Commentary: U.S. voters deserve better than China-bashing

U.S. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on Tuesday played the China-bashing card once again in his latest attempt to rectify his falling popularity. The inflammatory rhetoric, however, is dangerous and damaging and offers nothing substantive in way of improving relations with China.

In a speech in Detroit that outlined his economic prescription for America's economic headaches, Trump alleged that China "breaks the rules in every way imaginable" when trading with the United States, and "is responsible for nearly half of our entire trade deficit."

The former property developer pledged to boost the U.S. economy by hindering China's exports to the U.S. market and renegotiating global trade rules. "Americanism not globalism will be our new credo," Trump claimed.

To make their boss more appealing to the blue-collar working class in Midwestern states, economic advisers of the New York mogul earlier threatened a tougher approach on trade that includes a possible "trade war" with China, the world's second largest economy and the U.S.'s largest trading partner.

By scapegoating China and global free trade for lackluster economic performance, Trump and his team betrayed the Republicans' traditional endorsement of unrestricted trade. In a freakish coincidence, Trump shared a similar view with his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton that Washington shall pursue myopic and poisonous protectionism and "stand up to China" to make up for lost ground.

For years, China-bashing has always been an easy card for U.S. political candidates to play and cover up the country' s fundamental structural drawbacks. After all, settling these problems needs more painstaking reforms that none of the two parties would dare propose at the risk of electoral defeat.

However, if populist yet protectionist policies gets its way, Americans would have to pay a much higher price to bring factory jobs back to the country. By failing to focus on some real competitive edges, such means will only prompt countermeasures from other nations, leading to tit-for-tat protectionism and even trade wars, in the worst scenario.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, traditionally a Republican's supporter on trade, said that Trump's approach would cost 3.5 million U.S. jobs and result in higher prices for American consumers as well as a weaker economy.

Meanwhile, lashing out at China for U.S. economic frustrations has proven futile. Ironically, the U.S. middle and working classes, to whom Trump and Hillary have been eager to pander, would become the first to take the hit of U.S. trade barriers against China.

As the main beneficiary of Sino-U.S. win-win cooperation, Americans have grown accustomed to high-quality and affordable Chinese-made goods. Without their country's massive trade with China, neither their quality of life nor their country's high-end advantage in the global industrial chain can be maintained.

Fiery rhetoric has become Trump's card ever since the start of this election race. But even the billionaire himself could not see his own business thrive without decades of ties to China.

The world has gotten used to generations of U.S. presidents denouncing China in an election race. But they usually reoriented their China policy as soon as they took power and tried instead to cement ties with the Asian country.

That was true with former Republican President George W. Bush, and Hillary's once anti-trade husband Bill Clinton, who nevertheless gave China most-favored-nation treatment, which in part contributed to the U.S. economic boom of the 1990s.

Hopefully, the threat of launching a trade war with China by the current presidential candidates is merely tough talk. China-bashing is a recurring theme every four years, and by now it's become quite dull. Let's hope the next time around that future presidential possibles have something more substantial to say about America's relationship with China. U.S. voters deserve better. Endi