But they will not stop the CCP from shifting its trade and growing its power elsewhere. Beijing’s answer to the tariffs will, in part, be to shift exports that previously went to the United States to Latin America and other parts of the “Global South,” including Africa, South Asia, and Southeast Asia. Xi will use trade with other countries, combined with anti-U.S. ideology, to try and reorient the world away from Washington and to Beijing, not only economically but also diplomatically. That is the nature of the geopolitical conflict that Beijing decided to pursue against the United States.
The CCP is using the wealth China accumulates through trade to build a global military that is on its way to being more powerful than the U.S. military. At that point, the CCP will be able to impose authoritarian measures globally at an even faster rate than it is achieving now with its influence in places like Russia, Iran, and North Korea.
The Peruvian mega port, called the Port of Chancay, is emblematic of this shift in favor of the CCP. It is much more than a port for Beijing. The CCP will—for the first time and by contract with Peru—have near total control of what goes in and out of the port, including from outside of Peru. This is unprecedented for a China-built port anywhere in the world, and there are many.
The port is, therefore, arguably more the sovereign territory of China now than of Peru. This is likely why Xi opened the port personally—he sees it as part of his historical legacy and the expansion of CCP control of global trade at a qualitatively higher level that compromises the sovereignty of the countries where the CCP operates.
Chancay is something like the port of Hong Kong was to the British Empire for over 150 years—a lucrative and sovereign gateway of trade to an entire continent. The CCP’s disruption of Peru’s sovereignty is yet another piece of evidence that the CCP’s denunciation of British or American “imperialism” is hypocritical and self-serving. Beijing is only against the imperialism of others, not of itself.
Nobody ever elected the CCP. It has no popular mandate. So there is no ethical reason that the United States or our allies should give the same trade privileges to CCP-controlled territory as we do to democracies and our other allies and partners. The CCP has no right to impose its control over China, much less over a Peruvian port over 10,000 miles away, even if the Peruvian president was tricked into signing an unenforceable contract giving away the country’s sovereignty.
Meanwhile, the CCP is bullying the U.S. Navy and our partners in places like the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait, through both of which we are allowed by international law to traverse. As long as China is complicating U.S. and allied shipping in those places, there are plenty of ways for the United States to respond in kind by complicating CCP-controlled shipping to Latin America.
Given the growing U.S. national debt, this is the kind of winning financial approach to China that Trump accomplished so well in the past. His tariffs on China in his first term were shocking at first but gradually accepted globally, including by the Europeans, who now impose their own tariffs on China. Anything less than taxing China’s global shipping, and countries like Taiwan and the Philippines will not have the money to defend themselves. Countries like Peru will be tricked into giving away their sovereignty, thus opening themselves to exploitation by the CCP. That would be to the detriment of the United States, liberty, democracy, human rights, international law, and, in the long run, the entire world.