“Soybean Card” and Rare Earth Standoff: The 2025 China-US Trade Negotiation Game

Why “soybeans” and “rare earths”?

From an economic perspective, soybeans and rare earths may not seem equivalent, but their roles at a strategic level are very clear:

• Soybeans are key to the U.S. agricultural system and electoral politics. Many states in the Midwest depend on soybean exports to maintain farm income, and the voters in these regions influence the federal political landscape. Therefore, whether China purchases U.S. soybeans is directly related to internal political pressures in the United States.
• Rare earth is one of China’s global strategic resources. Rare earth is used in fields such as electric vehicles, satellite systems, precision manufacturing, and chip equipment. If there are fluctuations in rare earth supply, it will have a chain impact on the high-end industry chain.

Why is the “window period” chosen to appear in 2025 during negotiations?

In 2025, the global economy is in a period of supply chain restructuring, and countries are re-evaluating the risks of trade dependence. Against this backdrop, both China and the United States have realized that ongoing confrontation will only increase costs, thus creating a necessity for renewed dialogue.

The latest talks between the two sides focused on advancing three core issues:

• Will China’s soybean purchasing scale and pace recover and expand?
• Will China continue to tighten or moderately relax its rare earth export policies?
• Is the United States considering adjustments to certain tariffs and technology export restrictions?

Although no decisive breakthrough has yet occurred, both sides have not left the negotiating table, indicating that the situation is in a controllable game state.

What does each party want?

China’s goal is:

Stabilize the security of the supply chain, especially to avoid external restrictions on critical technologies and equipment, while flexibly controlling negotiation pressure through the rhythm of soybean procurement.

The goal of the United States is:

Ensure that agricultural exports do not experience interruptions, while maintaining their regulatory and influential role in the global technology chain.

Both sides are clear that confrontation is not the goal; controlling the initiative is the objective. Therefore, negotiations will continue but will not end easily.

What does negotiation mean for the global market?

• The agricultural products market will remain volatile but under control: Changes in China’s soybean purchasing rhythm will directly affect the competitive landscape of agricultural product exports from South America and the United States.
• The new energy and technology industries will maintain a high level of attention to rare earth policies: if rare earth exports are tight, the costs of the high-end manufacturing supply chain may rise.
• The global supply chain is showing a trend of “multi-center layout” that is accelerating: companies are increasingly unwilling to rely their production and supply on a single country.

In other words, the outcome of the China-U.S. negotiations affects not only the two countries but also the functioning of the global manufacturing system.

How should beginners follow up on subsequent progress?

No need to look at complex reports, just focus on the three most critical public signals:

• China’s monthly soybean import volume report: A significant increase in data indicates a easing in negotiations.
• Is there a change in the tone and wording of China’s business department regarding rare earth export policies: a more relaxed wording indicates that negotiations are approaching a compromise zone.
• Has the United States issued a new tariff exemption window or postponed the technology ban: This is a direct way for the U.S. side to show goodwill and reduce friction.

Remember: it’s not about watching the news rhetoric, but about observing policies and data actions.

Conclusion

The core of the China-U.S. trade negotiations is not just the exchange of economic interests, but the competition for future industry dominance. Soybeans reflect real pressure, while rare earths represent strategic advantages. This negotiation will see long-term, repeated, and phased easing, but it will not end quickly.

The truly valuable way to observe is not to guess the outcome, but to understand: those who hold structural advantages in resources hold the negotiating power.