It's a well-known fact that Donald Trump and his loyalists even at the pre-election campaign stage didn't hide the desire to start a large-scale scandal with China related to a disproportion of external trade and an artificial decline in the Yuan provided by Beijing. Frankly speaking, the overwhelming majority of spectators considered Trump's policy to be a populist pre-election rhetoric reckoned on dull rednecks who often fall for populist xenophobic appeals. If a usual external political struggle grows into a full-scale trade war the losses of the United States will be enormous. The strike will be delivered to the traditional spheres of American export to China – high-tech industry (civil aircraft, smartphones, etc.) and agricultural sector (half of American soybeans falls on Chinese market). Also the price increase in American retail first of all will damage Trump's voters – the groups of disadvantaged Americans.
However, the life laughed again at all the wise theorists' calculations. Not only was it impossible to predict Donald Trump's activity on the basis of the common sense (it's enough to recall the missile attack of American cowboys against a Syrian water station, also the North Korean psycho juggling nuclear bombs poured oil into the fire. Due to the military games of fat and spoiled boy Kim, Beijing found itself in an awkward position. Uncle Donald exerts pressure on Uncle Xi exposing an ultimatum – China either imposes oil embargo to strangle North Korean economy, or gets involved into a trade war with the United States and observes a real war next door. It seems like Chinese "uncle" ups the ante. It's not that Chinese leader has tender feelings for the Pyongyangian overgrown child who plays with nuclear edge-tools, but every Chinese "mandarin" has a fear determined by the national mindset – the fear of losing public face. That's why it's virtually impossible to evade the conflict.
Who will win in a trade war? According to the quantity of the pro-Chinese articles, Beijing doesn't grudge the money to create an expression of its inevitable win in the infosphere. That propaganda uses, inter alia, the arguments put in the beginning of this article. However, the reality isn't as good as Chinese comrades wanted it to be. Apple and Boeing will lose a great trading area, but won't crash. American disadvantaged people will become more depleted. The middle-class will also suffer. However, people who are accustomed not to hang upon guiding party's lips but used to rely on themselves, people whose ancestors survived during the Great Depression will not consider a temporary drop in income as a catastrophe. The same can't be said for the Chinese people who have been getting over a paternalistic model of government since the childhood and who have grown fat for the last 10-15 years. The loss of such a richest market as the USA will lead to a real disaster for the economy of the Middle Kingdom. The fact is that the main thing for the global economy is not the industry, but the outlet area. American industrial facilities' mobilization to the overpopulated Southeast Asia region with lots of countries where people are desperating for money will be accepted with enthusiasm. Except for Asia, there's Mexico just steps from the US border with its great spare workforce capacity. It will be extremely difficult for China to search out broad markets for its products, especially if Washington threatens sanctions against global business related with the import from China.
And thus, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) goes out of the shadows to the forestage which member countries form a united market with a size of 180 million people. This storage facility of course won't replace totally the loss of the US market but it's capable to play a role of a safety cushion for Chinese economy. It's possible that namely the feeling of Eurasian togetherness gives Beijing a possibility to act from the position of strength even being under the sword of Damocles, which is economic war against America.