Number of results to display per page
Search Results
22. Opinion: What Is China’s Core Economic Interest in Trade War?
- Author:
- Qiyuan Xu
- Publication Date:
- 02-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Abstract:
- The trade conflict between China and the U.S. has lasted for more than half a year. The two sides have held several rounds of consultations, but agreements were later broken and tensions have only intensified. The spat will likely be protracted, with frictions to continue and possibly escalate for a period of time, given the two countries’ diverging interests, public opinions and historical experiences. A broad range of issues are involved in the trade dispute. For example, the U.S. has pressured China on forced technology transfer, talent strategy and industrial policy issues, as well as issues the two sides have long been at odds over, such as intellectual property rights, labor, environmental protection, stateowned enterprise reform and foreign exchange rates. Meanwhile, the U.S. has targeted products and sectors that go well beyond those in which China has a competitive advantage. The U.S. tariffs also target industries that the country plans to focus on for future development.
- Topic:
- Development, Tariffs, Trade Wars, Trade, and Strategic Competition
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
23. Public and Opinion Leaders' Views on US-China Trade War
- Author:
- Craig Kafura
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- The Trump Administration has taken an aggressive line on US-China trade issues. Starting with steel and aluminum tariffs in March 2018, the United States has gradually imposed a number of tariffs on various Chinese goods. China responded in turn to each round. Recent negotiations, though initially fruitful, foundered on issues of Chinese subsidies and what US trade representative Robert Lighthizer described as “an erosion in commitments by China.” Now the escalation cycle has resumed. According to surveys conducted in 2018 among foreign policy opinion leaders by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the University of Texas, and the results of the 2018 Chicago Council Survey of the general US public, concerns about a potential trade war between the United States and China were already widespread before this most recent escalation.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, International Trade and Finance, Public Opinion, and Trade Wars
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
24. Americans Favor US-China Trade, Split Over Tariffs
- Author:
- Craig Kafura
- Publication Date:
- 09-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- Over the past 18 months, the United States and China have engaged in a steady escalation of tariffs. Beginning with steel and aluminum tariffs imposed by the Trump administration in March 2018, the trade conflict has expanded to cover hundreds of billions of dollars in bilateral trade. Recent rounds of negotiations have made no new progress and have led to both sides escalating further. The most recent US tariffs on Chinese imports went into effect on September 1, covering $112 billion of goods. Beijing has countered with retaliatory tariffs and has halted all agricultural purchases from the United States, a move targeted at already-struggling US farmers. While Americans broadly support engaging in trade with China, they are split along partisan lines on how to engage in that trade. Republicans support raising tariffs on Chinese imports and believe it will help the US economy in the long run, while Democrats oppose doing so and believe it will be harmful.
- Topic:
- International Trade and Finance, Bilateral Relations, Tariffs, and Trade Wars
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
25. Mexicans, Americans Share Positive Views of USMCA Trade Agreement
- Author:
- Craig Kafura, Jorge Buendía, and Esteban Guzmán Saucedo
- Publication Date:
- 05-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- The Trump administration’s push to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, along with the imposition of steel and aluminum tariffs, has strained an already tense relationship between the United States and Mexico. Despite those tensions, polls conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and Buendía y Laredo find broad public agreement on trade on both sides of the border. Majorities of both Mexicans and Americans agree that their economic relationship is important, are concerned about a trade war hurting their local economy, see international trade as having a positive impact on their nation’s economy, and expect the newly-signed US-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade to be good for their nation’s economy.
- Topic:
- Public Opinion, NAFTA, and Trade Wars
- Political Geography:
- North America, Mexico, and United States of America
26. US-China Trade Tensions: Impact on Mexico | Estados Unidos-China Tensiones Comerciales: Impacto en Mexico
- Author:
- COMEXI
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Mexican Council on Foreign Relations (COMEXI)
- Abstract:
- For the mid- or long-term, no country in the world—and much less Mexico—benefits from a strained environment in which there is no adherence to international trade rules. However, for the short-term, a strained trade environment produces adjustments to the supply chains, which could benefit competitors of those economies that are currently in conflict. Mexico, the second supplier of the United States only behind China, could reassert its position as a credible competitor of the Asian economy in the US. Likewise, in the context of trade friction, or even just the threat of a conflict, Mexico could strengthen its trade positioning in China by replacing part of the US offering. /// En el mediano o largo plazo, a ningún país del mundo, y menos a México, le conviene que exista un clima de tensiones donde no se respeten las reglas del comercio internacional. Ahora bien, en el corto plazo, el clima de tensiones comerciales genera ajustes en las cadenas de suministro, lo cual puede beneficiar a los competidores de las economías en conflicto. México, el segundo proveedor de Estados Unidos sólo después de China, puede reafirmar su posición como competidor creíble de la economía asiática en Estados Unidos, así como fortalecer su posición comercial en China, al sustituir parte de la oferta estadounidense, en un contexto de fricciones comerciales o su amenaza.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Economy, Economic growth, Trade Wars, Exports, and Trade
- Political Geography:
- China, Mexico, and United States of America
27. Time for China to Forge a New Strategy towards the US
- Author:
- An Gang
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Pangoal Institution
- Abstract:
- This summer thus far has greatly frustrated those in support of friendlier China-US relations. China-US trade talks recently took a turn for the worse. The Trump administration, after accusing Beijing of reneging on past trade commitments, has sought to raise tariffs to 25% on US $200 billion worth of imported Chinese goods. The Office of the US Trade Representative has proposed slapping tariffs on nearly all remaining imports from China, which are valued at approximately $300 billion. It is now soliciting public comment on the proposed list, which is expected to be issued as early as late June, following a congressional hearing.
- Topic:
- Civil Society, Bilateral Relations, Trade Wars, and Supply Chains
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
28. Rebooting U.S.-China Trade Ties: “Enter Ye Through the Narrow Gate”
- Author:
- Christopher K Johnson
- Publication Date:
- 05-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- Abstract:
- Nearly two weeks after the U.S. “Trade Avengers” unleashed during their visit to Beijing what one reasonably could call “trade shock and awe” with a very aggressive—if thoroughly researched and well-crafted—set of demands targeting the yawning U.S. trade deficit with China and the core of that country’s throaty industrial policy, China this week is taking its turn with the visit of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Politburo member and Vice Premier Liu He, President Xi Jinping’s economic point man who is almost universally described as a thoughtful, pragmatic, and mild-mannered policy academic. In the interim, voices from a wide swath of official Washington have sounded the alarm about the dangers of Chinese influence operations and the presence of alleged subversives, while President Trump himself seemed to cast aside these growing concerns by suggesting via Twitter that he would ask the Commerce Department to overturn its action against the Chinese telecommunications firm ZTE—long a focus of the U.S. security community for suspected cyber espionage activity and irrefutable violations of U.S. law—in response to protests that reportedly emanated directly from President Xi. With such frenetically sustained action in such a short period of time, the fog of war seems particularly thick at the moment. As such, it seems like a good time to slow down and have a think about how we got here, what actually is going on, and, with a little bit of luck, perhaps think about some ways to craft a viable way forward. Just like milestone birthdays in one’s personal life, important political anniversaries also can incline the mind toward reflection. Next year, of course, marks the fortieth anniversary of the reestablishment of diplomatic ties between the United States and China. As such, much breath and a lot of ink have been devoted to analyzing the course of the bilateral relationship over that nearly half-century. Although certainly not a universal opinion, it seems fair, if perhaps overly reductionist, to suggest that the general conclusion among a substantial number of U.S. officials, policy analysts, and journalists has been that the consistent U.S. policy emphasis on engagement with China during those forty years was, at the end of the day, a sham. In this rendering, naïve groups of senior policymakers in succeeding U.S. administrations and in most of the U.S. China-watching community were hoodwinked by wily CCP leaders who talked the talk of integrating into the so-called U.S.-led rules-based international order, but all the while they had a secret master plan to instead subvert that order and challenge U.S. primacy throughout the globe. In a slightly less menacing (if no less absurd) version of this narrative, China was, indeed, headed generally toward this hoped for integration under the stewardship of deceased paramount leader Deng Xiaoping and his handpicked successors Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao until Xi Jinping arrived and, through a ruthless consolidation of power, decided instead to change course in what now regularly is referred to in shorthand as Xi’s “authoritarian turn.” But this conclusion seems utterly wrongheaded when examined in the light of hard facts. On the Chinese side of the equation, for example, Deng Xiaoping may have appeared warm and cuddly when donning his cowboy hat during his famous 1979 visit to the United States, but he could be just as ruthless and grasping as any other authoritarian leader. Deng’s exceptionally courageous and dogged pursuit of the policies of reform and opening certainly are worthy of praise, but they cannot, and therefore should not, be separated from the fact that he was content to sit idly by as Chairman Mao’s loyal lieutenant as Mao decimated his political rivals during the Anti-Rightist Campaign (1957-59) and the Great Leap Forward (1958-62). Nor should we forget that Deng used every ounce of his massive personal prestige with the People’s Liberation Army to, with steely determination, rally his many reluctant commanders to execute the brutal Tiananmen crackdown of June 4, 1989. Similarly, Xi Jinping is no Jack-in-the-Box-like figure who has pulled a fast one with a sharp directional turn in the last couple of years made all the more stark after his sweeping consolidation of power at last fall’s 19th Party Congress. In fact, it is this author’s contention, as supported by a large body of written work and public commentary, that everything Xi has done over the last five years was abundantly clear, whether explicitly or in embryonic form—from the moment he was introduced to the world as China’s new top leader in the fall of 2012, as encapsulated in his call for his country to pursue the “China Dream” set on a foundation of “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” This by no means suggests the United States should express support for, or even acquiescence in, Xi’s policies, but only that it should not be reacting with the borderline hysteria that now seems to be gripping Washington.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Global Political Economy, and Trade Wars
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, Asia, and North America
29. The Chinese Betting Can Iran Develop Phase 11 of the South Pars Field?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 12-2018
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) has replaced Total of France as a major operator in the development of phase 11 of the South Pars gas field. This is a substantial gain for the Iranian government, which strives to lure international investors to shore up its economy following the withdrawal of most foreign companies from the market due to US sanctions in last August and November. However, the project appears to hit many hurdles, including the Chinese company’s fears of heavy US fines or escalation of the US ongoing trade war against the county in the coming period.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Government, Oil, Sanctions, Gas, and Trade Wars
- Political Geography:
- China, Iran, Middle East, and Asia
30. Trade linkages and firm value: evidence from the 2018 US-China "trade war"
- Author:
- Yi Huang, Chen Lin, Sibo Liu, and Heiwai Tang
- Publication Date:
- 04-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Centre for Trade and Economic Integration, The Graduate Institute (IHEID)
- Abstract:
- On March 22, 2018, Trump proposed to impose tariffs on up to $50 billion of Chinese imports leading to a significant concern over the "Trade War" between the US and China. We evaluate the market responses to this event for firms in both countries, depending on their direct and indirect exposures to US-China trade. US firms that are more dependent on exports to and imports from China have lower stock and bond returns but higher default risks in the short time window around the announcement date. We also find that firms' indirect exposure to US-China trade through domestic input-output linkages affects their responses to the announcement. These findings suggest that the structure of US-China trade is much more complex than the simplistic view of global trade that engendered Trump's "Trade War" against China.
- Topic:
- Economics, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Global Political Economy, Trade Wars, and Exports
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, and Asia