BEIJING: In the narrative of US presidential politics, China is a
Hollywood villain, a monetary cheat that is stealing American jobs. But
the one-dimensional caricature offered by President Barack Obama and
Republican challenger Mitt Romney obscures the crucial reality of
US-China relations: For all the talk about getting tough on Beijing, the
US and China are deeply entwined, defying easy solutions to the
friction and troubles that beset their relations.
The two
countries are the first and second largest economies in the world, doing
nearly a half-trillion dollars in trade which in turn buoys the global
economy. Their governments are in constant contact on North Korea`s and
Iran`s nuclear programmes and Syria`s civil war and are trying to work
out rules of the road for their huge militaries and such 21st century
problems as cyberwarfare.
Few relationships are as critical to
the world today. Managing the competition for global influence between
the world`s superpower and its stillrising rival so that it does not
become outright confrontation will be a priority for whoever wins next
month`s presidential election.
Little of the enormity and
importance of US-China ties found its way into Tuesday night`s debate
betweenObama and Romney. Instead, the candidates used it as a convenient
foil for their campaign positions about revitalising the US economy and
getting Americans back to work.
Both candidates sought to portray China as vacuuming up American jobs. Their arguments contained halftruths and flaws.
Romney
said excessive regulation and misguided policies during Obama`s first
term drained away American jobs, turning China into the largest
manufacturer in the world.` Obama said Romney, through his work for
private equity and investment firm Bain Capital, bore responsibility by
investing in companies that moved jobs to China.
The title of No 1
manufacturer is a matter of dispute. The research firm IHS Global
Insight said last year that China overtook the United States in 2010,
with total output of $1.995 trillion, compared with $1.952 trillion for
the US. The National Association of Manufacturers disputed that, saying
the United States still was in the lead and IHS Global Insight`s figures
were distorted by changes in exchange rates and other factors. L e f t
unsaid by both candidates: That if low-cost manufacturing jobs don`t go
to China, they`ll go somewhere else.
Think Mexico.
Obama,
for his part, said his focuson doubling US exports is ``creating tens of
thousands of jobs all across the country.` But one concrete example he
cited in getting tough on China slapping levies on imports of lowpriced
Chinese-made tires that he said saved 1,000 jobs had mixed results.
Economists at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in
Washington have said that some 1,200 jobs might have been preserved, but
that the cost amounted to $1.1 billion in higher prices paid by
American consumers or $900,000 per job. Whether the outcome was good or
bad for Americans is a matter of perspective.
Nor did they point
out that in an era of globalised business, an Apple iPhone created in
America and assembled in China helps both, as well as component
suppliers in Japan, Germany and South Korea.
True, China has used
its mix of free-market, state-directed economic policies to support
Chinese business to the disadvantage of foreign competitors. Romney came
closest to hitting that mark, ticking off China`s rampant theft of
intellectual property and other trade secrets as well as policies that
help hold down the value of its currency, the yuan, thereby keeping low
the price of Chinese exports.
Yet Romney`s campaign promise
repeated in the debate that hewould brand China a currency manipulator
on his first day in office may merely be symbolic. The act does not
require immediate punitive measures, and while economists estimate the
yuan is still undervalued, it has appreciated markedly, as Obama said.
And
applying that label may be counterproductive if Beijing retaliates. On
cue, China`s government news agency, Xinhua, soon after the debate
warned that China ``perhaps would be forced to fight back,` sparking a
global trade war. One Romney supporter in the business community, former
American International Group Inc. chairman Maurice Greenberg, told
Bloomberg Television last week that the candidate is unlikely to follow
through with the promise if elected. Lost in the back-and-forth is any
defence of US-China relations as a whole, and how the candidates would
handle the challenges China`s burgeoning economic, diplomatic and
military might pose to US pre-eminence.
For much of the past two
decades, presidential candidates have bashed China on the campaign trail
and taken a tough line once in office only to find that global trade
and hotspots require engaging Beijing. The Chinese government has
reminded its people of that pattern in state media reporting on the
election
No comments:
Post a Comment