Synthetic opioids management in Sino–American relations: focus on fentanyl by Zha Daojiong

In a major scoop earlier today, the Wall Street Journal reported Trump, Xi to Discuss Lowering China Tariffs for Fentanyl Crackdown, citing “people familiar with the talks” as saying, “If Beijing takes action to cut export of chemicals that make fentanyl, the U.S. would cut in half the 20% fentanyl-related levies on Chinese goods.”

In the afternoon, the Chinese foreign ministry signaled willingness over dealmaking

China’s position on this issue has been consistent and clear.

China is the most resolute country in drug control, with the most thorough policies and the best record, and it is also one of the countries in the world that list the largest number of controlled substances and exercise the strictest regulation.

China expresses sympathy for the American people suffering from the fentanyl crisis, has provided assistance in this regard and achieved positive results, and remains open to continuing cooperation with the U.S. side.

The U.S. side should take concrete actions to create the necessary conditions for cooperation between the two sides.

Professor Zha Daojiong of Peking University has repeatedly written on the issue, including saying China should crack down on illicit fentanyl flows regardless of U.S. rhetoric.

Below is his latest English-language article on fentanyl, published open access on June 18 in China International Strategy Review, a journal run by the Institute of International and Strategic Studies (IISS), Peking University. His conclusion:

…for both China and the United States, there is no justification for either rhetoric or policy to hold the other responsible for the fentanyl-related predicament, whether it stems from negligence or is perceived as intentional. Both societies must face the salient fact that they are sites of production, transit, and consumption of conventional and the ever-growing classes of NPS and other illicit drugs. In terms of both public health rationality and practical necessity, enhanced bilateral cooperation should be established as a standard practice. This approach should remain consistent, regardless of fluctuations in trade and other aspects of interactions between the two governments over other issue areas, and irrespective of the connections identified in research and broader policy-making contexts.

Last but not least, there is indeed a competitive dimension to the logic behind continuing with the notion of enhanced functional cooperation in counternarcotics. From an international relations perspective, the quality of the competition hinges on the degree of progress in finding effective solutions to the fentanyl/opioid challenge through domestic