It looks like the United States has reached a “phase one” trade deal with China in principle pending President Trump’s approval. Presumably it will address Trump’s stated concerns about Chinese intellectual property theft and forced technology transfers, as well as trade deficits.

Many Trump supporters will no doubt view the agreement as an important step in meeting China’s economic challenge. Washington is finally getting tough on Beijing.

But what if you think the China challenge is about more than just economics? Indeed, many China hawks view themselves as more than just trade warriors. They see China as presenting America with a full spectrum geopolitical challenge — economic, military, ideological. The analogy often tossed around is that modern China is like the Soviet Union plus 1980s Japan. Except with three or four times the people of that combo. 

For instance, Sen. Marco Rubio has warned of China’s “long-term plan to supplant the United States of America as the world’s dominant political, military, and economic power.” Sen. Tom Cotton claims Chinese President Xi Jinping is establishing a “new evil empire.” And controversial Fox News host Tucker Carlson says America is “in the race of our lives” against China. Such concerns are about a lot more than trade surpluses and deficits.

So I wonder if from that perspective the deal might seem disappointing. As I recently wrote for The Week: “But if China really is so dangerous, why would Trump want to make American farmers more dependent on it? Why would Trump want China to make itself more hospitable to American business and investment? Why would Trump treat Chinese tech companies as bargaining chips to increase purchases of America-grown sorghum rather than as the nefarious national champions of a hostile power?”

And I might further add, why would America be alienating the other liberal democracies it needs to effectively confront the Chinese challenge over the long-term? It’s just not clear to me how all these pieces fit together or whether enough thought has been given to resolving their strategic tensions.

This article by James Pethokoukis first appeared at the American Enterprise Institute.

Image: Reuters.