The businesses rule the present day world; everything revolves around business and it dictates the economic development of all countries. This is why the trade negotiations between countries are of utmost importance, and this is where the real "big business" happens. All trade negotiations have their own goals, as countries differ in terms of their social foundations, cultures, and representatives, the manner in which such negotiations take place will also differ, and accordingly, there will be varying points of view and concerns.
When it comes to such trade negotiations, what distinguishes the U.S. way of going about things is how much it resembles a car salesperson. For one, it's very professional—there's always a lawyer involved, there is remarkable coordination between the upper and lower levels, and of course, there is adroitness in both speech and action. What is of interest here is the impeccable structure of this "sales approach" that is really based on everyday research and has not evolved much over the decades. Its well-established structure is highly effective because it allows smooth cooperation between all relevant agents; so called booby traps are set up everywhere in such a way that most people will not be able to outsmart them. Even if you succeed in avoiding one trap, another is waiting just around the next corner, and once you fall in, the salesperson makes the profit.
Moreover, prolonging the negotiation will not make much of a difference, for they are veterans at this game. For example, the sale of a car revolves around its price, and the standard price for a car is a crucial launching point for the negotiation of the sale. Should you want to lower the price of the car, the salesperson will offer you a configuration with fewer features, and should you want to retain the original configuration, they will throw in a few additional services and still make a profit from you. If, on the other hand, you choose not to have any of it and demand a final price, they will tell you that the car is no longer available, but they could find you another car, provided that you pay an additional fee. If you decide to go to another dealer, well, I can tell you that the same scenario will play out as well, and even waiting for a certain period before calling them up again will not get you much further, as it is all part of the design. Most people get exhausted in their efforts to outsmart the system, especially considering the price discrepancies between different product features. For one, changing a 20-inch wheel to an 18-inch one could save you a few hundred USD. The size of the car display screen could likewise have a significant impact on the overall price, whether the car seats can be controlled electronically, or there is a warranty on the product and how long it will be valid for. It is thus evident that there are traps wherever you turn, and no matter what you end up selection you will still be short-changed by the salesperson.
In a way, the business culture of a country is also part of its heritage. Likewise, it can be said that both the legal system and business schools are in the service of business, and even the media is tuned to serve business interests. And when you think about it, there really isn't much difference between the small-scale sales of cars and the large-scale international trade negotiations. The U.S. has an incredibly robust and advanced business culture that is inculcated in its citizens from a young age. Children in the U.S. start learning the ropes of doing business when they set up and run their own lemonade stands by the road to raise funds for charity. These mini projects are the ideal training ground to initiate one into the world of business. As these children grow up, they are also required to undergo a rigorous scientific education and learn about working in a team professionally, and this is why most countries like us are not able to surmount the U.S. in terms of trade and business negotiations. The economic and business strength of the U.S. is, therefore no an accident, for it is an outcome of its culture, society, and robust business foundation.
In contrast to the U.S., traditional Chinese society is characterized by an emphasis on culture over the business. China has had a market economy for several decades now and has cultivated a batch of skillful business people. However, these so-called business people only know how to do trade, but lack the ability to seal deals at the higher, international levels. At most, they could only assist in such transactions. Take Jack Ma for example; he may be skilled at negotiating, but what role could he play in U.S.-China trade negotiations? Moreover, those who are in charge of international trade negotiations have never actually done so-called small scale business and thus do not have much practical experience. They may be good at theory but are completely hopeless when it comes to execution. Their understanding of business is rudimentary in consumer terms. One might then think that there is a hope in those who have studied abroad in the U.S., but really, in between improving their English and keeping up with schoolwork, how much time and energy do they have left to integrate into U.S. society? It is the much-mentioned "U.S. experience" that is eventually composed of hearsay from their fellow Chinese students supplemented by accounts they read from the internet. So it is no surprise that China is inferior when it comes to trade negotiations, and its passive approach of only reacting when things come up instead of being proactive and preemptive does not make things any better.
There is also another aspect of China's negotiation "style" that has not changed over the centuries, that is the culture of prioritizing personal relationships and friendships over the business—overstepping this line could often be construed as indecorous. While such dynamics might work well within smaller circles, they will not stand up to the test in larger circles, especially those involving international trade, and might even become the butt of a joke. In any case, China's business culture has remained rather unchanged over the years, and it has persisted to be a passive business actor that waits for things to crop up before it sets its own goals and bottom lines. When problems arise, there is likewise a tedious and inelegant process that requires said goals and bottom lines to be reevaluated before further action can be taken. All in all, this is why it can be said that China is a passive and predictable actor in the global business arena: its representatives might change, but its manner of conducting business negotiations hardly changes.
Nonetheless, China does have some strong points in its trade negotiations with other countries that have benefited itself mainly in overall systemic and historical terms. So while China's weakness has been caused by the drawbacks of its system, so have its strengths been drawn from its system. China's centralized system of power has allowed China to reap historic benefits such as being included in the WTO. Although there were many minor losses, these were insignificant compared to the overall rewards, as evidenced by the U.S. desire to renegotiate the terms. China's confidence in its historical approach to doing business its due in part to the institutional advantage that it possesses; should it lose this edge, there will not be much left to for it to leverage on.
It can thus be said that both the U.S. and China have institutional advantages when it comes to their individual manners of conducting trade negotiations, but both countries are built on vastly different systems. People from the US pay a lot of attention to the details, data, as well as the rules of the game, but ultimately, whether or not the U.S. wins or loses in the global arena is a matter of luck, the U.S. is not particularly strong when it comes to historical analysis and logic, be it in business or in learning. The Chinese, on the other hand, place importance on history and big targets; we want to pursue victory in history and the global arena. Because both the US and China are leveraging on their own strengths in their trade negotiations, it still remains to be seen who will emerge as the winner in the long term.
Final Analysis and Conclusion:
Overall, even though the media and the public have been hotly discussing the U.S.-China trade conflict, in reality they are but by-standers to event who are lacking meaningful insight to the game being played. These by-standers are but speculating in limited terms that fail to take into account the overall picture. In reality, however, what really matters is who will win in institutional terms, but this cannot yet be meaningfully speculated.
