On May 12, 2025, President Donald Trump delivered a press conference in the Roosevelt Room of the White House that left observers puzzled.
Addressing recent trade negotiations with China, Trump announced a significant de-escalation in the ongoing tariff war, but his remarks were marked by confusion, historical inaccuracies, and contradictions.
The speech not only highlighted Trump’s shifting stance on trade policy but also raised questions about his administration’s coherence in handling one of the most critical economic relationships in the world.
A Trade War Pause: The Geneva Agreement
The centerpiece of Trump’s remarks was the announcement of a temporary truce in the U.S.-China trade war, brokered over the weekend in Geneva.
The agreement slashed U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports from a staggering 145% to 30%, while China reduced its retaliatory tariffs on American goods from 125% to 10%.
Both sides agreed to maintain these reduced rates for 90 days while negotiators work toward a more permanent resolution.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent described the deal as a sign that “neither side wanted a decoupling,” emphasizing the mutual economic stakes at play.
For American businesses reeling from the tariff-induced disruptions—supply chain bottlenecks, rising costs, and market volatility—the temporary reprieve was a welcome development.
The Times noted that “even a temporary reprieve from the shockingly high tariffs is cause for celebration for businesses in both countries,” though it cautioned that “the tariffs’ repercussions will linger.”
However, critics were quick to frame the deal as a retreat, with some arguing that Trump had “surrendered” after months of aggressive posturing.
Sirius XM host Dean Obeidallah, for instance, posted on Bluesky: “Trump started the fire with his erratic tariffs, now he surrenders.
Yet media claims Trump is a savior for making a trade deal with China.
There is NO deal.
Trump surrendered but not before he caused much pain to small and mid-sized businesses, dock workers, truckers, and people with 401ks/stocks.”
A Speech Marred by Confusion
While the Geneva agreement was a concrete outcome, Trump’s explanation of it was anything but clear.
His speech veered between present-day negotiations and vague references to past deals, leaving listeners struggling to follow his logic.
At one point, Trump stated, “Both sides now agreed to reduce the tariffs imposed. After April 2nd, to 10% for 90 days as negotiators continue.”
The mention of April 2—a date over a month prior—appeared to be a mistake, as the agreement was finalized in May.
Trump further muddled the narrative by referencing a “great trade deal” with China from his first administration, claiming it was initially “much bigger” but was “canceled” by China at the last moment.
He seemed to conflate the current negotiations with a 2020 Phase One trade agreement, which required China to purchase $50 billion worth of U.S. agricultural products.
Trump boasted that the earlier deal “opened up China” to American businesses, but lamented that “they canceled it the last day,” and he “got a little bit angry.”
These remarks ignored the fact that U.S.-China trade has been active since diplomatic relations were reestablished in 1979, as noted by the Library of Congress.
Perhaps most strikingly, Trump admitted to misunderstanding key details of the tariff negotiations.
He recounted a moment of confusion over tariff rates, saying, “People thought it was 15 because they were doing 15.
We made it 50 because I misunderstood the 15.
I thought they said—I said, you got to get 50 because when I asked—what are we doing with them?”
This candid admission of error underscored the chaotic nature of his trade policy approach, raising concerns about the clarity and competence of his administration’s economic strategy.
The Bigger Picture: A Trade War with Mixed Results
Trump’s tariff war with China, which began in earnest during his first term and escalated in 2025, has been a polarizing endeavor.
Supporters argue that his aggressive stance forced China to the negotiating table, pointing to the Geneva agreement as evidence of his deal-making prowess.
They credit Trump with challenging China’s trade practices, which many economists agree have included unfair subsidies and intellectual property violations.
The 2020 Phase One deal, for instance, was hailed as a win for American farmers, even if China fell short of its purchase commitments.
However, critics contend that Trump’s tariffs have done more harm than good.
Dr. Moira Weigel, a Harvard University assistant professor, wrote in a New York Times guest essay that the 245% tariffs imposed earlier in 2025 were “unlikely to achieve [Trump’s] goal of returning manufacturing jobs to the United States.”
Instead, she argued, they strengthened China’s economic position by pushing its Amazon ecosystem to diversify and expand globally.
In China, Trump has earned the ironic nickname “Chuan Jianguo” or “Trump the Nation Builder,” with some merchants jokingly praising him as a “patriotic son of China” for inadvertently bolstering their economy.
The tariffs’ domestic impact has also been contentious.
American consumers have faced higher prices, with CNN’s Erin Burnett estimating that a $10 item from China would cost $18.50 under the new tariff regime.
Small businesses, dock workers, and truckers have borne the brunt of supply chain disruptions, while stock market volatility has eroded confidence in 401(k)s and retirement accounts.
Even Trump’s own party has shown signs of unease, with some Republican senators warning of a “tariff backlash” that could cost the GOP politically.
China’s Response: Calling Trump’s Bluff
China’s handling of the tariff war has been notably strategic.
Throughout 2025, Chinese officials have alternated between defiance and calculated restraint.
In April, President Xi Jinping declared that China was “not afraid” of Trump’s trade war, raising tariffs on U.S. goods to 125% but signaling they would not escalate further.
CNN’s Marc Stewart described China’s rhetoric as “almost making fun” of Trump, noting that Beijing viewed the U.S.’s 145% tariffs as unsustainable.
This perception was reinforced by Trump’s eventual backtracking.
As Jonathan Chait wrote in The Atlantic, China’s decision to ignore Trump’s warnings against retaliation paid off: “Trump held out for one month before backing down.”
Chait argued that Trump’s approach—described as “dominance theater” reminiscent of his reality TV persona—lacked substance, concluding that “winning with Trump is often impossible, because the relationship itself is lose-lose.”
Former Trump aide Sarah Matthews echoed this sentiment, telling MSNBC that China was “trolling” Trump by calling his bluff on exaggerated claims, such as his assertion of securing “200 tariff deals with 200 countries.”
Broader Implications: Allies and Global Trade
The U.S.-China trade war has not unfolded in isolation. Trump’s tariffs have strained relationships with allies, prompting unexpected alignments.
In March 2025, Japan and South Korea joined forces with China to “jointly respond” to U.S. tariffs, a move that stunned analysts.
Commentator Catherine Rampell remarked, “It took just two months to drive two of our closest and most important allies into China’s arms.”
This development underscored the risk of Trump’s “America First” policy alienating traditional partners, potentially eroding U.S. influence in the Asia-Pacific region.
Moreover, the trade war has exposed vulnerabilities in Trump’s broader economic strategy.
Eduardo Porter, writing for The Washington Post, argued that Trump’s tariffs were unlikely to succeed because they failed to offer “carrots” to incentivize global cooperation.
Instead, by punishing allies and adversaries alike, Trump risked pushing countries toward China’s sphere of influence, particularly in Latin America.
What Lies Ahead?
As the 90-day tariff truce begins, both the U.S. and China face a critical window to negotiate a sustainable trade framework.
For Trump, the challenge is to translate his deal-making rhetoric into tangible outcomes without further destabilizing the U.S. economy.
His administration’s mixed messaging—tough talk followed by concessions—has fueled skepticism about his ability to deliver.
Treasury Secretary Bessent’s call for a “fair deal” and de-escalation suggests a pragmatic shift, but Trump’s unpredictable style remains a wildcard.
For China, the truce offers an opportunity to consolidate its economic gains while navigating domestic pressures.
Beijing’s willingness to engage in talks, as signaled by its Ministry of Commerce in late 2024, indicates a desire to avoid a full-blown trade war.
However, China’s trolling of Trump and its alignment with U.S. allies suggest a confidence that it can outmaneuver him diplomatically.
President Trump’s May 12 speech was a microcosm of his trade war with China: bold, chaotic, and ultimately inconclusive.
While the Geneva agreement marks a pause in hostilities, it falls short of the transformative “deal” Trump promised.
His admission of confusion and reliance on outdated anecdotes have only deepened doubts about his administration’s economic stewardship.
As the U.S. and China enter a delicate phase of negotiations, the world watches to see whether Trump can deliver on his promises—or whether his tariff gambit will be remembered as a costly misstep.
Back to Retail Investor News.
About The Author
