Profile avatar
chorzempa.bsky.social
Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, focused on Finance, Tech, and Nat Sec related to China.
14 posts 852 followers 101 following
Getting Started
Conversation Starter

Here is the video of yesterday's discussion featuring our second fellowship cohort’s Trade & Competitiveness team @chorzempa.bsky.social, @zoe-liu.bsky.social & Huan Zhu presenting their working papers (global.upenn.edu/future-of-us...), expertly moderated by Mark Wu: www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU-C...

On Lutnick saying tariffs would have prevented DeepSeek breakthrough: If you have a hammer everything looks like a nail, but if you don’t have any nails then all your hammer does is break stuff. Lot of policy areas, including AI, where there are no nails for the tariff hammer.

Trumpism will cede global leadership to China in multiple areas because most other countries and institutions would prefer to deal with a lawful evil system than a chaotic evil one.

FBI reveals more information about the latest wave of Chinese cyber attacks that targeted U.S. telecoms and ISPs www.cybersecuritydive.com/news/china-l...

New piece and event launch! Want to know what it means to hit China's chip ambitions by putting 140 CN firms on the "entity list" this week? What do sanctions do? Our new brief @piie.com documents the rise of economic sanctions against China, with many surprises: a 🧵 1/n

New piece and event launch! Want to know what it means to hit China's chip ambitions by putting 140 CN firms on the "entity list" this week? What do sanctions do? Our new brief @piie.com documents the rise of economic sanctions against China, with many surprises: a 🧵 1/n

If you asked what Trump's USTR, Jamieson Greer, will do to US trade policy, and specifically China, thankfully he outlined his ideas in good detail a few months ago. It's full-on decoupling: revocation of PNTR (varying tariffs on all Chinese imports), defensive tools, and lots of industrial policy.

Brainard is right about the risks of sweeping, poorly designed trade barriers. But the argument would be more powerful had Biden chosen not to keep 300$ billion of Trump's tariffs on products from Christmas lights to baby clothes we'll never manufacture in the US. www.ft.com/content/182e...