Conflict between the US and China governments over export restrictions – continuing the earth in one direction and other goods in another direction are branded into a new “supply chain” trade war. The Wall Street Journal wrote (“Supply Chains Become a New Battlefield in the World Trade War”, June 11, 2025):
Important lessons from the latest skirmishes of the US-China trade war: the era of weaponized supply chains has arrived.
Weaponization is what happens when you intervene in someone else’s problem. Not only do they weaponize trade against foreign rulers, but tariffs and other trade barriers are weapons that the government supports against joint domestic consumers of SUBA domestic producers and other domestic producers.
Disputes over exports mark to return to the 17th and 18th centuries. The central government frequently restricted foreign imports as well as foreign exports. Grain exports were banned if harvests deteriorated, prices rose, or government price control caused shortages. In France, even grain movements between regions were controlled. As explained in the previous post, the UK government once banned the export of sub-machines to prevent foreign textile manufacturers from competing with domestic manufacturers. They also tried to prevent the migration of specialized world families before machines. The embargo was a weapon of war.
When the economists stop, protectionism is what we do to ourselves, which is done by foreign enemies at war. Of course, “what we do to ourselves” must be read as “what our submarines do to others within us.”
Rare earths are chemical elements found in minerals and, as is the case with many commodities, are used in many high-tech products that have both the production of minerals and magnets and for civilian and military use. Restricting or blocking exports from China will raise prices in other parts of the world and thus reduce its use to the next most valuable thing. For example, dysprosium prices have more than doubled over the past two months. People who are not economics families ignore the role of price in avoiding shortages. Also, note that it is almost always there. However, if it is not entirely complete, its use is either so efficient or costly (see my post, “War and Alternative Economic Concepts”). Moreover, 30% of rare earths are located in the outside China, including the United States. It is true that nine tents of treatment are concentrated in China and new plants will take longer to build, but at least one private company is already planning one in the US.
In the current association, the US government, a Donald Trump figure, launched a trade war. As the Chinese government retaliated, the US government also increased tariffs on goods imported from China. In mid-May, a meeting of two government representatives in Geneva reiterated partially repeatedly tariffs and suspended the cycle of retaliation. However, while the Chinese government had restricted rare earth exports, the US government learned about export controls regarding chipping and education (by limiting US Chinese student visas). On June 5th, Trump was in vain waiting for a sub-muse call from Xi, lied about Review 1, and finally blinked and called.
A two-day meeting with cabinet-level aides from two camps that continued last week in London. The two delegations agreed to an unpublished “framework” and returned to the Geneva aggregation. In exchange for the Chinese government, it temporarily eases restrictions on rare earth and magnet exports to the United States, and the Trump administration proposed to ease its own restrictions on Jet Engine and Ethane Salt and Chinese Student Visa Journal, June 11, 2025. But as the editorial says, “there are few details.”
After declaring that “a trade war is good and easy to win,” the declaration more or less begged for another long group rule that we can import what we need! The threat never far behind their dealings, as the rulers of the group do not like to beg in their grandeur. “I prohibit subjects from importing and exporting from you,” and you can transform into “I’ll get what I want from you.”
From a rule inserter’s insertion perspective, that’s what we should do. Freedom of trade between individuals and their private organizations is a necessary condition for prosperity, peace and security.
*************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Yahoo! Return to the 17th century, Pierre Lemieux and Chattgupto
