Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China blasts U.S. over trade protectionism
Globe and Mail ^ | 23/03/06 | BARRIE MCKENNA

Posted on 03/23/2006 3:57:28 AM PST by John Filson

-- Beijing politely rolled out the red carpet this week as two leading U.S. senators began a fact-finding mission to determine how to punish China for manipulating its currency. But half a world away in Geneva, China's delegate to the World Trade Organization lobbed a rhetorical bomb at the United States, accusing Washington of hyping national security concerns to restrict foreign investment on its home turf.

"By interpreting and applying WTO national security clauses in an excessive way, [the United States] has again seriously undermined the credibility of the multilateral trade regime, over which China is highly concerned," Chinese WTO envoy Sun Zhenyu told his fellow ambassadors yesterday.

The comments appeared to be directed at U.S. political backlash that helped kill a bid last year by China's CNOOC Ltd. to acquire Unocal Corp., a Houston-based U.S. oil and gas producer.

"Recently the United States exerted pressure and imposed restrictions on inward [foreign direct investment] on account of national security, which prevent foreign companies from seeking mergers and acquisitions [there]," Mr. Sun added.

The verbal attack, which coincides with the release of a WTO report on U.S. trade policy, marks the latest flashpoint of an increasingly strained relationship between the two economic and military giants.

China wasn't alone in warning about rising protectionist tendencies in the United States. In comments filed yesterday with the WTO, the European Union urged the United States to strike "a better balance" between security concerns and avoiding "unnecessary and costly burdens" to legitimate business.

Responding to the criticism, U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman said the Bush administration is "cognizant of the potential for protectionism in the U.S. and we are actively communicating the real world benefits of trade at home." But he pointed out that United States hardly has a monopoly on anti-trade tactics.

"Economic isolationism . . . is not just a phenomenon in the United States," Mr. Portman said in a statement released in Washington.

The recent furor over the proposed takeover of several East Coast ports by Dubai Ports World of the United Arab Emirates has caused concern that the United States may be turning increasingly inward as it wages a global war on terrorism.

In the United States, critics blame China for stealing U.S. jobs and pushing the trade deficit to record levels by keeping the value of its currency, the yuan, artificially low. Last July, China raised the value of the yuan by 2.1 per cent and introduced a system to gradually move the currency away from its peg to the U.S. dollar. But the currency has barely moved since.

In Beijing, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said the next couple of months could be a defining period in U.S.-China relations.

"Our goal is to let the Chinese government realize that the politics of this issue is about to get out of hand," warned Mr. Graham, co-author of a bill with Democrat Charles Schumer that would slap a 27.5-per-cent tariff on all Chinese imports. He said the senators are stressing to leaders in Beijing that "if you think the relations between our two countries are good, you're misreading the tea leaves back home [in the U.S.]. They're not good, and they're getting worse."

Mr. Graham and Mr. Schumer have said they want to push for a vote on the widely popular legislation as early as this month. The senators were slated to meet yesterday with Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of the People's Bank of China.

The Congressional vote could be the first dust-up in the prelude to next month's U.S. visit by Chinese President Hu Jintao. The White House confirmed yesterday that Mr. Hu would meet U.S. President George W. Bush on April 20.

That's just five days after the U.S. Treasury Department is slated to release a report on whether to officially brand China a currency manipulator -- the first step in imposing sanctions.

Although largely drowned out by the politicians, U.S. business leaders have appealed for calm in the escalating dispute. Caterpillar Inc. chairman Jim Owens warned Congress not to be seduced by tariffs and other retaliatory measures against the Chinese.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: china; freetrade
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-139 last
To: hedgetrimmer

"A technique called asymmetric warfare. And the so-called Americans like the CEO of Caterpillar Inc, are soldiers fighting for the chinese side."

I'd imagine he's just bowing to pressure to push Cat stock up in the short-run. When it blows up he'll get the axe, and probably a nice golden-parachute. The big-boys will pull out of the stock before it tanks, and all the American workers who've poured their heart & soul into Caterpillar over the years will either end up laid-off or taking huge hits on their compensation.


121 posted on 03/23/2006 12:56:31 PM PST by CowboyJay (Rough Riders! Tancredo '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: carl in alaska

"Tony Blair also made a fairly hawkish speech last night (posted at FR.) That's probably a secondary factor."

Blair has some serious domestic troubles ATM from my understanding. Scotland Yard peeking up his kilt.


122 posted on 03/23/2006 1:00:20 PM PST by CowboyJay (Rough Riders! Tancredo '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: ConsentofGoverned

And to you too. Two tours is to be more than admired. A friend of mine I grew up with General J. Emory Mace served three tours. His daughter Nancy Mace was the first graduate from the Citadel In SC. You might remember the controversy in 1997. Most people don't know it was his daughter. The Army said, your daughter, your mess, you're the new Commandant, clean it up. You never heard anything more. He would hunt and fight rather than eat.


123 posted on 03/23/2006 1:29:02 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: CowboyJay
It is exceedingly difficult for a US interest to open a market in China due to red-tape and belligerence on the part of their government. Once they do, its' just a matter of time before China reverse engineers, and cuts into that company's global market-share. Our current trade relations with China amount to economic suicide. It also funds a fairly nasty socialist government and gives them increased influence over our affairs.

Simply not true. It fairly easy for a small business to start in China or Indonesia. I know many who have done so in the furniture business. Big business has many more details to hash out and is more complicated. Believe me they welcome investment and business. They put on the biggest trade show and business event in the world every year. Business is not government, there is nothing more capitalistic than a young Chinese with some capital seeking capital. Most business despises politics.

124 posted on 03/23/2006 1:42:55 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: jec41
Business is not government, there is nothing more capitalistic than a young Chinese with some capital seeking capital.

Then why does the Chinese communist party own some percentage, up to 50% for some, of "free trade" businesses?
125 posted on 03/23/2006 1:59:35 PM PST by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Then why does the Chinese communist party own some percentage, up to 50% for some, of "free trade" businesses?

They don't. Most of China's new business is private. Such as Boeing. Its owned by stockholders not the Chinese government.

126 posted on 03/23/2006 2:08:06 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: jec41

I was talking about the ability of US companies to export product into the Chinese market, and keep Americans employed...

Not our ability to throw money at them, and put American factories out of business. I'm sure they welcome investment. They don't welcome competition.


127 posted on 03/23/2006 2:12:32 PM PST by CowboyJay (Rough Riders! Tancredo '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: jec41
The more willing Boeing and Airbus are to share technology and provide local jobs, the more likely they are to win Chinese orders.

Who is calling the shots here? The company or the Chinese government?

Boeing, Hexcel and the state-run China Aviation Industry invested a combined $60 million to open BHA Aero Composite Parts in 2001.

Who owns this factory?

I don't see "private industry" but corporatist fascist partnerships with state run companies. What do you see?

As a career choice, jobs in state-run factories are "not the best," he conceded. "But a lot of people want to come here because it's stable," he added. "No one can be fired

I guess Boeing wins again. Because if you pay someone $0.30 a day and you can fire them, its no big deal, I guess.

Besides BHA, Boeing also is working with China's state-run aviation companies: China's Chengdu Aircraft will supply the 787 rudder, Hafei Aviation the 787 wing-to-body fairing panels, and Shenyang Aircraft the 787 vertical fin leading edge. Boeing said those contracts are worth $600 million, adding to $1 billion in earlier purchases from China.

Not too much private enterprise going on here.

Peter Chang, managing director of China Aviation Marketing in Redmond says, "in 30 years when we're retired and golfing, China will rule the aviation world."

After we get done bilking the American people out of their industrial base to support state-run manufacturing in a communist country.
128 posted on 03/23/2006 2:30:42 PM PST by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: CowboyJay


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 14, 2004 Contact:
Victoria Park (Washington, DC): 202-482-3809
Mary Brown Brewer (Beijing): (86) 139-1189-7150



Commerce Under Secretary Aldonas Launches New Tools to Help U.S.
Small and Medium-Size Exporters Take Advantage of China's Growing Market
China Business Information Center provides U.S. firms with "one-stop shopping" for exporting; American Trade Centers will help U.S. firms compete for infrastructure projects

BEIJING, China - In China with a delegation of U.S. manufacturers led by National Association of Manufacturers president Jerry Jasinowski, Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade Grant Aldonas today unveiled new tools to help U.S. companies expand exports to China's growing market - the China Business Information Center, American Trade Centers and the Global Supply Chain Initiative. According to U.S. Commerce Department trade statistics, through June of this year, U.S. exports to China are up 36 percent over the same period last year, making China one of the fastest-growing U.S. export markets, and the sixth-largest U.S. export market overall. Last year, China's worldwide imports increased by more than 40 percent.

"Free and fair trade helps create jobs at home by opening foreign markets to American exports, but one of the biggest hurdles U.S. small and medium-size companies (SMEs) face in trying to export to China is a lack of information," said Aldonas. "Eighty-six percent of all U.S. firms exporting to China are small and medium-size enterprises, and these new resources are part of the Bush administration's commitment to helping smaller firms expand exports and create new jobs for Americans."


129 posted on 03/23/2006 2:35:14 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Boeing and China -- the Early Years
Ties between Boeing and China began early. In 1916, the year of the company's founding, William E. Boeing hired Beijing-born Wang Zhu to design a new seaplane, the Model C, for the U.S. Navy.

Wang had just graduated in aeronautical engineering from Armstrong Technical College in London and Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston. His work with The Boeing Company laid the groundwork for a generation of new airplanes.

China is not only distinguished in Boeing's history for having contributed its first engineer hired by the Compnay. In 1935, China became the first country outside the United States to receive a Boeing field service representative.

On March 29, 1939, Pan American Airways began trans-Pacific service to Hong Kong using Boeing 314 Clipper seaplanes. A number of Douglas Dolphins, DC-2s and DC-3s also operated in China in the 1930s and 1940s.


130 posted on 03/23/2006 2:39:12 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Private airline launches 1st flight(2005/03/12)







BEIJING, Mar. 12 -- China's first private airline launched its maiden flight Friday, opening a new chapter for efforts to modernize the country's booming air travel industry.
The Okay Airways Co. Boeing 737-900, with 81 people aboard, flew from the airline's base in the northern city of Tianjin to Kunming, a popular tourist spot in the mountain southwest.

"Everything went just as we desired," said Han Jing, a spokesman for the airline. "The first flight was very successful."


The first passenger flight of Okay Airways takes off at 9:00am from Binhai International Airport in Tianjin March 11, 2005. [newsphoto]

China also has approved the launch of three other privately owned carriers as it tries to build up modern airlines able to compete with bigger, established foreign rivals.

Aircraft makers ranging from U.S.-based Boeing Co. and Europe's Airbus SA to Brazil's Embraer are looking to China to drive sales as its 1.3 billion increasingly prosperous people take to air travel.

Okay says it will fly six Boeing 737 aircraft, focusing on domestic charter flights, cargo and express delivery services. The aircraft carry the English letters "OK" in gold on their white fuselages.

The airline said its president, Sui Mingguang, was at the controls for the 4 1/2-hour maiden flight, which included a stop in the central city of Changsha.

Okay is owned by investors from Beijing and the southern financial center of Shenzhen, near Hong Kong.

China began easing restrictions on private investment in airlines in early 2004.

Other private airlines are to debut in coming months - Shanghai-based Spring International Airlines; Eagle Airlines, in the southwestern city of Chengdu, and Huaxia Airlines in northwestern China's Gansu province.

China's airlines have gone through wrenching changes since the government broke up its monopoly carrier in the early 1990s, creating more than a dozen regional carriers.

Major state-owned carriers such as Shanghai-based China Eastern and China Southern in the southern business capital of Guangzhou invested in fleets of modern Boeing and Airbus jets, with frequent-flier programs, multilingual flight attendants and international route networks.

Beijing, Shanghai and dozens of other cities built gleaming, futuristic airports.

But a glut of competitors sparked a price-cutting war, driving many to the brink of bankruptcy. In response, regulators have forced airlines to merge into three large groups, hoping to create competitors big and strong enough to face foreign airlines.

Sharp cutbacks in routes flown by Chinese carriers have created openings for Okay and other competitors.

A forecast by Boeing says Chinese airlines will spend $183 billion on aircraft over the next 20 years.

In the latest deal, six Chinese airlines signed an agreement in January to buy 60 of Boeing's new 787 jetliners for a total of $7.2 billion.


131 posted on 03/23/2006 2:53:56 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: jec41
Regulation on Foreign Investment in Civil Aviation Industry was issued on June 21, 2002 by the CAAC, the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation (now known as the Ministry of Commerce, or "MOFCOM") and the State Development and Planning Committee (now known as the National Development and Reform Commission, or "NDRC").

The highlights of the 2002 regulation regarding civil airports (Category One) are:

Chinese party has to hold "relative majority shares" in the joint venture. "Relative majority shares" means that the shareholding percentage of the Chinese party has to be greater than any of its foreign partner(s).

The 49% share-holding limitation on aviation oil supply and aircraft maintenance services is still in existence, while no such limitation exists on cargo storage, ground services, food catering and parking lots.
132 posted on 03/23/2006 3:30:28 PM PST by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

2002 is not 2006

Private Airlines Bring Fierce Competition in Aviation Industry

The influx of non-government capital to the civil aviation industry has resulted in the establishment of 14 non-state airline companies in China, which has helped break the state monopoly of the aviation market.



Dongxing Airlines based in Shanghai, one of the companies established five months ago, has signed an agreement for leasing and buying 20 Airbus aircraft at a cost of 12 billion yuan (US$148 million).



Also in Shanghai, the Spring and Autumn Airlines said that during July to October last year alone, the company carried 74,552 passengers with only one plane operating 436 flights.



"Our occupancy rate reached 95 percent," said Wang Zhenghua, president of the company.



While the non-state airlines are seeking to increase the number of craft and flights, Okay, which made the "maiden voyage" of the non-state airlines, said it would put an eye on cargo transportation.



All this has triggered fierce competition among Chinese airlines and helped improve their services, observers say.



China's three major airline groups have felt the pressure, not only from the fear of declining market share, but also the fact that their pilots are leaving for the non-state competitors.



However, Yang Yuanyuan, director of the General Administration of Civil Aviation of China, said the government will continue the policy of opening the aviation market.



The ultimate goal for the reform of China's civil aviation industry is to make air travel available to more ordinary Chinese, said the pilot-turned official.



"The pressure from non-state airlines will become the top driving force for state-owned airlines to make improvements," he said.



(Xinhua News Agency January 2, 2006)


133 posted on 03/23/2006 3:49:23 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer; Mase; 1rudeboy; expat_panama
In 1946 our GDP was $222 billion. It took us 27 years to get to $1,307.

These numbers are in current dollars. If you want to be accurate, you should use a source with constant dollars.

It took China about 10 with generous help from "free traders" in the white house and Congress and the American taxpayer.

In the real world, 1982 until 2002 is 20 years, not 10.

So who really is winning?

Not your poor math teacher.

134 posted on 03/23/2006 6:00:11 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

Dont forget the cost of living will spike itself to a record high. Wal Mart helps you save a few pennies, But No Wal Mart helps you spend your savings. Which is better? Having more money or barely any. Plus if we didnt have any Wal Mart, Wal Mart would probably move to Mexico and invite US shoppers for a bit of Cross Border Shopping (While picking up a few Mexican Hitchhikers)


135 posted on 03/23/2006 6:01:39 PM PST by Petey139
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
you should use a source with constant dollars

So the next time you all use the federal government for a source I should laugh?
136 posted on 03/23/2006 8:02:18 PM PST by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
In the real world, 1982 until 2002 is 20 years, not 10.

Toddsterpatriot says: don't you believe your lying eyes!
137 posted on 03/23/2006 8:03:37 PM PST by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
If you're too stooopid to understand the difference between current dollars and constant dollars.......If you don't think 27 years of inflation make a difference, go right ahead. LOL!!
138 posted on 03/23/2006 9:03:37 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Toddsterpatriot says: don't you believe your lying eyes!

Hedgetrimmer says: 1982 to 2002 is 10 years. Too dumb to subtract?

139 posted on 03/23/2006 9:06:12 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-139 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson