Is closer trade with China worth the risk of annoying the US?

Hosted by:

I write about the rapidly evolving artificial intelligence technology and its possible impacts on society. Originally from England, I spent some time at the BBC in London before moving to Switzerland to join SWI swissinfo.ch.

中文

瑞士冒着激怒美国的风险与中国加强贸易是否值得？

Switzerland plans to upgrade its free trade agreement with China, just as the United States and the European Union have become more difficult about trade.

For some Swiss companies, the vast Chinese market offers an escape from tariffs and threats form previously reliable trading markets.

What do you think? Should Switzerland risk upsetting both Washington and critics of China’s human rights record by cosying up to Beijing? Let us know in the debate below.

Global trade

US tariffs force Switzerland to rethink trade ties

This content was published on Sep 24, 2025 United States trade policy is rattling countries worldwide and prompting them to redirect trade flows at record speed.

Join the conversation!

Contributions must adhere to our guidelines. If you have questions or wish to suggest other ideas for debates, please, get in touch!

Please sign in to submit and like comments.

Sort by

LynxVegas 2026-09-15 09:42

Money is money. Switzerland should focus on expanding and developing markets. That's east of here, not west. CH is not in the EU, so is free to choose which country it trades with. The current US boss is easily annoyed, but no need to worry about him.

Paul Douglas Hugentobler 2026-09-14 07:48

Yes. I don’t see why Switzerland upgrading its free trade agreement with China will upset the US. Switzerland is not cosying up to Beijing. Both countries are doing what is in their best interest, just like the US does what is in its best interest. This is Switzerland first, not America first. We should all learn from China, India, Brazil and especially Canada on how best to deal with the US.

Smiss 2026-09-02 08:48

As I was told whole touring Africa...."China brings infrastructure and jobs, the US and Europe bring corruption and churches". ____The price of doing business with the US is too steep. No loyalty. No honor. Time to look to those that are moving forward instead of those interested in war and invasions. The US is far worse in its aggression than Russia...no sanctions? No blocked accounts

AlexSO 2026-09-01 17:34

In the grand theatre of international relations, the question before us today is one that demands not passion, but perspective; not rhetoric, but reason. Is closer trade with the People's Republic of China worth the risk of annoying the United States? It is a query that has been posed with increasing frequency in diplomatic corridors and boardrooms alike, and it deserves an answer that rises above the fray of transient political tensions. My contention, offered with the utmost respect for our American allies, is that closer trade with China is not merely worth the risk—it is an imperative rooted in economic realism, geopolitical stability, and the very ethos of sovereign choice.____Let us begin by acknowledging the obvious. The United States remains one of the world's most vital economic and strategic partners, and Switzerland, like many nations, cherishes the ties that bind us across the Atlantic. The transatlantic relationship is built on shared values, historical kinship, and a mutual commitment to democratic principles. To suggest that closer engagement with China constitutes a betrayal of that relationship would be both hyperbolic and historically myopic. Diplomacy, after all, is not a zero-sum game. It is a tapestry woven from multiple threads, each contributing to the strength and resilience of the whole.____China, however, is not merely another thread—it has become one of the primary pillars of the global economic order. To ignore this reality is to engage in a form of wilful blindness that serves neither our national interest nor the prosperity of our citizens. Consider the sheer scale of the opportunity. The People's Republic of China is the world's second-largest economy, a manufacturing powerhouse, and an increasingly sophisticated hub for innovation and technology. For a nation such as Switzerland, whose economic vitality depends on exports, precision engineering, pharmaceuticals, and financial services, the Chinese market is not a luxury—it is a necessity.____In 2024, China remained Switzerland's third-largest trading partner, with bilateral trade volumes exceeding CHF 40 billion. Swiss watches, machinery, and pharmaceutical products enjoy robust demand in Chinese cities, while Chinese investment and tourism have contributed significantly to the Swiss economy. This is not a relationship of convenience; it is a relationship of complementarity. Switzerland offers quality, precision, and trust; China offers scale, dynamism, and an ever-expanding middle class with a growing appetite for the very goods and services in which we excel.____Critics may argue that closer trade with China entails political and security risks, particularly in light of the strategic competition between Beijing and Washington. Yet it is worth asking: is there any meaningful economic partnership that does not carry some degree of risk? The United States itself, through its trade policies and occasional protectionist impulses, has demonstrated that even the closest alliances can experience friction. To single out China as uniquely problematic is to overlook the complex interdependence that characterises the modern global economy.____Indeed, one might argue that engaging China through trade is precisely the most effective means of fostering stability, dialogue, and mutual understanding. Economic interdependence is the handmaiden of peace. When nations trade, they build relationships that transcend political rhetoric. They create stakeholders on both sides who have a vested interest in maintaining harmonious relations. The European Union, with its longstanding policy of "engagement through trade," has long understood this principle. Switzerland, with its tradition of neutrality and bridge-building, is uniquely positioned to champion this approach.____Moreover, it is worth noting that China itself has undergone a remarkable transformation over the past four decades. Hundreds of millions of its citizens have been lifted out of poverty, a feat without parallel in human history. This achievement has been facilitated, in large part, by China's integration into the global trading system. To withdraw from that system, or to artificially constrain our engagement with it, would be to diminish our role in one of the most significant economic narratives of our time.____The argument that closer trade with China somehow "annoys" the United States also warrants closer scrutiny. The United States is a mature and sophisticated nation, fully capable of understanding that its allies and partners have their own sovereign interests to pursue. The American administration, regardless of its composition, has consistently engaged with China on trade matters when it suits its own purposes. The US-China trade relationship, despite its occasional turbulence, remains one of the largest bilateral trade relationships in the world. To suggest that Washington would be fundamentally perturbed by Switzerland maintaining a similarly pragmatic relationship with Beijing underestimates the resilience and sophistication of American foreign policy.____Furthermore, the notion of "risk" must be contextualised. In an era of global supply chain disruptions, climate change, and technological transformation, diversification is not a luxury—it is a risk management strategy of the highest order. China is not only a market; it is a critical node in global supply chains, including those upon which Europe and the United States depend. The production of rare earth minerals, pharmaceuticals, and green technologies are areas in which China plays an indispensable role. Closer trade ensures that Switzerland and its partners have a seat at the table, rather than being relegated to the margins of decisions that affect our prosperity.____It is also important to recognise that closer trade does not imply uncritical alignment. Switzerland has always been a nation that values its independence and its capacity for independent judgment. We have the right—indeed, the duty—to engage with China on our own terms, while maintaining robust dialogues on matters of governance, human rights, and international law. The two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the very act of engagement provides a platform for such conversations, rather than relegating them to the realm of distant admonition.____In the final analysis, the question is not whether closer trade with China is worth the risk of annoying the United States. The question is whether we have the courage and the clarity to pursue our national interests with conviction and foresight. The United States will continue to be a vital partner, and our relationship with Washington will endure. But China represents a horizon of opportunity that we cannot afford to ignore. To do so would be to surrender our economic future to a mirage of protectionism, disguised as prudence.____The world is not a stage for binary choices. It is a continuum of possibilities, and Switzerland has always thrived by navigating that continuum with grace, intelligence, and pragmatism. Let us continue to trade with China, not in spite of the risks, but because of the rewards. Let us do so with our eyes wide open, our values intact, and our commitments to our allies unwavering. In doing so, we will demonstrate that true diplomacy is not about choosing sides—it is about building bridges.____I therefore respectfully submit that closer trade with China is not merely defensible; it is desirable, necessary, and entirely consistent with the best traditions of Swiss statesmanship. The risks are manageable. The rewards are transformative. And the alternative—retreat, suspicion, and self-imposed isolation—is a path that no nation of vision would willingly choose.

ProperD 2026-08-31 10:53

Of course it's worth the risk....USA offers no loyalty whatsoever and if Switzerland were drowning the US would simply carryon and not try to help save Switzerland. Actually, Switzerland should have made this move a long time ago. It's much like being in an unhealthy relationship. You stay, and stay hoping the other person will change or you stay because you have nowhere else to go. You don't know how you will survive. Then one day you gather your strength and make that move. You suffer a bit but eventually you gather your footing and you're so happy that you finally had the courage to take the actions that you did. ......Both USA and EU have proven themselves to be unworthy partners. The biggest problem for Switzerland is that roughly 70% of their trade is with these two countries. But this teaches a valuable lesson "never put too many of your eggs in only one or two basket." Switzerland must heavily diversify and slowly wean off of too much dependence on these two entities including following their decisions in global politics. It won't be easy but it must be done...I guess it's better late-than-never.

Matthew Allen SWI SWISSINFO.CH 2026-09-02 09:48

@ProperD

I take your point ProperD, but is there any guarantee that China will prove a more reliable trading partner? The "Made in China" policy has been criticised in the West for aggressively syphoning technology know-how from Western companies. Here's one example: ____https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/trade-policy/china-is-courting-swiss-start-ups-for-their-intellectual-property/91787850

ProperD 2026-09-02 13:52

@Matthew Allen

Well...I don't think your point is as cut-and-dry as you make it out to be. It’s crucial not to forget that all economic success stories include a phase that involved copying and mimicking the technologies and products of industry leaders. For example, America stole British designs for looms and mills which helped make America a financial superpower. In addition, copying made Japanese companies like Hitachi, Nintendo, and Sony global sensations.....Keep in mind that China of course benefitted from their strategy of "trading market for technology." Nonetheless, China did not have access to key technologies as companies only shared the technology important for those products i.e. parts of products produced locally in China. The most important components of the design "the master blueprint" so to speak, was withheld. So China wasn't able to completely implement/copy the products they manufactured. I think that what's making the west so angry is that China is not only doing well but they're doing it better!......Due to geopolitical upheavals and trade wars, China has moved away from importing technology as a policy and is implementing a more self-reliant strategy. For instance, Tesla is manufacturing a huge amount of autos from its factory in Shanghai but has complete control of its IP and technology but China is still producing more efficient and reliable EVs .....It appears to me that the west is acting like little, spoiled children who don't want to play fair. Making foolish political decisions and warmongering across the globe has been the biggest contribution to the west's demise and nothing Else....!!!......The west wants to award China's total success to them. LOL As If China has no intelligence and ability to create a great nation, a nation that has roughly 3500 to 5000 years of recorded history. China joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) boosted its global trade and integration into the world economy. What's more, China's innovation is based on discovering new ways to monetize its services, gain new customers, etc. China has the world's highest saving rate and a massive global trade imbalance on the export end. China is the world's largest economy IMHO and the west don't like it one bit. The downfall of one power to another is nothing new. Many empires have fallen throughout the ages and they usually blamed their demise on everyone but itself. Therefore in conclusion, yes I think at this time in history China is and will continue to be a more reliable trading partner. because they're focusing on the right things.