The escalation of restrictive measures by the US administration following the trade talks in Madrid has unnecessarily put great strain on bilateral economic ties. It has been the US side's relentless pressure campaign over the past weeks, executed while ignoring the Chinese side's concerns and goodwill, that has directly prompted China's announcement of export control measures on rare earths and related items on Thursday.

Although it is well aware of what caused China's justified moves, the US administration still threatened to impose a 100 percent tariff on Chinese goods and export controls on critical software and industrial parts. In doing so, the US side ridiculously pretended to be the "victim". But the world sees clearly which party is responsible for the rising tensions.

Moreover, the US' threats also highlight the inadequacy of its policy toolbox in dealing with the problems that are de facto of its own making, as they seem more like a knee-jerk action, rather than a well-considered, systematic response. The performance of the US capital market on Friday demonstrated its doubts in the effectiveness of these rash threats.

Since 2018, the inherent flaws of the US' zero-sum approach to trade have become increasingly apparent. Facts have proven that the US tariffs on Chinese goods are indirect taxes on US importers and consumers.

While being preoccupied with its typical practice of double standard, the US administration seems to be operating under the illusion that its threats of extreme tariffs can force concessions from China. This is a profound miscalculation.

If the proposed intimidation materializes early next month as claimed, China will most likely respond with reciprocal countermeasures, repeating the cycle that unfolded earlier this year.

China will necessarily take advantage of the latest round of the US' economic coercion and trade bullying to further strengthen its foreign trade resilience. In the medium to long term, China will have no choice but to reduce its dependence on US software, industrial parts and technology if the US continues its current practice. In other words, the US' attempts at coercion will push China to accelerate its efforts to further strengthen its industry and supply chains.

The overall development trajectory of Sino-US economic and trade relations has shown it is a fighting-while-negotiating process. And the framework for that has become clear: China will negotiate adhering to its principled stance. It will not accommodate the US' habitual practice of using unilateral bullying measures to leverage concessions prior to talks.

China's supply capacity of certain items has proved to be irreplaceable. Under the current US economic situation, with wages stagnant and prices continuing to rise, the negative sentiment among the US public resulting from the inflation fueled by the US administration's economic and trade policies will have a direct impact on domestic politics with the 2026 midterm elections on the horizon.

China with its strong governance capabilities, responsive and pragmatic policymaking and economic resilience will continue to resist US pressure. The US administration should realize the futility of its bullying practices and recognize that dialogue and mutual respect are the best way to benefit the US. It should appreciate that the consensuses reached by the two heads of state that a sustainable economic partnership is in the fundamental interests of both countries.

China's stance is not one of mere defiance. It favors communication and cooperation rather than antagonism and confrontation. But the US seems unable to appreciate the benefits to be gained by abandoning its zero-sum mentality.

China remains open to working with the US and engaging in dialogue and consultation as the way forward, if the US administration can correct its course. The world's two largest economies should handle their differences responsibly and help steady the global economy.