Offensively Realist? Evaluating Trump’s Economic Policy Towards China

Riding to the White House on a wave of democratic fervour and also appealing plans that place “America First”, Donald Trump’s political election provided a large obstacle to the liberal internationalism that had actually specified United States diplomacy given that World War Two (Ikenberry et alia, 2018, p.1).  High-account project guarantees such as being harder on NATO free-riders, staying clear of costly efforts in the Middle East and also bring back equity when it come to Sino-United States profession were self-proclaimed as “rational” (NY Times, 2016) and also seemingly symbolized the rationalist IR custom that puts self-help as the raison d’être of states running under problems of global anarchy (Mearsheimer, 2014, pp.30-31). However, to what level President Trump’s diplomacy has actually mirrored realistic look refers dispute among scholars in the area. Randall Schweller sees Trump’s plans as based upon a worldview that is “fundamentally realist in nature” (2018a, p.134), whereas others have actually criticised his careless plans as taboo to a practical, realist method (McGurk, 2019; Walt, 2017). In this essay, I look for to contribute to this dispute by evaluating Trump’s international financial plan via the prism of offending realistic look, among one of the most preferred concepts of global national politics. I will particularly analyze 2 vital Trump plans; his initiation of a profession battle with China and also his withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). By doing so, I will certainly show that the Trump management’s financial plan in the direction of China cannot be taken into consideration rationalist. Before starting my evaluation, I will quickly clarify on the web link in between offending realistic look and also diplomacy.

Offensive Realism and also Foreign Policy

Offensive realistic look is a current enhancement to the rationalist IR custom, differentiating itself from timeless realistic look and also protective realistic look (Telbami, 2002, p.158). Unfortunately, I cannot use a thorough evaluation of the dispute that raves in between rationalist scholars, though it is necessary to keep in mind that offending realistic look is one sort of realistic look, not the sort of realistic look (Kirshner, 2010, p.53). Therefore, it is totally probable that Trump’s plans might be taken into consideration rationalist when evaluated utilizing a various variation of realistic look- certainly scholars have actually endeavoured to make this situation (see Schweller, 2018). Nonetheless, the range of this essay is limited to evaluating Trump’s plans via the prism of offending realistic look and also ends on these premises that Trump cannot be taken into consideration a rationalist.

First conceptualised by John J. Mearsheimer, offending realistic look (hereafter additionally described as realistic look) takes on an architectural sight of global national politics. In doing so, it shuns the evaluation of the inner characteristics of states; administration, framework of federal government, and also management individuality do not number in a globe of reasonable, utility-maximising states (Mearsheimer, 2014, p.31).  Mearsheimer improves the concepts of timeless realistic look (an anarchic system, the relevance of power and also the defend survival in between states) and also verbalizes them right into an extensive concept that insists that states will certainly constantly look for to increase power, accomplish local hegemony and also ultimately protect against others from obtaining such standing (ibid., pp.363-65). This makes offending realistic look of significance to existing United States-Sino connections- the United States is unquestionably a local hegemon in the Western hemisphere and also China’s marvelous increase and also assertive plans recommend that it as well needs such standing (Mandelbaum, 2019, p.125). Therefore, a rationalist United States diplomacy’s essential objective is to avoid China from coming to be a local hegemon in East Asia.

Despite insisting that army power is the supreme money in the global system (Mearsheimer, 2014, p.55), offending realistic look has a lot to state regarding business economics. Essentially, army power cannot be obtained without substantial gets of wide range to produce tools, buy modern technology and also train soldiers (Ibid.). Realism consequently comes close to financial purchases from a zero-sum point of view, simply put ‘one great power’s gains are necessarily, the various other’s loss’ (Christensen, 2006, p.96). Thus, it puts a primacy on family member gains (Grieco, 1988, p.499), indicating hegemonic states cannot endure a status that sees a competitor’s power expand quicker than its very own.  A last presumption that relates to profession is that of rationality, with Mearsheimer insisting that states will certainly make a cost-benefit analysis and also select the plan that is most efficient in boosting its power setting about its competitors (2009, p.244). Such presumptions are vital in establishing whether a plan is rationalist or otherwise.

An usual lightning-rod for rationalist objection is the “theory-practice paradox”; if realistic look insists itself to be reflective of the fact of global national politics, why do rationalists continuously suggest plans for states to comply with (Oren, 2009, p.284)? However, neorealist concepts never ever desire clarify private diplomacy choices, rather endeavouring to clarify global national politics a lot more extensively- certainly Mearsheimer acknowledges his forecasts aren’t constantly ideal (2014, pp.10-11).  Realists consequently identify the fundamental threats that happen when states do not act as anticipated and also entail themselves in the political procedure to avoid this from taking place, making offending realistic look both authoritative and also anticipating (Rosato and also Schuessler, 2011, p.813). From here, I will certainly show that Trump’s financial plan in the direction of China does not comply with the prescriptions of offending rationalist concept.

The Unrealism of Trump’s Trade Wars

Offensive realistic look is not protectionist naturally as free enterprises frequently profit the globe’s leading powers (Popescu, 2019, p.394). However, when the financial order is a lot more valuable to one world power than the various other, rationalists would certainly anticipate the last state to try to modify the system so regarding make sure a loved one advantage (Ibid). Prior to Trump’s political election, the worldwide financial order basically profited China vis-à-vis the United States. For years, the United States has actually gone after a plan of “engagement” which had actually looked for to incorporate China right into the globe economic climate and also handle its tranquil increase (Zhao, 2019, p.489). Such a plan method runs counter to realistic look; also if China conceals its increase as “peaceful”, its real objectives can never ever be understood and also consequently it has to be treated with uncertainty (Mearsheimer, 2014, p.381). Every year, China’s economic climate expands about that of the United States (World Bank, 2020), in no tiny component because of unjust trading methods such as forced technical transfer and also copyright burglary (Meltzer and also Sehnai, 2019, p.2). Such financial development permits China to speed up financing right into its army (Atesoglu, 2013, p.88) and also hence boosts its capability to task power in the area. That the Trump management is bidding to modify this situation by enforcing substantial tolls on the Chinese (which have actually been reciprocated) (BBC, 2019) has actually seen it related to offending realistic look (Popescu, 2019, p.394). Whilst these tolls have actually reduced United States financial development (Tankersley, 2019), a debate might be made that such plans stay in accordance with offending realistic look as they harm the Chinese economic climate a lot more, consequently enhancing United States family member gains (Mearsheimer, 2014, p.386). However, protectionism is the incorrect treatment to the issue of Chinese family member development.

 Trump’s profession plan in the direction of China shows a lack of reasonable evaluation of the framework of the global economic climate. A state can just anticipate to make family member gains using financial threat if the targeted state cannot get the tariffed products and also solutions in other places (Ibid). In this situation, there are lots of financial stars in the global system that are “functionally equivalent” to the United States (because they can provide comparable products and also solutions) that would certainly agree to load void left by America in China’s profession (Kim, 2018, p.1278). Indeed, China’s choice to reduced tolls with the European Union shows that they can and also will certainly look in other places to relieve the stress Trump’s tolls have actually positioned on its economic climate (Drezner, 2019, p.15). That Trump has actually additionally positioned tolls on EU products (Helmore, 2019) is proof of the unrealismof his profession plan, as this has actually offered the EU better motivation to involve with China in profession and also hence function as the United States’ “functional equivalent”. The fact is that financial control can just generate family member gains if carried out in performance with various other states (Art, 2003, p.120), which provides Trump’s independent profession battle versus China a workout in futility. The Chinese economic climate is anticipated to adjust to the preliminary shock, whilst United States companies will likely come to be much less affordable because of raised prices, hence indicating that Trump’s profession plan will certainly raise China’s family member financial benefit (Kim, 2018b). At best, the United States will certainly additionally locate “functionally equivalent” trading companions, providing the plan method useless because of “minimal impact” on either side (Kim, 2019, p.1432). Therefore, due to the presence of “functionally equivalent” rivals in the global system, a sensible state in the setting of the United States would certainly have wrapped up that the prices of embracing financial protectionist plans versus China were higher than the advantages or at ideal would certainly maintain the status-quo.

However, maybe suggested that Trump’s plans are not component of a lasting method to damages China’s economic climate however are a kind of “economic statecraft” made to require it to make concessions in the short-term (Ibid., p.1440).  Such a plan method would certainly seem suitable with offending realistic look, which recommends that states must seek step-by-step boosts in nationwide power when the chance develops (Snyder, 2002, p.158). In this feeling, the contract of a profession offer in between the United States and also China previously this year (that covered most of the locations China obtains its unjust benefits from (Politi, 2020)) might be deemed a success of Trumpian financial statecraft. However, there is factor to think that Trump’s offer will certainly not in fact enhance United States power about China. Realism would barely have us anticipate that China would certainly capitulate to United States financial stress so conveniently; if the continuous profession battle won’t decrease Chinese gains about the United States, why would certainly China make the giving ins Trump needs? As Grieco insists, states are most likely to rip off on or leave a global contract must it emerge that are making gains about it (1988, p.499). Therefore, offending realistic look would certainly anticipate the participating contract got to in between the United States and also China to be short-term. China will certainly want to problem from the contract once it knows that stopping its unjust organization methods will certainly decrease its competition in the worldwide economic climate and also hence decrease its family member benefit over the United States.  Indeed, it has previous kind hereof, continuously damaging WTO regulations made to cut its unjust methods (United States Trade Representative, 2019, p.2). Thus, whilst it might appear that Trump’s financial statecraft has actually compelled the Chinese to the negotiating table, realistic look would certainly advise one to be skeptical of such a story and also would certainly anticipate Chinese defection or withdrawal from the offer and also a resumption of the destructive profession battles.

The Realism of the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Not just has the Trump management sought a Chinese profession plan that is inappropriate with offending realistic look, it has actually declined a profession contract that had all the characteristics of a noise, rationalist plan. On his very first day in workplace, Trump authorized an exec order taking out the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a multilateral profession contract with 11 various other pacific edge countries, most importantly omitting China (Traub, 2014). His factors for doing so can be deemed suitable with offending realistic look; he took into consideration the TPP a negative offer because of the truth that the various other trading companions profit greater than the United States, hence indicating the United States would certainly make family member losses (Magcamit, 2017, p.20). However, “when considering the problem of relative gains, decision-makers usually only care about the most powerful country or a country with the strongest upward mobility” (Bin, 2003, p.315). In this feeling Trump must have checked out the TPP not via the prism of family member gains vis-à-vis various other participant states however analyze just how the profession contract influences United States power about China. When checked out hereof, TPP approval was an essentially realist plan, with the offer forecasted to cause substantial losses for China (Sidkar and also Mukhopadhyay, 2017, p.20) whilst all at once enhancing United States financial development (Petri and also Plummer, 2016, pp.10-11). Given the dependancy of China on its local neighbors, it is not likely that it would certainly have had the ability to locate ideal alternate trading companions, consequently providing them an option in between financial marginalization or “constructive engagement” with TPP participants (Poletti, 2018, p.58). Should China have actually picked this last choice, they would certainly have been locked-in a US-led profession routine made particularly to restrict the relative benefits they originate from unjust trading methods (Chow, 2016, p.376). In this feeling, approval of the TPP would certainly have paid for the United States much higher take advantage of over China instead of a unilateral profession battle and also consequently would certainly have been a far more ideal treatment to the unsuccessful plan of involvement. The United States’ withdrawal from the TPP has actually ultimately left the door open for Chinese participation, with the continuing to be participants even more most likely to be laxer concerning China’s trading methods, because of their need for accessibility to its big market (Foster and also Doffey, 2018). Such an action would certainly raise China’s financial prominence over its neighbors and also hence better its capability to task power in the area, an end result taboo to the rationalist scholar. A rationalist management would certainly have prevented this result whatsoever prices and also validated the TPP.

Furthermore, it would certainly be misdirecting to restrict the advantages of TPP approval simply to the family member gains it would certainly have accumulated to the United States – there were additionally solid critical rewards for this plan. As Mearsheimer illuminates, China’s neighbors all have an usual passion in having its increase so regarding prevent dominance however are not effective adequate to do so alone and also consequently need United States management (2014, p.385). In this light, the TPP might have been the initial step in the ‘coming balancing coalition’ that Mearsheimer anticipated would certainly arise to include China’s increase (Ibid., p.383). As Hasegawa illuminates, financial assimilation in between states manages them a feeling of shared protection versus dangers and also frequently foreshadows army collaboration (2017, p.164). Therefore, lots of TPP participant states saw the campaign as essential from a safety point of view, as it showed that the United States had a dedication to participate in a harmonizing plan versus China (Miller, 2015, p.8). Before Trump’s early termination of the profession contract, also a distressed India was taking into consideration involving with the task (Tellis, 2014, p.112). Should this have actually taken place, the United States would certainly have prospered in unifying China’s local neighbors in a considerable profession routine, with the possibility for higher army teamwork better down the line. Without such a union,  China’s neighbors recognize that they cannot solidify its aspirations in the South China Sea and also are consequently dependent on United States management to discourage its irredentist plans there and also avoid it from insisting control over the tactically vital sea lane and also the natural deposits that exist under it (Emmerson, 2017, p.12). The TPP would certainly have shown such a dedication and also hence worked as a company barrier versus Chinese expansionism in the area (Hasegawa, 2017, p.164). That the Trump management would certainly overlook the geostrategic advantages of the TPP is consequently demonstrative that its plan method does not line up with offending realistic look.


By utilizing offending realistic look as a logical device, I end that Donald Trump’s financial plan in the direction of China cannot be taken into consideration rationalist. If the United States’ essential objective is to include China’s increase and also avoid it from attaining local hegemony in East Asia, after that Trump’s choices to take out from the TPP and also start a profession battle with China have actually been definite failings. Whilst the status-quo plan of involvement is unwanted, the profession battles have actually highlighted Chinese family member gains instead of lessening them and also have actually consequently been not able to safeguard substantial giving ins concerning China’s unjust profession methods. The TPP withdrawal was likewise anti-realist, turning down a concurred profession offer that would certainly have enabled the United States to establish the profession schedule in East Asia, raised United States gains about China and also indicated to local allies a long lasting United States dedication to include China’s increase. The web outcome of these plans is a China that stays on training course to control East Asia financially, with an extension of such a plan method definitely introducing Chinese local hegemony in the future.


Art, R.J. (2003). A grand method for America. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

Atesoglu, H.S. (2013). Economic Groth and also Military Spending in China. International Journal of Political Economy, [online] 42(2), pp.88–100. Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

BBC (2019). A fast overview to the United States-China profession battle. BBC News. [online] 29 Jun. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020]

Bin, L. (2003). Absolute gains, family member gains, and also United States protection plan on China. Defense & Security Analysis, [online] 19(4), pp.309–317. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Chow, D.C.K. (2016). How the United States Uses the Trans-Pacific Partnership to Contain China in International Trade. SSRN Electronic Journal, [online] 17(2). Available at: [Accessed 29 Feb. 2020].

Christensen, T.J. (2006). Fostering Stability or Creating a Monster? The Rise of China and also U.S. Policy towards East Asia. International Security, [online] 31(1), pp.81–126. Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

Emmerson, D.K. (2017). ASEAN in between China and also America: Is It Time to Try Horsing the Cow? TRaNS: Trans -Regional and also -National Studies of Southeast Asia, 5(1), pp.1–23. Available at: also-national-studies-of-southeast-asia/article/asean-between-china-and also-america-is-it-time-to-try-horsing-the-cow/793AFAA432688BC8D57919C49195BD89 [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

Foster, H. and Doffey, A. (2018). Why China Should Join the Trans-Pacific Partnership – AIIA. [online] Australian Institute of International Affairs. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

‌Grieco, J.M. (1988). Anarchy and the limitations of teamwork: a rationalist review of the latest liberal institutionalism. International Organization, [online] 42(03), pp.485–507. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020]

Hasegawa, M. (2017). Close Economic Exchange with a Threatening State: An Awkward Dilemma over China. Asian Security, [online] 14(2), pp.155–171. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Helmore, E. (2019). ‘Absolutely draconian’: British brand names support for Trump’s tolls. [online] the Guardian. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

‌Ikenberry, G.J., Parmar, I. and also Stokes, D. (2018). Introduction: Ordering the globe? Liberal internationalism theoretically and also technique. International Affairs, 94(1), pp.1–5. Available at: [Accessed, 29 Feb. 2020]

Kim, D.J. (2018). Realists as totally free investors: the battle for power and also the situation versus protectionism. International Affairs, [online] 94(6), pp.1269–1286. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Kim, D.J. (2018b). Why Trump’s financial protectionism won’t make America wonderful once more. [online] Medium. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Kim, D.J. (2019). Economic control as a method of Great Power competitors. International Affairs, [online] 95(6), pp.1423–1441. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Kirshner, J. (2010). The catastrophe of offending realistic look: Classical realistic look and also the increase of China. European Journal of International Relations, 18(1), pp.53–75. Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

Magcamit, M. (2017). DESCRIBING THE THREE-WAY AFFILIATION IN BETWEEN POPULISM, SECURITIZATION, AND RATIONALIST FOREIGN POLICIES: President Donald Trump and also the Pursuit of “America First” Doctrine. World Affairs, [online] 180(3), pp.6–35. Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

Mandelbaum, M. (2019). The New Containment Handling Russia, China, and also Iran. Foreign Affairs, [online] 98(2), pp.123–131. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

McGurk, B. (2019). American Foreign Policy Adrift. [online] Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Mearsheimer, J.J. (2009). Reckless States and also Realism. International Relations, [online] 23(2), pp.241–256. Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

‌Mearsheimer, J.J. (2014). The catastrophe of Great Power national politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

Meltzer, J. and also Shenai, N. (2019). The United States-China financial connection An extensive method Executive Summary. [online] Brookings Institution. Available at: [Accessed 3 Mar. 2020].

Miller, M. (2015). China’s Relations with Southeast Asia. [online] U.S.-CHINA FINANCIAL AND ALSO SAFETY EVALUATION PAYMENT, pp.1–8. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

‌NY Times (2016). Transcript: Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy Speech. The New York Times. [online] 27 Apr. Available at: [Accessed 29 Feb. 2020]

Oren, I. (2009). The Unrealism of Contemporary Realism: The Tension in between Realist Theory and also Realists’ Practice. Perspectives on Politics, [online] 7(2), pp.283–301. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Petri, P. & Plummer, M. (2016). The financial results of the Trans-Pacific Partnerhsip: brand-new quotes. Working Paper 16–2, Washington DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Poletti, A. (2018). Containment Through Trade? Explaining the United States Support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership in Clementi et alia, United States Foreign Policy in a Challenging World: Building Order on Shifting Foundations. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Politi, J. (2020). What’s in the United States-China ‘phase one’ profession offer? [online] FinancialTimes. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Popescu, I. (2019). American Grand Strategy and also the Rise of Offensive Realism. Political Science Quarterly, [online] 134(3), pp.375–405. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

Rosato, S. and also Schuessler, J. (2011). A Realist Foreign Policy for the United States. Perspectives on Politics, [online] 9(4). Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

Schweller, R. (2018). Opposite however Compatible Nationalisms: A Neoclassical Realist Approach to the Future people–China Relations. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, [online] 11(1), pp.23–48. Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

Schweller, R. (2018a). Three Cheers for Trump’s Foreign Policy: What the Establishment Misses. Foreign Affairs, 97(5), pp.133–143.‌ Available at: [Accessed 27th Feb. 2020].

Sikdar, C. and also Mukhopadhyay, K. (2017). Economy-vast influence of TPP: brand-new difficulties to China. Journal of Economic Structures, [online] 6(1). Available at: [Accessed 28 Feb 2020].

Snyder, G.H. (2002). Mearsheimer’s World—Offensive Realism and also the Struggle for Security: A Review Essay. International Security, [online] 27(1), pp.149–173. Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

Telbami, S. (2002). Kenneth Waltz, Neorealism, and also Foreign Policy. Security Studies, 11(3), pp.158–170. Available at: [Accessed 29th Feb. 2020]

Tellis, A.J. (2014). The geopolitics of the TTIP and also the TPP. Adelphi Series, [online] 54(450), pp.93–120. Available at: [Accessed 1 Mar. 2020].

Traub, J. (2014). Obama’s Pacific Wager. [online] Foreign Policy. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

United States Trade Representative (2019). 2018 Report to Congress On China’s WTO Compliance United States Trade Representative. [online] United States Trade Representative. Available at: [Accessed 29 Feb. 2020].

Walt, S.M. (2017). This Isn’t Realpolitik. This Is Amateur Hour. [online] Foreign Policy. Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

World Bank (2020). World Development Indicators InformationBank. [online] Available at: [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].

‌Zhao, S. (2017). American Reflections on the Engagement with China and also Responses to President Xi’s New Model of Major Power Relations. Journal of Contemporary China, [online] 26(106), pp.489–503. Available at: [Accessed 29 Feb. 2020].

Written at: University of St Andrews
Written for: Dr. Adam Bower
Date created: March 2020

Further Reading on E-International Relations