博弈视角看“关税战”：特朗普策略与各经济体不同反应

Core Viewpoint - The article analyzes the implications of Trump's tariff war on the global economy, particularly focusing on the strategies and responses of various economic entities, including China, Canada, and Mexico, as well as the broader international context [2][4]. Group 1: Trump's Psychological Bottom Line - Trump's key demands in the tariff negotiations include a 10% baseline tariff on global imports, protective tariffs on key industries like automobiles, and specific measures targeting China, Canada, and Mexico [5][6][8]. - The 10% baseline tariff is seen as a potential concession point for Trump, aimed at preventing trade loopholes and increasing fiscal revenue [6]. - Protective tariffs on industries such as steel, aluminum, and automobiles are intended to limit competition and protect American jobs, with tariffs already set at 25% for steel and aluminum [7]. Group 2: Trump's Game Strategy - The U.S. holds a strategic advantage in the tariff war due to its position as the largest global demand-side economy, allowing it to dictate terms to other economies [10]. - Trump's unpredictable behavior in tariff announcements serves to increase the decision-making costs for opponents, maintaining strategic flexibility [11]. - The U.S. is shifting from multilateral frameworks like the WTO to bilateral negotiations, using tariffs as leverage to reshape trade relationships [10]. Group 3: China's Response - China has demonstrated a strong and rapid response to U.S. tariffs, indicating both the necessity and capability to counteract U.S. measures [15][16]. - The trade conflict is characterized as a repeated prisoner's dilemma, where mutual cooperation is beneficial, but unilateral concessions would disadvantage China [15]. - China's economic resilience and strategic reforms are expected to mitigate the impacts of the tariff war, with a focus on expanding domestic demand and technological self-sufficiency [18]. Group 4: Responses from Other Economies - Canada has taken a firm stance against U.S. tariffs, leveraging its economic ties with the U.S. to push back effectively, while Mexico has shown a more passive response due to its dependency on the U.S. [22][23]. - Other economies like the EU, Japan, and India have exhibited a tendency to negotiate rather than retaliate, reflecting their reliance on the U.S. and a lack of unified response strategies [25][26]. - The EU's delayed response to U.S. tariffs highlights internal divisions and a lack of cohesive strategy compared to China's swift actions [26].