Donald Trump presents a 90 -day trade truce with China and duties as a “victory”, but international markets are interpreting evolution as a forced withdrawal of the risk of shortages and destabilization of the economy.

The shares rose and bond yields increased after a press conference by US Secretary of Finance Scott Bessed early in the morning in Geneva, where both sides are having talks.

As with the trade agreement with Britain last week, the US did not return to the previous tariff regime before Trump’s rise to the White House.

On the contrary, duties in Chinese products will be reduced from 145% to 30%initially for a period of 90 days. In return, China reduced its own duties to imports from the US to 10%, from the 125% of the White House retaliation.

This is still a significant change in the terms of trade between the two countries compared to the period before Trump’s rise to power, but it is far short of a substantial commercial embargo.

The two sides pledged to continue the talks, but in the announcement issued by the White House there was no mention of other complaints he had previously made against China, including the weakness of the Wan.

On the contrary, the announcement praised “the importance of a sustainable, long -term and mutually beneficial economic and commercial relationship”. The wording was different from Trump’s speech on the day of liberation, in which he had stated that the US was “plundered, captured, raped and stripped by countries nearby and distant.”

In other words, as analysts explain, evolution can be interpreted as a retreat. It may have been influenced by market turbulence, but it seems more likely that dramatic warnings by retailers for empty shelves – reinforced by data showing a sharp fall in imports in American ports – reinforced the position of moderation in terms of commercial policy.

When asked about game shortages, Trump told reporters that children should be happy with “two dolls instead of 30” and that they may “cost a few dollars” than usual. However, it is even unlikely for Trump to endure the burden of attacks and responsibility for lack of basic goods, similar to those of the Covid-19 period, in the world’s largest economy.

Instead, it seems that the White House has chosen a regular retreat. The US-China conflict has always been the warmest front in Trump’s trade war, with deeper roots and greater public support than its most peculiar attacks on Mexico and Canada.

If Trump is really ready to retreat against Beijing, this sends a message that he can retreat to other offensive aspects of his commercial policy.

However, what Scott Bessed failed to eliminate and his Chinese counterparts are the uncertainty that has occupied investors throughout the world economy since Trump announced the duties on “Liberation Day”.

Chinese products have only been temporarily reduced at present, while many other countries are still waiting for negotiations about where their own duties will end up after the second 90 -day waiting period, which concerns Trump’s “reciprocal” duties and expires in July.

Meanwhile, companies throughout the global trade system are wondering which version of its policy is more likely to prevail, and they are very likely to be tempted to continue bypass the US, where possible.

And as 30% duties remain in Chinese exports to the US, the wider picture remains: two major financial forces are removed from each other.