0:00

Hi, this is Eric Kim with New

0:02

York Times Cooking. As a recipe

0:04

developer, I spend a lot of

0:06

my time trying to come up

0:08

with dishes that are quick, easy,

0:11

but also very special. For me,

0:13

that means dishes like cochogato salmon.

0:15

It's a crispy salmon fillet with

0:17

a salty, sweet glaze that bubbles

0:19

up in candies. I love cooking

0:21

this because it only takes 20

0:23

minutes. You can get this recipe

0:25

and so many more ideas on

0:27

New York Times cooking. Visit NYU

0:29

cooking.com to get inspired. From

0:31

New York Times, I'm Michael

0:34

Balboro. This is the daily.

0:36

President Trump says that he

0:38

is pausing some of the

0:40

tariffs that took effect overnight.

0:43

He announced a 90-day pause

0:45

on most of his new

0:48

tariffs. After promising that tariffs

0:50

against dozens of countries

0:53

were here to stay. No matter

0:55

how much they heard businesses or

0:57

the stock market, President

0:59

Trump has abruptly reversed

1:01

course. A universal 10%

1:03

tariff is in place

1:05

while country-specific deals come

1:08

together and sector-specific tariffs

1:10

remain. It looks like the

1:12

US has blinked. Except when it

1:14

comes to China. The President also

1:16

saying that he will raise the

1:19

tariff on Chinese imports now up

1:21

to 125 percent.

1:23

Today. Today. Jonathan

1:25

Swan on

1:28

why the

1:30

president changed

1:33

his mind

1:35

and David

1:38

Pearson on

1:40

why China

1:43

won't back

1:45

down. It's

1:47

Thursday, April

1:51

10th. and joining

1:53

us. Thanks for having me. So

1:55

the question here is very simple. Why

1:57

did Donald Trump reverse himself?

2:00

here and take the off-ramp from

2:02

these tariffs that none of us

2:04

thought he was very likely to

2:06

take. What happened here? Well

2:08

if you listen to the

2:10

public explanations from his

2:13

aides... This negotiation went

2:15

exactly the way we had

2:17

hoped it would go. This was the

2:19

plan all along. As I told everyone

2:22

a week ago do not

2:24

retaliate and you will be

2:26

rewarded. The Treasury Secretary, the

2:28

press secretary... clearly

2:30

missed the art of the deal. You

2:32

clearly failed to see what President Trump

2:34

is doing here. The genius out of

2:37

the deal strategy to isolate China and,

2:39

you know, negotiate with the rest of

2:41

the world. The entire world is calling

2:43

the United States of America not

2:45

China because they need our markets,

2:47

they need our consumers, and they

2:50

need this president in the Oval

2:52

Office to talk to them. Right. This

2:54

was all pre-planned. Yeah. That's not true.

2:56

behind the scenes what actually happened and

2:58

we're still getting more detailed now you

3:01

know my colleagues Maggie Haber and myself

3:03

and others on our team have been

3:05

reporting this out but right it's all

3:07

it's only five o'clock we haven't had

3:09

all that much time to make sense

3:12

of basically a three-hour old pause yeah

3:14

but but based on the conversations I've

3:16

had in the last two hours I

3:18

can say with confidence that this was

3:21

a decision driven by fear of

3:23

a full-blown financial panic crisis It

3:25

is true that Scott Besant,

3:27

the Treasury Secretary, and others

3:30

in Trump's orbit, have been

3:32

for several days now trying

3:34

to talk him towards a

3:37

more tailored tariff strategy, one

3:39

that would not punish allies as

3:41

harshly as America's worst trade adversaries,

3:44

and one that would potentially isolate

3:46

China. while putting a freeze on

3:48

other countries to negotiate, which is

3:51

where they ended up. But as

3:53

has become clear in conversations I've

3:55

had in the last couple of

3:58

hours, the end of... that deserves

4:00

most credit for today's decision is

4:02

the bond markets and fear among

4:04

Trump's team that this could spiral

4:06

out into a full-blown financial panic.

4:09

So just explain the meltdown Jonathan

4:11

in the bond market. Well you've

4:13

got the worst person you can

4:15

possibly ask to explain the meltdown

4:17

in the bond market. You actually

4:19

need someone who knows what they're

4:21

talking about. Okay okay Jonathan we

4:23

figured this might be the case

4:25

that you are not the authority

4:28

on the bond market and so

4:30

in the grand tradition of... phoning

4:32

a friend and having Marshall McLuhan

4:34

behind the potted plant, we're going

4:36

to bring on someone who is

4:38

an authority on bonds to briefly

4:40

explain what the heck just happened

4:42

there. I think that's very wise

4:44

for your listeners. What I would

4:47

acknowledge in this moment too, which

4:49

is that the bond market is

4:51

pretty hard to explain so we

4:53

decided to call you and ask

4:55

you to just briefly explain What

4:57

happened in the bond market because

4:59

as Jonathan just put it That

5:01

felt decisive in the Trump administration's

5:04

decision to hit pause on the

5:06

tariffs that terrified them Jonathan just

5:08

said so what happened? Why would

5:10

it merit terror from this administration?

5:12

So there are not a lot

5:14

of sure things in this world,

5:16

but one of them is that

5:18

in times of crisis, people around

5:20

the world buy the US dollar,

5:23

and specifically they buy US government

5:25

bonds. Because there's this building assumption

5:27

that whatever happens, war, aliens invade,

5:29

you know, whatever, the US government's

5:31

going to endure, and that appears

5:33

to have broken down, not fully,

5:35

but at least in the margins.

5:37

This idea that the US is

5:39

the ultimate safe haven is broken

5:42

down. And when people are less

5:44

willing to... by US

5:46

government debt, the

5:48

US government has

5:50

to pay a

5:52

greater rate of

5:54

return to persuade

5:56

people to buy

5:58

our debt. They

6:01

have to pay

6:03

higher interest rates,

6:05

basically. And a

6:07

lot of other

6:09

interest rates are

6:11

paid to the

6:13

rates on US

6:15

government debt. Mortgages,

6:17

credit cards. And

6:23

so you've got both the message

6:25

of the bond market breaking out,

6:27

which is that people who trade

6:29

money for a living worry that

6:31

bad days are ahead. And then

6:33

you've got the direct consequences of

6:35

jacking up borrowing rates, which is

6:37

an easy way to end up

6:39

in a nasty recite. God,

6:44

just to make sure I understand,

6:46

traditionally, you buy a bond, you basically

6:48

loan the United States government some

6:50

money, you are a thousand percent sure

6:52

that money is going to come

6:55

back with a little extra. All of

6:57

a sudden, people are fearful that

6:59

might not be the case. The government

7:01

might not be so dependable. They

7:03

start selling these bonds and it starts

7:05

to mess up all other kinds

7:07

of borrowing rates around the economy. And

7:09

that's how you suddenly get into

7:11

a situation where this all starts to

7:13

go really sideways. Yeah, I mean,

7:16

your mortgage goes up, well, you're going

7:18

to spend less on other parts

7:20

of the economy, which means you're depriving

7:22

businesses of income. Maybe you're not

7:24

going to buy that house you were

7:26

thinking about. And now housing prices

7:28

don't go up as much and some

7:30

developers doesn't make as much money

7:32

as they hoped in construction companies. I

7:35

get less business as a result.

7:37

This is how economic downturns happen. One

7:39

key trigger is when the cost

7:41

of borrowing money goes up, especially quickly.

7:43

That can be a real shock

7:45

to the system. Got it. And that

7:47

shock is exactly what happened today

7:49

in the bond market. OK, Peter, this

7:51

is really helpful. So

7:54

thank you. Thank you. OK,

7:56

Jonathan, do you get it now?

8:00

I kind of got it before,

8:02

but not in a way that

8:04

was going to be very useful

8:06

to your listeners. I'm glad you

8:08

got Peter on. Well, perhaps you

8:10

could have done it just as

8:12

well. We'll never know. No, no,

8:15

no, no, no. You made the

8:17

right decision. So what else is

8:19

factoring into the White House decision

8:21

beyond the bond market? When

8:23

we had been talking to you a

8:26

couple of days ago, it was

8:28

just the bond market? Suddenly

8:30

going haywire? Or was it

8:32

all kind of becoming one

8:34

big collective untenable situation? Well, I

8:36

don't want to pretend omniscience

8:39

here. It's very hard to kind of

8:41

get inside Trump's head. As I said

8:43

to you in the last time we

8:46

talked, the only thing you could really

8:48

go by is what he's saying privately

8:50

and what he's saying publicly. And the

8:52

two things were pretty much the same,

8:55

which was these tariffs are great. They're

8:57

bringing in money. coming and begging to

8:59

me and kissing my ass, but I

9:01

think things pretty clearly start to shift

9:04

Sunday night, Monday morning in the direction

9:06

of being open to negotiations. My colleague

9:08

Maggie Haberman has some reporting that

9:10

Scott Bessen, the Treasury Secretary, flew

9:12

with Trump to Washington from Palm

9:14

Beach on Sunday nights and had

9:16

a really important conversation with him

9:19

on the plane steering him more

9:21

in this direction. JD Vance, actually,

9:23

the vice president, was supportive of

9:25

this idea of... being more structured

9:27

with the tariffs focusing more on

9:29

China. So these conversations were happening,

9:31

but when we last spoke, which

9:33

was Monday, I didn't have any

9:36

sense, and neither, this is the

9:38

more important part, neither did Trump's

9:40

most senior advisors, that he was

9:42

going to back off these tariffs.

9:44

Mr. Trade, Representative, are you aware

9:47

that the tariffs have been paused?

9:49

I am, yes. When were you made aware

9:51

of that? The US Trade Representative Jamison Greer

9:53

was on the hill. Right. What are the

9:55

details? How long is the pause? How many

9:58

days? How many weeks? I understand it. 90

10:00

days. I haven't spoken to the president

10:02

since I've been here. So the trade

10:04

representative hasn't spoken to the president of

10:06

the United States. He didn't know about

10:08

it before it happened. Right, and that

10:10

earned him some serious mockery from Democrats

10:12

who said who is in charge here?

10:15

Because if the US trade representative is

10:17

in front of Congress defending these tariffs

10:19

while the tariffs are paused, it did

10:21

not seem to the members of that

10:23

congressional committee that there was any unified

10:26

vision of what was happening. Right, but

10:28

this just goes to show how quickly

10:30

this all came together and how much

10:32

it was driven by pressure, external

10:35

pressure, and anxiety rather than

10:37

something that was preordained, you

10:39

know, the plan all along.

10:41

I mean, give me a

10:43

break. So, Jonathan, we're learning

10:45

something it seems pretty important

10:47

about this president, which

10:49

is contrary to our belief that

10:52

after the first term, he was no

10:54

longer swayable by market forces.

10:56

when it came to something

10:58

like tariffs, that if the

11:00

markets went down, even if

11:02

perhaps the bond market started

11:04

to go haywire, he was

11:06

deeply committed to this vision

11:08

of tariffs. That was our

11:10

thinking, and the markets were not

11:12

going to take him off that

11:14

position. And then... Can you walk

11:16

us through, but you're thinking about

11:18

why you decided to put a

11:20

90-day pause? Well, I thought that

11:22

people were jumping a little bit

11:24

out of line that were getting... Yepy,

11:27

you know, we're getting a little bit yippy,

11:29

a little bit afraid. We hear

11:31

something very different, including the president

11:33

personally in front of the White

11:36

House, acknowledging that people were getting

11:38

the yippies. That was his word. The

11:40

bond market right now is beautiful. But

11:42

yeah, I saw last night where people

11:45

were getting a little queasy. And so

11:47

clearly this is the president conceding that

11:49

he is at the mercy of the

11:51

markets, to a degree. for sure and

11:53

and what we did today

11:55

was we located his pain

11:57

threshold he actually withstood way

11:59

more pain. Like $10 trillion in

12:02

wealth wiped out. Yes, this was

12:04

not term one Trump until now.

12:06

It required genuine fear of some

12:08

of his top officials that this

12:10

really could spiral out of control.

12:13

This could bring about a recession

12:15

on his watch. Trump has privately,

12:17

certainly in the last two years,

12:20

he's been talking about, I don't

12:22

want to be Herbert Hoover, I

12:24

don't want, talks about 1929 a

12:26

lot privately, this idea that some

12:28

catastrophic great depression type of event

12:30

could happen on his watch. He

12:32

really fears that. And up until

12:34

now, what he had seen in

12:36

the markets obviously did not lead

12:38

him to the conclusion that he

12:40

could be Herbert Hoover. And I

12:43

think the signals that they were

12:45

seeing today tipped him over the edge.

12:47

I'm curious what it does to Trump's

12:49

credibility going forward to have that pain

12:51

threshold reached in such a short period

12:53

of time, less than a week when

12:56

it came to these tariffs. And so

12:58

if you're the rest of the world

13:00

looking at whether Trump and his

13:03

administration can stand by these

13:05

difficult positions like tariffs that

13:07

he said were a long-term project

13:09

to bring jobs back to the US,

13:11

who's going to believe him the next

13:13

time he wants to create leverage

13:16

in one of these situations? Well,

13:18

I don't want to speculate because I

13:20

haven't talked to any foreign leaders

13:22

since the pause, and I'd like

13:25

to talk to a few before

13:27

I... give you any commentary on

13:29

that, but what I will say

13:32

is even before this decision today

13:34

you had a crisis of credibility

13:36

in which allies, foreign governments,

13:39

did not know whether they could

13:41

trust the president's word, whether his

13:44

negotiators actually spoke on his behalf. I

13:46

have spoken to a number of foreign

13:48

officials who really struggle negotiating with this

13:50

White House because they don't know if

13:53

their interlocutors are going to have the

13:55

rug pulled out from under them from

13:57

the president any minute. So Scott Besson.

14:00

the Treasury Secretary talked today about

14:02

more than 75 countries have reached

14:04

out for negotiations. They're going to

14:06

be quote unquote bespoke. You know,

14:08

each one is individual blah blah

14:11

blah blah. Well, that's fine, but I

14:13

think that it's not going to be

14:15

so easy to negotiate necessarily with all

14:17

these different countries because they don't necessarily

14:19

know that they can rely on the

14:22

word of the United States after all

14:24

of this turmoil, all of this rug

14:26

pulling. And I think that's actually... going

14:28

to be the real challenge. Again, asking

14:31

you to do something that

14:33

perhaps is a little uncomfortable

14:35

for you, which is to speculate

14:37

on what happens next. But is

14:39

there any sense that in 90

14:41

days, the president would ever restore

14:43

these tariffs knowing the amount of

14:45

trauma they inflicted on the US

14:48

and the global economy? Or is

14:50

the sense that they have every

14:52

incentive to do deals and not

14:54

bring these tariffs back across the

14:56

world? Well, I'm not going to... make a

14:58

speculation about what Trump might do,

15:01

but I think the markets already

15:03

have. I think the market reaction

15:06

to this, as exuberant as

15:08

it was, suggests that people think

15:10

that the idea of Trump launching

15:13

a global trade war against allies

15:15

and adversaries alike has passed. Yes,

15:17

and that this is more likely

15:19

to be an America versus China

15:22

trade war with a baseline tariff

15:24

of 10%, which is much more

15:26

tolerable for... not just foreign governments

15:29

but the markets. Right, and we

15:31

should say the state of play

15:33

at this moment is that tariffs

15:35

that were varied based on countries

15:37

and in some cases extremely high

15:39

have gone down to a much

15:41

much smaller universal tariff of

15:44

10% the rest have been paused but

15:46

not when it comes to China those

15:48

originally very high tariffs remain

15:50

and in fact through tit for tat

15:53

and back and back and forth they've

15:55

gone up... past 100% from

15:57

the US as of Wednesday.

15:59

And so therefore we now

16:02

have a trade war that

16:04

has seemingly been narrowed down

16:06

to China, and I wonder

16:09

how you think about that

16:11

and how far we think

16:14

the president is willing to

16:16

take that particular face off.

16:18

My sense is quite far,

16:21

and he won't want to

16:23

be the one to back

16:25

down first, but he can't

16:28

be happy about this having

16:30

to blink and having to

16:32

put the pause on all

16:35

of this. So China... will

16:37

assume even more importance for

16:40

him, quote unquote, winning that

16:42

trade war. And remember, Trump

16:44

is not someone who views

16:47

international trade as win-win, as

16:49

cooperation, coming to an agreement

16:51

where both sides come out

16:54

happy. He sees it as

16:56

zero-sum with a clear winner

16:59

and a clear loser, and

17:01

he will not want to

17:03

be the first person to

17:06

back down and quote-unquote lose

17:08

this trade war against China.

17:10

Depending on what China does,

17:13

I think, is the real

17:15

question about where this ends

17:17

up, because I don't see

17:20

Trump wanting to back down

17:22

first. Hmm. Well, Jonathan, thank

17:25

you very much. Thanks, Michael.

17:27

After the break, Rachel Abrams

17:29

talks to our colleague, David

17:32

Pearson, about how China and

17:34

its leader, are likely to

17:36

respond. We'll be right back.

17:49

David, good morning. I should say you

17:51

are in Hong Kong, which is 12

17:53

hours ahead of us here in New

17:55

York City. And I do want to

17:57

share that when this story about the

17:59

new tariffs on China broke at a

18:01

around 2 p.m. Eastern time on Wednesday,

18:03

we here at the Daily, we're debating

18:05

how early is too early to call

18:07

you and wake you up 5 a.m.,

18:09

maybe 6 a.m., but being the generous

18:11

colleagues that we are, we decided to

18:13

let you sleep in, but nevertheless, it's

18:16

early and thank you so much for

18:18

being here with us. I'm so happy

18:20

to be here, thank you. So while

18:22

you were sleeping. Trump announced a pause

18:24

on his so-called reciprocal tariffs everywhere except

18:26

for China. And you cover China for

18:28

the New York Times. You've been following

18:30

the standoff between the United States and

18:32

China very closely. Just to start off,

18:34

were you surprised by the news when

18:36

you woke up? So

18:38

I was surprised that the terrorists

18:40

were paused on most of the

18:43

world, but I was not surprised

18:45

that the terrorists were actually increased

18:47

on China, because we've seen such

18:49

a ratcheting up of this trade

18:51

war between these two countries in

18:54

the last week or so. And

18:56

China is the only country that

18:58

has decided to go toe to

19:00

toe with Donald Trump. When the

19:02

Trump administration slapped terrorists on them

19:05

last week, China returned the volley

19:07

with the same. tariff on the

19:09

United States and then when Trump

19:11

increased it again, China responded with

19:13

the exact same levy and now

19:16

here we are today with a

19:18

whopping 125% tariff on Chinese goods.

19:20

Now we're waiting for China's response

19:22

to that. Right, China will now

19:24

be subjected to sort of a

19:27

staggering figure, 125% tariff. That number

19:29

has just been going up and

19:31

up and up and up. What

19:33

is the state of play in

19:35

this trade war at the moment?

19:38

Like, what is China's appetite for

19:40

negotiating right now? I think China

19:42

wants this trade war to end.

19:44

It's economy has been struggling for

19:46

a few years now because of

19:49

a property crisis. They've built too

19:51

many houses and there aren't enough

19:53

buyers right now. And so there's

19:55

been a... with deflation, with rising

19:57

debt, and the only thing that's

20:00

been driving growth in the economy

20:02

is manufacturing and exports. And the

20:04

biggest single market for China is

20:06

the United States. About 15% of

20:09

its exports go to the United

20:11

States. Now that's a smaller share

20:13

than it was a few years

20:15

ago, but it's still a massive

20:17

part of China's business model. Because

20:20

China has all of their eggs

20:22

in this export basket, so to

20:24

speak, they're extremely vulnerable if all

20:26

of those exports suddenly become much

20:28

more expensive to export. Exactly. They're

20:31

going to have to find new

20:33

markets, and there just isn't enough

20:35

out there to absorb all these

20:37

things that China usually sells to

20:39

the United States. If a trade

20:42

war is going to be so

20:44

painful for China, potentially, why wouldn't

20:46

they just be motivated to cut

20:48

some kind of a deal? Like,

20:50

even if it's a deal that

20:53

is really just a victory in

20:55

name only for President Trump, why

20:57

would they not be motivated to

20:59

give that to him? National pride

21:01

and political legitimacy is on the

21:04

line for China's leader, Shee Jin

21:06

Ping. He is not going to

21:08

come to the negotiation table under

21:10

duress. He wants China to be

21:12

treated like an equal to the

21:15

United States. He has built up

21:17

an image of himself as a

21:19

strong man in China, someone who's

21:21

responsible for rejuvenating China's sort of

21:23

greatness, and so he cannot afford

21:26

to look weak at all. The

21:28

legitimacy of his rule, of the

21:30

Communist Party, rests on him being

21:32

able to stand up to the

21:34

United States. So it really feels

21:37

like you have... two leaders of

21:39

two of the world's largest economic

21:41

powers who both feel like they

21:43

need to project power. They cannot

21:45

back down, they cannot capitulate any

21:48

deal that they strike would need

21:50

to save face. And all of

21:52

that seems like sort of a

21:54

bad combination from the standpoint of

21:56

trying to de-escalate and strike some

21:59

kind of a deal. that's productive

22:01

for both sides. So I'm curious,

22:03

David, what could they do here?

22:05

So China, of course, still has

22:07

other levers that it can pull

22:10

to inflict some pain on the

22:12

United States. There are still many

22:14

big American companies that are invested

22:17

in the Chinese market. You know,

22:19

it's something that American businesses have

22:22

drilled over for decades. And they

22:24

can go after those companies. It

22:26

can also go after Hollywood. It

22:29

could block more films coming into

22:31

China. It could then also target

22:34

some of the states that produce

22:36

agricultural commodities that China imports

22:38

from the United States. Those

22:40

are generally states that voted

22:42

heavily for Donald Trump. It

22:44

could also decide not to

22:46

allow a sale of TikTok,

22:48

which has been a front

22:50

burner issue for President Trump.

22:52

Lastly, and this is the

22:54

most risky of the options,

22:56

it could also devalue its

22:58

currency to make its exports

23:00

more competitive in the global

23:02

marketplace. The problem with that,

23:04

though, is it would raise

23:06

tensions with other countries that

23:09

are worried about Chinese overcapacity

23:11

and having too many Chinese

23:13

cheap goods flood their country.

23:16

If both sides don't reach a deal

23:18

and this whole thing does keep ratcheting

23:20

up and escalating in the ways that

23:23

we've already been seeing, what does that

23:25

look like? Just practically speaking, for both

23:27

China and the United States. Well,

23:30

from the United States, American consumers

23:32

are just going to see prices

23:34

go up. They're going to order

23:36

things from Amazon and be shocked

23:38

by what they're paying for whatever

23:40

you're ordering from China, which is

23:42

a lot of things. From the

23:44

Chinese side... This is going to

23:46

make a bad economic situation

23:49

even worse. That means higher

23:51

unemployment, that means factories going

23:53

idle, that means goods that

23:55

are just sitting in warehouses,

23:58

and not being in... to

24:00

offload it onto

24:02

other countries. But

24:04

ironically, in the long run,

24:06

this could actually help

24:08

China. It could actually accelerate

24:10

the one thing they really

24:13

really need, which is to

24:15

reform their economy away from

24:17

exports. They can't be this

24:20

one-trick pony. They have to

24:22

find a way to get

24:24

more people in China. to

24:26

consume things kind of like

24:29

Americans so that their economy

24:31

is on a more sustainable

24:33

footing. And the problem is

24:35

the government knows this, but

24:38

to make that reform requires painful

24:40

changes that have been really slow

24:42

and hard to make so far.

24:45

This is also interesting because

24:47

it is so similar to the

24:49

arguments that Trump has been making,

24:51

like both of these leaders feel

24:53

like. What's happening now could be

24:55

better for each of their countries

24:57

in the long term after some

25:00

short-term pain, short-term pain, long-term gain.

25:02

Yeah, that's true, except economists

25:04

have been telling China that

25:06

it needs to reform its

25:08

economy for years, whereas economists

25:11

in the United States are

25:13

very skeptical about President Trump's

25:15

plan and how would bring

25:17

manufacturing back to the United

25:19

States. In the meantime, China

25:22

would... definitely prefer status quo

25:24

because then it could work

25:26

on reforming its economy without

25:28

facing the pressure of a trade war.

25:30

David you've been watching this dynamic between

25:33

China and the United States for

25:35

years and what we've seen in

25:37

the last few weeks and obviously

25:39

in the last 24 hours represents

25:41

just a massive disruption to that

25:43

relationship and I'm just curious what

25:46

you think is the most fundamental

25:48

shift that all of this represents.

25:51

So right now we're still in

25:53

the brinksmanship phase, I think, of

25:56

the trade war. There's still some

25:58

room where they're jockeying. for

26:00

some sort of acceptable

26:03

solution where both leaders save

26:05

face. But what this disruption

26:08

has reminded us is that

26:10

there's a chance these

26:12

two largest economies in

26:14

the world could actually

26:16

divorce what we call

26:18

the coupling. And if that

26:20

actually happens, we'll speak of

26:22

it as a sort of

26:25

before and after times. To

26:30

be sure, we're not there yet,

26:32

but we're closer than ever

26:34

before. And you have to think

26:37

about the US-China

26:39

relationship for the last

26:41

five decades. The glue has

26:43

been business. It is the

26:46

bedrock of almost 50 years

26:48

of bilateral relations. You take

26:50

that glue away, then everything

26:52

is on the table now.

26:55

The two most powerful countries

26:58

can't get together and talk

27:00

about all the other problems

27:02

facing the world today, like

27:04

climate change, like pandemics, like

27:07

financial crises. But it also

27:09

means they can't get together

27:11

and talk about things they

27:14

disagree on, because they'll

27:16

have less reason to, things

27:18

like the fate of Taiwan,

27:21

fentanyl, and human rights.

27:23

And if China and the

27:25

US aren't talking, if

27:27

they're not engaging on

27:29

these big issues, then

27:32

we're suddenly plunged

27:34

into a far

27:36

more dangerous world.

27:38

David, thank you

27:40

so much. Thank you,

27:42

Rachel. We'll

27:54

be right back. Here's

28:03

what else you need today. On Wednesday,

28:05

the House of Representatives

28:07

passed legislation that would

28:09

bar federal district judges

28:11

from issuing nationwide injunctions,

28:13

the latest attempt by

28:15

Republicans, to undercut judges

28:17

who have blocked President Trump's

28:20

agenda. Trump and his allies

28:22

have been frustrated by

28:24

how frequently district court judges

28:27

have struck down his executive

28:29

orders. on issues ranging

28:31

from deportations to mass firings

28:34

at federal agencies. But the

28:36

bill faces an uphill battle

28:39

in the Senate where Democrats

28:41

and moderate Republicans are expected

28:44

to oppose it. Today's episode

28:46

was produced by Claire

28:49

Tennis Getter, Mary Wilson,

28:51

Carlos Prieto, and Nina

28:53

Feldman. It was edited

28:56

by Maria Barn and

28:58

Paige Cowan. Contains original

29:00

music by Marian Lozano,

29:03

Alicia But E2, and

29:05

Rowanimisto, and was engineered

29:07

by Lissamoxley. Our theme

29:10

music is by Jim

29:12

Blunberg and Ben Landsberg

29:14

of Wonder League. That's

29:16

it for the Daily.

29:18

I'm Michael Bobbog. See

29:20

you tomorrow.