Trade War with China

xiabonan said:

I think the paradox is this: America can and continue to lead the world with its ideology and values, as long as it doesn't force those values and ideology onto others.

Leadership is about exhibiting the merits of your own system and make contributions to your community, and if others see that it's working out great, they will follow you. That's how you lead, in a class, in a sports team, in a company, and in the world.

Once you start doubting yourself, start fearing that others might not follow, start using power to force others to follow, that's when leadership starts to be questioned.

Click to expand...

localizer said:

People are like playdoh though. Things like religion is very easily forced upon people, especially if you do it when they're young and you use fear to coerce. With the internet, it only becomes easier especially when you can manipulate/control what people see/read. China foresaw this and blocked the other side's propaganda. The situation only gets worse with things like automation *referring to Twitter bans.

Blocking Western social media was definitely a national security concern, and less so of an economic one. China and other countries will only have more reason to block them as time goes by unless the companies crackdown and force people to use real ID"s or something.

Click to expand...

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) remarked Tuesday on the U.S. statement on China's newly-issued white paper, according to the MOC website.

The Office of the United States Trade Representative and the U.S. Department of the Treasury made a statement Monday on the white paper, "China's Position on the China-U.S. Economic and Trade Consultations."

Neglecting multilateral trade rules, the United States has taken unilateralist and protectionist actions frequently in the name of the trade deficit to trigger China-U.S. economic and trade frictions, said the spokesperson, adding that the United States had also tried to coerce China into accepting its demands in the economic and trade consultations.

"This was typical trade bullying," said the spokesperson. "The United States is fully accountable for harming both sides and the world."

The U.S. trade deficit with China, affected by many factors, is the result of market effect. The United States has reaped a lot of benefits from its trade with China, and its argument of being taken advantage of is completely untenable, the spokesperson said.

Since it took office, the new U.S. administration has disregarded global interests, trumpeted "America First," ignored international duties and responsibilities, abused its state power to suppress other countries' enterprises and disrupted the global industrial chains and supply chains, the spokesperson said.

"It is self-evident who has disrespected international rules and who has taken 'unfair trade' practices," the spokesperson said.

The white paper elaborated on China's efforts to push forward the economic and trade consultations with the greatest patience and sincerity, the spokesperson said, stressing that the U.S. accusations were totally unwarranted.

The U.S. accusations of China backpedalling in the consultations is simply nonsense. It is common practice to make revision suggestions on the wording of a text under discussion in trade talks, the spokesperson said.

The U.S. administration has frequently adjusted its demands in the previous rounds of consultations but arbitrarily accused China of backpedalling. Its intention is nothing but to sling mud at China, which is not acceptable to China, added the spokesperson.

China always believes that the bilateral disagreements and frictions should be solved through dialogue and consultation, the spokesperson said.

Consultation, however, needs to be based on mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit, said the spokesperson. A consultation will lead nowhere if one side attempts to achieve a result solely beneficiary to itself by coercing the other to compromise.

China hopes that the United States will stop its wrong actions and make joint efforts with China to meet each other halfway to promote the healthy and steady development of the China-U.S. economic and trade relations, the spokesperson said.

Click to expand...

China's top economic regulator invited industry analysts to give clues about further strengthening rare-earth export controls, which, industry insiders said, is a major effort in making good use of the rare-earth card in containing the US amid an escalating trade war.

The

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(NDRC) convened a conference on Tuesday to study upgrading the domestic rare-earth sector, which has huge growth potential.

With tangible resource advantages, China's rare-earth sector has been progressing toward a high-quality and technology-driven model. However, as illegal mining and production still exist, a large portion of rare-earth products are still low- and middle-level, and the value of rare-earth resources has not been fully exploited, according to a statement on the NDRC' website.

Analysts pointed out that rare earths are scarce resources that can't be regenerated, and China should strengthen full-scale supervision of rare-earth production. They suggested that authorities should carry out the rectification of production order and crack down on illegal mining activities.

Meanwhile, regulators should also strengthen export controls on rare earths and establish a traceable review mechanism for exports.

Liu Yiqiang, deputy director of research and development department of the National Center of Quality Supervision and Inspection for Tungsten and Rare Earth Products, urged earlier that the Chinese government should issue guidelines on rare-earth exports and mining.

"Heavy rare earths are indispensable components in lots of high-tech applications in the US. If China uses the rare-earth card, it could also play a role in containing the US strategy… China should make good use of such means," Liu told the Global Times.

The export volume of rare earths will surely decrease with tightened export controls, and might influence US' domestic rare-earth supply, analysts said.

"China will of course ensure the supply of global demand, out of its responsibility as the biggest rare-earth exporter in the world," Wu Chenhui, an independent rare-earth analyst, told the Global Times on Tuesday.

Considering the irreplaceable role of heavy rare earths in the military sector and in high technology, China should give more protection to such strategic assets, some industry insiders suggested.

"The US does not have abundant heavy rare earths as China does, and China also represents world-leading technology in rare earth extraction," an industry insider, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told the Global Times.

"We have the 'killer card' and we're actively pushing forward upgrading and downstream high-end applications. These could have a big impact on US industries," he said.

The NDRC said in a statement that the domestic rare-earth sector should transform from one that is resources-reliant to one that is innovation driven, with full supply chain advantages.

China indicated on May 28 that it may weaponize its rare earths in an escalation of trade war with the US.

"If any country wants to use products made of China's rare earth exports to contain China's development, the Chinese people would not be happy with that," said a spokesperson from the NDRC.

A stricter and regulated rare-earth export mechanism is also fully in line with global laws and rules, as well as to benefit the healthy development of global rare-earth industry chain, said Wu, the analyst.

Click to expand...

Opinion

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Donald Trump’s unnecessary fight for domination is increasingly being framed as a zero-sum game

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The disappearance of the Soviet Union left a big hole. The “war on terror” was an inadequate replacement. But China ticks all boxes. For the US, it can be the ideological, military and economic enemy many need. Here at last is a worthwhile opponent. That was the main conclusion I drew from this year’s Bilderberg meetings. Across-the-board rivalry with China is becoming an organising principle of US economic, foreign and security policies.

Whether it is Donald Trump’s organising principle is less important. The US president has the gut instincts of a nationalist and protectionist. Others provide both framework and details. The aim is US domination. The means is control over China, or separation from China. Anybody who believes a rules-based multilateral order, our globalised economy, or even harmonious international relations, are likely to survive this conflict is deluded.

The astonishing white paper on the trade conflict, published on Sunday by China, is proof. The — to me, depressing — fact is that on many points Chinese positions are right. The US focus on bilateral imbalances is economically illiterate. The view that theft of intellectual property has caused huge damage to the US is questionable. The proposition that China has grossly violated its commitments under its 2001 accession agreement to the World Trade Organization is hugely exaggerated.

Accusing China of cheating is hypocritical when almost all trade policy actions taken by the Trump administration are in breach of WTO rules, a fact implicitly conceded by its determination to destroy the dispute settlement system. The US negotiating position vis-à-vis China is that “might makes right”. This is particularly true of insisting that the Chinese accept the US role as judge, jury and executioner of the agreement.

A dispute over the terms of market opening or protection of intellectual property might be settled with careful negotiation. Such a settlement might even help China, since it would lighten the heavy hand of the state and promote market-oriented reform. But the issues are now too vexed for such a resolution. This is partly because of the bitter breakdown in negotiation. It is still more because the US debate is increasingly over whether integration with China’s state-led economy is desirable. The fear over Huawei focuses on national security and technological autonomy. Liberal commerce is increasingly seen as “trading with the enemy”.

A framing of relations with China as one of zero-sum conflict is emerging. Recent remarks by Kiron Skinner, the US state department’s policy planning director (a job once held by cold war strategist George Kennan) are revealing. Rivalry with Beijing, she suggested at a forum organised by New America, is “a fight with a really different civilisation and a different ideology, and the United States hasn’t had that before”. She added that this would be “the first time that we will have a great power competitor that is not Caucasian”. The war with Japan is forgotten. But the big point is her framing of this as a civilisational and racial war and so as an insoluble conflict. This cannot be accidental. She is also still in her job.

Click to expand...