For Donald Trump, “tariffs” might be the most beautiful word in the dictionary. At this point, he might have convinced himself he invented the term. Throughout the 2024 election cycle, he pledged to impose sweeping tariffs as a countermeasure against China’s economic aggression.

Two decades after China’s admission to the World Trade Organization (WTO), its state-led, non-market approach to trade continues to tilt the playing field in its favor, to the detriment of American companies, workers, and consumers. The economic toll has been staggering: between 2001 and 2018, the U.S. trade deficit with China cost 3.7 million American jobs. The time has come to push back.

But tariffs are not the solution. Instead, the United States should prioritize reviving the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Mechanism (DSM). Using this forum to resolve trade disputes, the U.S. could safeguard its economic interests without risking a trade war that would harm American households. A rules-based system, backed by the DSM, would bring stability to global trade and ensure that the U.S. retains its influence in shaping international economic norms.

As history has shown, protectionism cannot address the underlying inequities in U.S.-China trade. During Trump’s first term, tariffs of up to 25–30% were levied on Chinese goods—a policy continued and even expanded by the Biden administration. Now, Trump is pledging to go further, proposing 60% tariffs on all imports from China. Yet these policies have repeatedly proven counterproductive.

The previous round of tariffs reduced U.S. GDP by 0.3–0.7% in 2019 alone. Beijing’s retaliatory measures exacerbated the pain: American businesses suffered, consumer prices soared, and one study estimated that Trump’s trade policies erased 300,000 U.S. jobs. Another report calculated the cost to American households at $419 per year, a price paid in inefficiency and higher taxes.

Equally concerning, the U.S.’s unilateral imposition of tariffs violated WTO protocols, undermining global trade norms. Neither these tariffs nor the 2020 bilateral “Phase One Agreement” achieved meaningful reform in China’s trade practices.

The DSM, by contrast, offers a proven pathway for addressing these challenges. At its core is the Appellate Body, a judicial panel that adjudicates trade disputes. However, in 2019, the number of judges on the panel fell below the required three due to U.S. obstruction of new appointments—a blockade that has paralyzed the mechanism ever since. Ending this impasse is critical.

Revitalizing the DSM would allow the U.S. to resolve trade disputes through established legal frameworks rather than provocative industrial policies. Such a move would reaffirm America’s commitment to a rules-based global trading system and deter other nations from following China’s protectionist lead. The WTO framework encourages investment by reducing uncertainty, fosters job creation, and stimulates economic growth. Moreover, it gives the U.S. a vital tool for advancing its interests while mitigating the risks of a damaging trade war.

Notably, China has historically complied with adverse WTO rulings. Decisions handed down by an impartial international body leave Beijing little room for retaliatory measures. Reinstating the DSM would thus lower the stakes in U.S.-China trade relations, creating opportunities for constructive engagement.

There are geopolitical stakes, too. Without a functional WTO DSM, other major economies—including the European Union and China—are turning to alternative trade dispute systems that exclude the U.S., leaving it without a voice in critical deliberations. Should these parallel systems eclipse the WTO, America’s economic and geopolitical clout would erode.

Critics often argue that the WTO infringes on American sovereignty by allowing foreign judges to rule on U.S. interests. But the facts tell a different story. The U.S. has won favorable outcomes in 90% of the WTO cases it has initiated. Of the 27 cases filed against China, the U.S. emerged victorious in every resolved instance, yielding billions in benefits for American manufacturers and exporters while dismantling discriminatory practices and opening Chinese markets.

China’s state-driven trade practices have inflicted deep harm on American workers and businesses. President-elect Trump has an opportunity to address this imbalance—not through blunt-force tariffs, but by reviving the WTO’s judicial system. The U.S. was instrumental in building today’s global trade order, an architecture that underpins unprecedented prosperity. By reinvigorating the WTO and asserting leadership within it, America can secure this system—and the benefits it brings—for future generations.