Sino-US economic and trade relations into the trap of Thucydides?

  Source: China Financial Forum of forty people: Following US President Trump announced after the steel import tariffs and a new protective trade policies will be introduced。 According to the "Wall Street Journal" reported that the US plans to announce punitive trade policy against China on Thursday。
  Sino-US economic and trade relations recently friction, exacerbated conflicts。 Recently, the Chinese financial forty Forum () Academic Committee, Essence Securities chief Gao Shanwen wrote that Trump has influence to mercantilism and unilateralism-oriented philosophy and style behind the Sino-US trade relations, but these effects It may not have long-term。
  Earlier this year, as a member of the delegation of the CF40, high Shanwen involved visited government departments and think tanks in Washington。
Through this visit, he found in economic and trade fields to pursue a hard line with China, the United States is becoming the consensus of the ruling and opposition parties。
  He pointed out that the basis of economic and trade relations between the two countries, is experiencing significant and adverse change。 Sino-US relations may have entered Thucydides trap, how to better manage future friction and conflict, need to think systematically。   Handle bilateral trade frictions need to be more systematic thinking Sino-US relations, including economic and trade relations, it is almost the world's most complex relationships, needs to have sufficient height and depth, the need for complete control of the situation and expertise reserve in order to study。 I do not have such professional background, it is difficult to comment related topics。
But when earlier this year, with the delegation of Chinese financial forty Forum (CF40) visits Washington, there are some first-hand observation and experience, and we do share a relevant。   In mid-1945, when negotiating the establishment of the Bretton Woods system, many countries have sent delegations, the head of the British delegation is a famous economist John Maynard Keynes。 He then put forward the basic principles of a settlement of international payments imbalances, in the face of serious balance of payments imbalances, deficit countries and surplus countries should bear equal responsibility and symmetrical adjustment。 Assuming that there is a big deficit of a country, the other there is a big surplus countries。
So, not only deficit countries need to be adjusted, it should be mandatory for adjustment of surplus countries to take responsibility。
But this principle was firmly opposed to the US delegation, the United States should be required to bear the main responsibility for deficit countries to adjust。
The point is that at the time and subsequently a long time, the United States maintains a sizeable current account surplus。   After entering the 21st century, with enormous changes in the situation, the United States began requiring adjustment of surplus countries bear the primary responsibility, China has become the object constantly being accused of, it is important reason is that the moment the United States has been transformed into a long-term deficit country。 So, there is no eternal theory, only permanent interests。 At this point, we want to seriously study the US government。   We live in a highly globalized world, not only faced with the globalization of trade in goods and services, but also faced with the globalization of production globalization, financial globalization and a certain degree of human resources, these changes continue to occur over the last few decades of promote and accelerate the growth of the global economy。 Traceable supply chain and production chain, different sectors in different countries, therefore, based on trade data, surplus and deficit data adjusted responsibility to judge, there is a very big problem。
From a multilateral point of view, China's current account balance remained in recent years, the actual surplus slightly fully accepted within the scope of international organizations。 This means that if there is a huge Chinese trade surplus with the United States, there must be a huge deficit to other countries。
In this case, the United States asked China to adjust unilaterally assume responsibility for the Sino-US bilateral trade deficit, lack of strong theoretical basis。
We should occupy the high ground on the theoretical and moral, try to solve the problem in a multilateral framework。   Sino-US economic and trade relations in recent years has become more uncertain, more friction, more volatile。 There are two factors behind the unrest needs to break down。
Adverse changes in economic and trade relations, to what extent is because Trump personal thoughts and ideas, to what extent is because the political basis of Sino-US economic and trade relations, is undergoing irreversible systemic effects very far-reaching changes。 These two aspects of change in the past few years occurred simultaneously。
  Trump mercantilist, unilateralism, abandon the multilateral framework, the trade as a zero-sum game。
While the US president has a lot of discretion on trade issues, but I guess his beliefs and opinions do not necessarily represent those scholars and the general consensus of the ruling and opposition parties。
Maybe a few years later, the United States to replace a mainstream political circles in Washington accepted by the president, when unilateralism and mercantilist policies will follow a series of adjustments。 If so, it means that many policies, ideas and practices of the US government now proposes a departure from the long-term trend。 We do not need too much emphasis on the strategic level, just adopted piecemeal, in time the situation will return to long-term trends, and automatically stabilize。
  But apart from this, we also need to see, as an important political basis for bilateral economic and trade relations are undergoing irreversible, systematic, far-reaching changes。
At this level, we need to discuss the following three questions。   First, the existence of Sino-US relations Thucydides Trap?I believe that Sino-US relations have entered a Thucydides trap。
As the rise of emerging powers, at least in the US view, China and the United States is all-round competition for strategic influence and dominance of global affairs, and increasingly confrontational。   Second, ballast stone whether Sino-US relations had changed?My guess is that, from 1972 to 1991 20 years, the Sino-US relationship the most important is the presence of stone ballast of the Soviet Union。
Although at the time the rapid growth of bilateral economic and trade relations between the two countries, but does not have strategic importance。
In 1991 the Soviet Union in 2012 to 20 years, the most basic strategic relationship between the two countries ballast stone is China's rapid growth and the huge US interests in this process are obtained, and the United States hopes China can change in the growth process a more market-oriented and democratic。 There is no doubt in this process, the most China-US relations is the foundation stone ballast economic and trade ties between the two countries, marking the peak of the US to accept China's entry into WTO, and subsequent honeymoon。 Future repair past under the bottom face of the German trap potential competitive relationship even confrontation, more need for a common ballast stone between China and the US, while economic and trade relations is undoubtedly still one of the most important foundation。
Changes discussed bilateral trade and economic relations at this level, address the risks of confrontation and conflict, have more pressing practical significance。   Sino-US economic and trade many unfavorable, subtle changes are taking place。
Traditionally, whenever Sino-US tensions arise in the political, diplomatic relations, there will be American Chamber of Commerce or the business community to come forward and be a lot of work to ease and quickly towards normalization of Sino-US relations。 However, in recent years this situation less and less, and even corporate America on behalf of the American Chamber of Commerce in China began to hold criticism, not as in the past-friendly stance。
Objective reasons is to improve the competitiveness of Chinese companies, US companies constitute more and more powerful direct competition。
For example, China has not got the certificate of airworthiness C919, but have already received orders for more than eight aircraft, Boeing company had a great competitive pressure。 Previously, when the tensions in Sino-US relations, China will buy a few Boeing aircraft, the Boeing will speak for China。
And now, China will not continue to buy Boeing aircraft, the C919 will be sold in the future of Europe, Japan or countries in Asia, has become Boeing's competitors, the impact of these companies will not be lobbying the US Congress or pursue a friendly policy toward China stance。
In addition, changes in China's business environment, the country back into the competition as well as signs of selective government support strategic emerging industries formed, more and more discomfort caused by foreign-funded enterprises。   Semiconductor, for example, Korean semiconductor manufacturing industry is more competitive than the United States, but they want to pay substantial royalties the United States, South Korea so get a lot of hardware manufacturing profits, but also through trade in services a portion of the money paid to the United States。 And China is currently invested hundreds of billions in government subsidies and investment, and trying to push a substantial upgrade of the semiconductor manufacturing industry across China in the short term。
If this strategy to succeed, the global semiconductor manufacturing chain will be re-shuffle。
So, how can we hope that the US semiconductor manufacturing field of large enterprises to speak for China?Sino-US trade relations have had highly complementary, so the United States before the emphasis on free trade and market access for developing。
However, with the direct bilateral economic and trade relations increasingly competitive, and compete in the global market of a third party, if based on future-oriented strategic considerations, confrontational Sino-US relations will become increasingly prominent, so the Americans on the topic from He turned to the so-called free trade fair trade。
  Standing Boeing angle, Boeing Aircraft Company C919 should not believe in the absence of government support, cheap credit, subsidies and other state-owned background, entirely by private enterprise initiated and operated。 For it, this is unfair competition。 Made in China 2025 lists a number of strategic emerging industries, intends to universal support, these industries, almost all goes to the field of corporate America has a core competence, thus causing a lot of rebound。 Therefore, the Sino-US economic and trade relations bilateral relations as an important ballast stone, distorted and unfavorable changes are taking place on many levels, in this context, the bilateral trade surplus was only set up as a target of discussion。   Third, WTO can not cover potential practices and how to solve conflicts?This is a deeper issue。 For example, China's C919 obtained more than 800 single, the United States believes it is not fair competition, but this could not be sued in the WTO, because the WTO does not cover this area。
There are many similar problems。
Standing in the United States point of view, these acts must be managed, otherwise US companies will not be competitive, but they can not cover these practices WTO, the United States tried to solve the problem through bilateral frame, or coordination of common allies to put pressure on China。
  In any case, these disputes and concerns need to find acceptable to all rules, which require relatively long process, with continuous friction and continuous bargaining, but also involve and affect the future of global economic governance。
  In this sense, I believe that in spite of economic and trade relations as a ballast stone Sino-US relations, had to bear a very great role in history, but now the stone ballast is undergoing irreversible, far-reaching changes。 To manage Thucydides trap between China and the US, we must continue the long-term economic and trade relationship as the most important stone ballast。 On the one hand to fully safeguard the WTO multilateral mechanism, while not covered by the WTO for the field, should be resolved through bilateral negotiations should be on the core interests of mutual concern, the relationship between the core, the core practices established criteria, in order criterion based on further covering more countries, so as to improve the current global economic governance system, and the establishment of a Sino-US economic and trade relations more unbreakable ballast stone。 This process may take some confrontational, the need to run a longer period。
  How to achieve this vision, will undoubtedly need the joint efforts of both sides, we need to go beyond the current trade disputes, for systematic thinking about the future。