Republican Senators Say China Should Be Less Indispensable in Future in Supply Chain
Several Republican senators told reporters at the Capitol May 11 that there's an appetite to punish China because of its lack of transparency on the spread of the novel coronavirus. President Donald Trump on April 30 floated using tariffs on Chinese imports to retaliate for the suppression of coronavirus details (see 2005010064), but has backed away from such talk more recently (see 2005070039). Assistant Majority Leader Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said, “Well it seems like our relationship with China has just continued to deteriorate.” He added that it appears that China hid information in the early weeks of the outbreak in order to stockpile protective gear, “and otherwise protect themselves at the expense of the rest of the world.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
“We have to deal with China one way or the other but I would say that relationship is more strained,” he said. When a reporter noted that adviser Peter Navarro is pushing for trade retaliation, and the president seems less sure what direction to go, Cornyn said, “well the coronavirus sort of upended everything. And so I think a reevaluation is in order.”
Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., who also serves in the Senate leadership, said, “We need to make sure that we're never again dependent upon China for critical supplies, materials, medical medicines, and you're talking about how the best way to do it. That's part of the discussion and then Senator Cotton has a bill that been talked about as well” (see 2003190047).
Other Republican senators said that even if there is frustration with China over some issues, their role as an economic partner has to be considered.
Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said: “I don't think it's mutually exclusive to, you know, have some strong differences of opinion, and disagreements with China on other issues and still realize that they're a huge market, and we're a huge market ... we've got to figure out ways to cooperate economically.” He said China has been buying commodities, such as soybeans, as they pledged to do for phase one of the trade deal.
He was dismissive of Navarro's arguments for tariffs. “I think there are other ways you could get China's attention, too. And I think that ... particularly given the fact that we're going to want to restart the economy and start to ramp out of this hole that we're in. I'm not sure that, you know, taking punitive economic actions is a really good move right now.”
Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, a former U.S. trade representative, said that even though China hasn't bought all the ag commodities in phase one, that doesn't mean the U.S. should pull out of phase one. “Just the opposite ... we should insist that they fulfill their commitments, and fulfill their commitment to negotiate phase two,” he said. “These agreements are good for us.” He agreed with Barrasso, however, that the U.S. should make changes to its supply chains.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, downplayed the possibility that Trump would withdraw. “You're going to find the president talking fairly negative but not 100 percent negative about relations with China and trade with China,” he said during a conference call with reporters May 12. But he added, “I don’t think you’re going to hear him say anything negative about the agreement he signed.” Grassley said Trump is thinking about being re-elected and moving on to phase two in China negotiations.