ dilemma approach to progress in the World Trade Organization’s agricultural trade negotiations. Issues in Political Economy, 16, 1–20.
26. Iglesia, M. J. C., Khan, Z., & Nuzula, I. F. (2025). The impact of the US–China tariff war on international trade. Jurnal Genesis Indonesia, 4(2), 148–154.
27. Itakura, K. (2020). Evaluating the impact of the US–China trade war. Asian Economic Policy Review, 15(1), 77–93.
28. Johnson, J. (2017). The Art of Breaking the Deal: What President Trump Can and Can't Do About NAFTA. CD Howe Institute Commentary, 464.
29. Khurana, C. (2022). Review of game theory applications in international trade. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 7(1), 196–206.
30. Kwa, A., & Lunenborg, P. (2018). US’ Section 301 actions: Why they are illegitimate and misguided. SSRN Working Paper. Erişim adresi: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3280853
31. Lester, S., & Zhu, H. (2020). Adjudication vs. frontier justice in international economic law disputes: The Trump Administration’s push for unilateralism in trade enforcement. Erişim adresi: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3537576.
32. Li, M., Balistreri, E. J., & Zhang, W. (2020). The US–China trade war: Tariff data and general equilibrium analysis. Journal of Asian Economics, 69, 101216.
33. Liang, C., Liu, N., & Liu, Y. (2022, July). The game between China and the United States based on trade in the epidemic era. Proceedings of the 2022 2nd International Conference on Enterprise Management and Economic Development (ICEMED 2022) içinde (ss. 134–141). Atlantis Press.
34. Löchel, H., & Tang, S. (2024). Great power rivalry in the 21st century: China vs. the United States—A game-theoretic analysis of the Thucydides Trap (SGC Working Paper Series No. 7).
35. Mann, C. L. (1987). Protection and retaliation: Changing the rules of the game. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1987(1), 311–335.
36. Mazalov, V. (2014). Mathematical game theory and applications. John Wiley & Sons.
37. McCGwire, J. (2018). A game theory analysis of Donald Trump’s proposed tariff on Chinese exports. Studia Economica Review, 31, 69–77.
38. McMillan, J. (1986). Game theory in international economics. Harwood Academic Publishers.
39. Morrison, W. M. (2018). China–U.S. trade issues. Congressional Research Service. Erişim adresi: https://content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Econ%205420-6420-Fall%202018/Morrison-China%20US%20Trade%20Issues.pdf.
40. Muchen Sun, M., Baldini, F., Hughes, K., Trautman, P., & Murphey, T. (2025). Mixed strategy Nash equilibrium for crowd navigation. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 44(7), 1156–1185.
41. Mughwai, V. L. (2020). Game theory and its application in international trade: Use of strategic games in trade policy. Academic Journal of Economic Studies, 6(2), 96–101.
42. Navarro, P., & Ross, W. (2016). Scoring the Trump economic plan: Trade, regulatory, & energy policy impacts. Unpublished policy paper for the Trump Campaign. Erişim adresi: https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Trump_Economic_Plan.pdf.
43. NewsTarget. (2025, April 15). US raises tariffs on Chinese goods to 145%, sparking global economic concerns. Erişim adresi: https://www.newstarget.com/2025-04-15-us-china-trade-conflict-drives-economic-deterioration.htm.
44. Office of the United States Trade Representative. (2025, January). USTR announces compliance review of Phase One Economic and Trade Agreement. Erişim adresi: https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2025/january/ustr-announces-compliance-review-economic-and-trade-agreement-between-government-united-states.
45. Parbo, J. (2021). Negotiating trade conflicts: A case study of the US-China Phase One deal. Journal of Global Trade Policy, 18(3), 122–135.
46. Paszak, P. (2021). US-China trade war: Origins, timeline and consequences. Warsaw Institute. Erişim adresi: https://warsawinstitute.org/us-china-trade-war-origins-timeline-consequences.
47. Politico. (2016, July 21). Full text: Donald Trump 2016 RNC draft speech transcript. Erişim adresi: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/full-transcript-donald-trump-nomination-acceptance-speech-at-rnc-225974
48. Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42(3), 427-460.
49. Rapoport, A., & Chammah, A. M. (1966). The game of chicken. American Behavioral Scientist, 10(3), 10–28.
50. Rapoport, A., & Chammah, A. M. (1970). Prisoner's dilemma: A study in conflict and cooperation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
51. Reuters. (2018, July 2). Trump threatens action on WTO after reports he wants to withdraw. Erişim adresi: https://www.reuters.com/article/business/trump-threatens-action-on-wto-after-reports-he-wants-to-withdraw-idUSKBN1JS194/
52. Reuters. (2025, April 11). Trump optimistic about reaching new deal with China, White House says. Erişim adresi: https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-optimistic-reaching-deal-with-china-white-house-says-2025-04-11/
53. Romp, G. (1997). Game theory: Introduction and applications. Oxford University Press.
54. Ross, D. (2024). Game theory. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2024 Edition). Stanford University. Erişim adresi: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2024/entries/game-theory/
55. Rosyadi, S. A., & Widodo, T. (2017). Impacts of Donald Trump’s tariff increase against China on global economy: Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model. Munich Personal RePEc Archive. Erişim adresi: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/79493/
56. Salvatore, D. (2016). International economics (11th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
57. Sheng, L., & Felix do Nascimento, D. (2021). A brief history of trade wars. Love and trade war: China and the US in historical context içinde (ss. 1–46). Springer Singapore.
58. Snyder, G. H. (1971). "Prisoner's dilemma" and "chicken" models in international politics. International Studies Quarterly, 15(1), 66–103.
59. Taylor, C. N. (1997). The limits of economic power: Section 301 and the World Trade Organization dispute settlement system. Vand. J. Transnat'l L., 30, 209-348.
60. Time. (2015). Here's Donald Trump's presidential announcement speech. Erişim adresi: http://time.com/3923128/donald-trump-announcement-speech/
61. US News. (2025, April 15). China changes top trade negotiator amid tariff war with US. Erişim adresi: https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2025-04-15/china-changes-top-trade-negotiator-amid-tariff-war-with-us
62. Von Stengel, B. (2021). Game theory basics. Cambridge University Press.
63. Worldometers. (2023). GDP by country. Erişim adresi: https://www.worldometers.info/gdp/gdp-
64. Yin, J. Z., & Hamilton, M. H. (2018). The conundrum of US-China trade relations through game theory modelling. Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 20(8), 133–150.
65. Yu, M., & Zhang, R. (2019). Understanding the recent Sino-US trade conflict. China Economic Journal, 12(2), 160-174.
66. Zhang, J. (2025). Game Theory analysis of global supply and demand restructuring under the Sino-US trade conflict. Finance & Economics, 1(6), 1-5.