中文
Cargo ships loaded with containers at the Port of Los Angeles in California, United States, May 10, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]
By Stephen Ndegwa
Starting Tuesday, the U.S. will begin imposing new port fees on Chinese vessels calling at American ports. On paper this looks like an administrative twist – a cost adjustment, a simple "policy update." But scratch the surface and it is clear this is simply another brick in the wall of U.S. economic unilateralism wrapped neatly in the rhetoric of "fair competition."
What Washington calls a "service fee" is, in fact, a politically charged tariff by another name. It targets vessels tied to Beijing, whether by ownership, flag or construction, while leaving others untouched. That selective targeting speaks volumes. It is not about market discipline or fair play; it is about discrimination. And it is the latest chapter in Washington's long-running experiment with economic containment under the guise of policy reform.
This pattern is not new. When U.S. policymakers find themselves falling behind, their instinct is not to compete harder but to change the rules of the game. The U.S. shipbuilding industry, once a maritime powerhouse, has been in decline for decades. Yet instead of investing in its own capabilities, Washington now seeks to handicap others. This is shameless protectionism with a bureaucratic face. It is a page pulled from a familiar playbook by framing an economic constraint as a "security measure," hoping no one notices the contradiction.
However, the rest of the world is noticing. The U.S. cannot simultaneously claim to defend a "rules-based international order" while cherry-picking which rules to follow. The principle of non-discrimination, the very backbone of global trade, is being eroded each time Washington acts alone without consultation, without consensus and without concern for the broader impact on global stability.
And that impact will be real. China's shipping sector, which forms a major artery in global logistics, will inevitably absorb some of the shock. Freight rates could rise, routes could shift and delivery timelines could stretch as companies adjust to avoid added costs. Yet the collateral damage will not stop at China's shores.
Global supply chains already fragile after years of pandemic turbulence and geopolitical uncertainty are deeply interconnected. Disrupt one link and the rest feel the strain from the domino effect. Ironically, U.S. consumers and businesses may end up paying the very costs their government claims to be offsetting.
There is a broader irony here too. The U.S. used to be the champion of open seas and free trade, the loudest advocate for globalization when it suited its interests. Now, when the tides of competition no longer flow in its favor, it is suddenly turning inward, rewriting the rules midgame. This shift does not just hurt China; it also hurts the credibility of the U.S. as a global economic leader. You cannot call for predictability and partnership abroad while practicing protectionism at home.
The U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., the United States, October 12, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]
For China, the response has been measured but firm. Beijing's decision to introduce reciprocal port fees on U.S.-linked vessels is not an escalation; it is an act of balance. Reciprocity is the cornerstone of modern diplomacy, a reminder that fairness cuts both ways. China has been consistent in its message that cooperation is always preferable but sovereignty and fairness are non-negotiable.
If Washington's goal was to send a message of strength, it may have done the opposite. The global community sees a major power more interested in short-term politics than long-term principles. In trying to appear assertive, the U.S. risks appearing insecure as a country so wary of competition that it would rather build economic barriers than build better products, technologies or ships.
The danger of this trend extends far beyond port fees. If this becomes the norm, if every major economy starts imposing unilateral "service fees" or targeted tariffs on political grounds, global trade could splinter into rival blocs. The international system already stretched thin by protectionist impulses might find itself unraveling altogether. And when that happens, no nation can escape the fallout.
Ultimately, this is not just about ports or vessels. It is about the direction of global commerce and the integrity of the international order itself. The U.S. once set the standard for openness; now it seems determined to undercut the very principles that made its own prosperity possible. The world's trading partners deserve better than unilateralism disguised as policy reform.
If Washington truly values fairness, it should choose dialogue over duty fees. Otherwise, October 14 may be remembered not as a stand for the U.S. economy but as a turning point when the U.S. drifted further from the spirit of cooperation that once defined global trade.
Stephen Ndegwa, a special commentator for CGTN, is the executive director of South-South Dialogues, a Nairobi-based communications development think tank.
