Powering Up Rebalancing

Bar chart of electric power consumption in China by sector, Jan-May, 2018, year-on-year % increase.

ELECTRIC POWER CONSUMPTION acts as a proxy for economic activity. These sectoral figures from the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) for the first five months of this year give a snapshot of where the growth is strongest, and points up how the economy is rebalancing.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Economy

When Declaring Victory Is Not The Same As Wining A Trade War

Made in China label. Photo credit: Martin Abegglen, 2010. Licenced under Creative Commons.

CHINA HAS IMMEDIATELY retaliated against the first tranche of the 25% tariffs on $50 billion a year of Chinese exports to the United States announced by the Trump administration.

China will impose an matching tariff on 659 categories of US imports worth $50 billion a year, effective July 6. Vehicle and aircraft parts and vegetables account for the bulk of the targeted imports.

The Trump administration on Friday said its tariffs would come into effect on July 6 and cover more than 800 types of Chinese exports worth $34 billion a year. The largest category of goods affected are machinery, mechanical appliances and electrical equipment (full list). The White House says the remaining $16 billion of exports to be targeted will be announced later.

It is imposing the tariffs for what it deems unacceptable and unfair intellectual property and technology transfer practices by China that it has said cost the US economy $225 billion-600 billion a year.

There is, however, careful calibration on the United States part of these actions. It has reduced its original list of 1,300 targeted categories to focus on those sectors Beijing is promoting as part of its ‘Made In China 2025’ plan to develop advanced industries and to minimize the impact through international supply chains on domestic US industries. Some of the 500 categories removed from the list were done so following lobbying by US importers.

Beijing, for its part, has taken aim at the most politically sensitive US industries. where it believes it can have most impact on US President Donald Trump’s electoral support in rural areas and the Rustbelt.

US restrictions on Chinese firms’ investment in the United States are expected to be announced at the end of the month.

The president’s advisor on trade and manufacturing policy, Peter Navarro, says that the ‘era of American complacency’ on trade is over. But there is an old adage about how generals always fight the last war. The Trump administration’s tariffs seem to be doing the same thing.

International supply chains mean much of the value of the goods China exports is not added in China, so they hurt the non-Chinese part of the supply chain as much or more as the Chinese part.

Furthermore, policymakers may not care too much if the United States tries to choke off the sales of its cheap products; they want Chinese companies to export the higher value-added goods the US actions will push them towards making (and they have plenty of alternative markets in which to sell both cheap and more expensive products; the US accounts for only one-quarter of China’s exports).

Meanwhile, China’s industry has developed to the point that in sectors such as artificial intelligence and autonomous vehicles it is already internationally competitive. Intellectual property protection is now more important to its companies than intellectual property theft.

Trump may end up declaring victory in this particular trade war by being able to show he is being ‘tough on China’ and cutting the headline number of the bilateral goods trade deficit, but it will be China that actually wins the war.

1 Comment

Filed under China-U.S., Trade

China Can Be Content With The Trump-Kim Singapore Summit

 

North Korea leader Kim Jong Un (left) and US President Donald shake hands in the summit room during the DPRK–USA Singapore Summit, June 12, 2018. Photo credit: By Dan Scavino Jr. [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

THE SINGAPORE SUMMIT between US President Donald Trump and North Korea leader Kim Jong Un was a quick-fire and highly choreographed affair, genuinely historic in just happening, but long on symbolism and short on substance.

It may turn out to provide the basis for the eventual denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula, though an equally long-term success would be the integration of North Korea into the international order as a nuclear power that played by international rules and norms.

Alternatively, it may all fall apart in time, as history provides some precedent.

But potentially it is a ‘reset moment’, although this Bystander is not alone in having no idea what Kim’s long-term game is.

For now, China will be pretty happy with where things stand. Kim has given nothing away that would concern Beijing. Meanwhile, the US president has tacitly followed the ‘suspension for suspension’ approach Beijing suggested all along once it was clear that the dormant six-party talks framework was going to be replaced by bilateral talks between Washington and Pyongyang.

Trump’s statements at a post-meeting press conference that the US would suspend its joint military exercises with South Korea and that the president would like US troops to leave the peninsula eventually (neither of which proposal was in the statement the two leaders signed at their meeting) would have delighted China. Beijing has long wanted a scaled-down US military presence in the region.

So, too, would Trump’s promise of security guarantees for the North Korean regime — China wants no outcomes that lead to either the unification of the Koreas or the collapse of the Kim dynasty, either outcome of which risks putting US or US-allied troops on its Manchurian border.

It will, no doubt, take the occasion when it arises to remind Seoul that Trump considered the joint exercises, or ‘war games’ as he called them, too expensive. From there, it will not be too far a stretch to put the idea in Seoul’s mind that the US president could have been suggesting that South Korea would be too expensive to defend in general.

Senior US officials, alive to the broader security implications of that for Japan and in the South China Sea, were quick to row back on that.

Most importantly for Beijing, no detailed plan or process for managing North Korea’s nuclear and missile programmes was laid out at the summit. The only commitment was to hold follow-on summit implementation negotiations, led by U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, and an unnamed ‘relevant high-level [North Korean] official’.

This opens the door for all the interested parties, especially China, to turn that into an international effort for what will necessarily be a detailed and painstaking process of inspection and verification if the US aim of ‘complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation’ is to be achieved. The considerable volume of regional diplomacy that has been underway for some months is, in a sense, preparation for that.

“A good beginning is half done,” a foreign ministry spokesman, said of the summit, adding that China wished to “support the two sides to implement the consensus reached by their two leaders, promote follow-up consultations, further consolidate and expand the achievements, and make the political settlement of the peninsula issue a sustainable and irreversible process”.

In other words, it wants a seat at the table. China has a pivotal role to play in as much as it has the critical hand on dialling up or dialling down the enforcement of international sanctions on North Korea.

Pompeo will visit Beijing on Thursday when Beijing’s ‘support’ will immediately be made available.

Leave a comment

Filed under China-Koreas, China-U.S., Defence

The US Resumes Its Trade War With China

WE SAID EARLIER this month after the United States put its trade war with China on hold that that would last only until US President Trump tweets that “it is back on, or was never off or is over”.

We have moved into the ‘back on’ phase.

The Trump administration says it plans to impose 25% tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese imports by the end of June. The list of goods to be subject to the tariff will be published on June 15. The announcement also promises specific investment restrictions and enhanced export controls on “industrially significant technology”.

In a rather resigned-sounding comment, the Commerce Ministry said it was both “surprised and unsurprised” by the announcement.

Wilbur Ross, secretary of its US opposite number, is due in Beijing later this week for a follow-up round of talks to those earlier in the month that led US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin to say that the Trump administration would hold off imposing tariffs on up to $150 billion in Chinese imports for alleged violations of US American intellectual property and unfair trade practices as the two sides were making progress towards a ‘framework’ for cutting China’s $375 billion merchandise trade surplus with the United States.

So the latest White House announcement may be Trump indulging in his new favourite negotiating tactic of cutting up rough ahead of talks.

Leave a comment

Filed under China-U.S., Trade

Mapping The Belt And Road

Mercator Institute of China Studies map of China's Belt and Road Initiative

 

The useful map above is produced by The Mercator Institute for China Studies, the German think tank that is the largest in Europe with an exclusive focus on China.

There has been a sharp uptick in recent weeks in expressions of concern by US politicians outside the traditional China-hawks about Beijing’s long-term plans to expand its global power through infrastructure development and finance and by building up its military.

In February, The Mercator Institute published a report suggesting that Europe should have similar concerns about how Beijing is expanding its influence in Europe in support of those aims through the use of ‘sharp power’ — the offensive use of soft power tools aimed at political and economic elites, media and public opinion, and civil society and academia.

 

2 Comments

Filed under China-Africa, China-Central Asia, China-E.U., Trade, Transport

Trump’s 540 Degree Turn On ZTE

THIS BYSTANDER FRANKLY admits to being confused.

US companies were banned earlier this year from selling components to telecoms equipment maker ZTE for seven years on national security grounds, export business worth several hundred millions of dollars. This sanction led to ZTE, which relied on US companies for up to 30% of the components of its phones, ceasing operations, prompting President Xi Jinping to ask his US counterpart to reconsider the penalty. US President Donald Trump then asked his Commerce Department to reconsider the penalty, seemingly as part of a prospective broader trade deal between the two countries.

Now, following criticism from both Democrats and fellow Republicans after the recent US-China trade talks that he is losing the trade war against China, Trump says what he wants is an additional heavy fine and a requirement that ZTE  “buy a big percentage of their parts and equipment from American companies”.

Wasn’t buying US-made components the national-security concern that led to the sanctions on ZTE in the first place?

We understand that US export sales and jobs are at issue, but we are still left scratching ourheads. But such contradictions seem to be the hallmark of Trump’s trade and foreign policy.

Leave a comment

Filed under China-U.S., Trade

United States Puts Trade War On Hold

THE US-CHINA trade war is on hold. Official. Or official, at least until the US president tweets that it is back on, or was never off or is over.

US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin says the Trump administration will not, for now, impose tariffs on up to $150 billion in Chinese imports for alleged violations of US American intellectual property and unfair trade practices. The rationale, according to Mnuchin, who was speaking on one of the United States’ Sunday morning TV talk shows, is the progress made in last week’s trade talks towards a ‘framework’ for cutting the $375 billion merchandise trade surplus with the United States.

High-level US trade officials met their opposite numbers from Beijing in Washington last Thursday and Friday, which was followed by a communique that vowed that neither side would launch a trade war against the other.

China said it would buy more agricultural and energy products from the US as part of a substantial cut in its trade surplus with the United States, which will include still-to-be-discussed purchases of US manufactures and services.

Both of those, and particularly the latter, require structural reforms on Beijing’s part likely to come later rather than sooner.

Beijing said it would drop it anti-dumping investigation into US sorghum, but that at best will protect existing US exports now at risk, rather than create new business in itself. Also, while the US has plenty of energy, particularly liquefied natural gas, it could sell China it would have to build distribution infrastructure to deliver it. Privately, US trade officials say it could take three to five years to double US energy exports to China.

Sales of agricultural commodities could be ramped up within a crop season, however. China bought $19.6 billion-worth of US farm produce in 2017, making it US farmers’ second largest foreign market. The United States is hoping for a 40% increase this year. If that comes about, there will be only another $188 billion to go to the $200 billion cut in the trade surplus that the United States reportedly seeks.

Beijing also promised to address US concerns about intellectual property protections (although that is pushing against an open door given that Chinese firms have an increasing amount of intellectual property of their own to protect these days).

Whatever short-term concessions might be made to provide Trump with an arithmetical win on the trade deficit, Beijing will do nothing that compromises its Made in China 2025 industrial policy, which is the real war.

Meanwhile, our man in Washington sends word that President Donald Trump’s U-turn on sanctions against telecoms equipment maker ZTE got a rebuff from the US Congress last week.

The House Appropriations Committee snuck into an appropriations bill an amendment that forbids the Commerce Department from changing the sanctions on ZTE that it imposed last month for trading with Iran and North Korea.

The inclusion of a seven-year ban on US companies selling components to ZTE has led the company to cease operations, and it was that ban that Trump, surprisingly, a week ago ordered the Commerce Department to rescind and replace with a less onerous alternative.

There is a long distance between an amendment being passed in committee and making it into law, a distance few such amendments survive. However, even getting past the first step, acceptance into a bill, shows how driven US-China trade relations are going to be on the US side by domestic politics, and especially in the run-up to November’s mid-term Congressional elections.

The Democrats — and it was one of their number, Dutch Ruppersberger, a Congressman representing a district in Baltimore, that proposed the amendment — are attacking Trump’s policies at every turn, scenting the opportunity to recapture control of at least one house of Congress from the Republicans in the mid-terms.

This partisan dimension further complicates the already complex trade relationship between the two countries. There may be no war-war for now, but there will be plenty of jaw-jaw.

2 Comments

Filed under Agriculture, China-U.S., Energy, Trade