All around is the cacophony of trade wars, as the US Administration and China square off against one another. Using the term suits the political agenda of both sides, but the call may well be premature. The current salvos could yet be the prelude to talks between the White House and Xi Jinping’s newly installed government, and not, to quote Mark Anthony, to unleashing the dogs of war. At least not yet.

In discussing trade conflict in a different context almost 30 years ago, the political scientist Edward Luttwak described it as the logic of conflict in the grammar of commerce. It is an apt way to describe the Sino-US relationship today. Once competitors and collaborators, China and the US are now rivals and also adversaries. Yet, for all of the Trump administration’s bluster and overtly protectionist agenda, which has recently hardened against China, it has not gone for broke so far.

For a start, the US trade deficit with China is not as simple as it looks. The headline $370bn deficit in 2017 was nearer $150bn, when allowing for China’s supply chain hub status. In other words, we have to allow for goods shipped by, say, Japan and South Korea to China to be finished off and then re-exported.