U.S. President Donald Trump (left) and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the G20 Summit in Osaka, Japan, June 2019 [Photo=AP·Yonhap News]

U.S. President Donald Trump has warned that he may impose “much higher” tariffs on countries worldwide than current levels.

President Trump has publicly stated that “the United States has been too generous” and that he will not show leniency going forward. He also reaffirmed his "America First" policy, stating, "Many countries have deceived the United States for years. We will secure hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue through tariffs and strengthen national security."

'Unjust External Forces' and 'China-Centricity'

In South Korea, which is currently facing the risk of tariffs being raised from 15% to 25%, views on President Trump's actions are somewhat complex.

The opposition party has questioned the government's responsibility for the tariff increase, while the presidential office criticized the opposition, stating that "we must fight together against unjust external attacks."

In reality, the entity the government would want to object to is the "unjust attack" from the external force (the United States). However, Prime Minister Kim Min-seok made bold claims without basis after returning from the U.S., and since the government is not in a position to speak out to the U.S., they have taken their frustration out on the vulnerable opposition party. Regardless of the venting, the current government must take responsibility for the tariff issue.

Just as there are differing perspectives domestically, various voices are emerging within the U.S. regarding tariffs.

Currently, a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of reciprocal tariffs is underway in the U.S. Supreme Court. President Trump has vehemently accused "the U.S. small and medium-sized businesses and the 12 Democratic-leaning states leading this lawsuit as being China-centric."

Interestingly, while Trump criticized the U.S. Democratic Party as "China-centric," Lee Jae-myung's statement about "unjust external forces (the United States)" could not be more China-centric.

As is well known, South Korea runs a deficit in trade with China and a surplus in trade with the United States. By branding the U.S., our largest customer, as an "unjust external force," how can the U.S. consider South Korea as its ally?

Trump and Xi Jinping Are Similar?

Over the past decades, U.S. policy towards China has shifted from "Engagement" to "Strategic Competition." Particularly since the mid-2010s, as China has emerged as the strongest power in Asia, the U.S. has viewed China as its "greatest threat."

Recently, the Center for American Progress (CAP) criticized, "Instead of trying to change China's trajectory, President Trump is increasingly imitating Beijing's strategy."

They further argued, "President Trump uses state power to achieve political goals," and claimed that "Trump's 'America First' policy, a mix of transactional nationalism, personal loyalty, and state control, is creating a 'China-like America.'"

They also lamented, "As a result of following China's pattern of using its influence to suppress multilateral regulations it dislikes, the U.S. is undermining the trust and credibility that was once the basis of its global leadership."

However, there is something CAP has overlooked.

While it is true that President Xi Jinping and President Trump exert influence on their own countries and others based on their formidable power, there is a significant gap between them.

Xi Jinping uses the method of seizing control of the party organization within the vast bureaucratic apparatus of the Communist Party and self-appropriating the system through strict discipline. In other words, organizational control is the core of Xi Jinping's power.

However, Trump emerged like a comet from outside the established political establishment and is pursuing his own politics powered by public support.

The basis of Trump's power is not a party organization. For Trump, the nation is a large corporation. He focuses on transactional outcomes of U.S. economic interests rather than ideological justification.

He pursues "America First" politics under the guise of "national glory" and, through this, is subject to institutional judgment in elections every four years. This is his weapon.

How can Trump, who is like this, be equated with Xi Jinping, who has voluntarily entered a period of permanent rule (by deleting the term limit for the state president through constitutional amendment in 2018) under the pretext of the ideological justification of "permanent rule of the Communist Party"?

By comparing Trump, who wants his own people to prosper, with Xi Jinping, a devotee of ideology, CAP has inadvertently exposed China's true nature even more.

Reporter Im Yo-hee