With China's rapid growth increasingly affecting a wide range of issues worldwide, it has become expedient for US presidential candidates to blame China for some domestic problems in the US. But in this year's US presidential election campaign, China-bashing has been virtually non-existent. There are good reasons for this welcome change.
China has found itself a frequent target of populist demagoguery. Its exchange-rate regime, which pegs the yuan to the US dollar, has been blamed for the mounting US trade deficit. Never mind that America's bilateral trade deficit with China, even including Hong Kong, accounts for less than one-fifth of the total US deficit. Growing imports from China and more direct investment by US companies have supposedly fueled US unemployment. The jobs issue has been further exploited by citing poor working conditions, low wages, child labor and other problems commonly found in developing countries.
Attacking a communist country has always seemed to offer US politicians a convenient way to appeal to the average voter. After all, most US voters can be trusted not to understand how other countries -- let alone countries in the Far East -- really work.
But this time, President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry both know that it would be unwise to bash China too hard. US companies and the entire US economy have a huge stake in China now, so both candidates have no interest in rocking the boat. A candidate may promise more anti-dumping actions against Chinese goods, vow to press harder on China to change its exchange rate regime, or sharpen criticism of China's weak enforcement of intellectual property rights; but too much protectionism may make a candidate look irresponsible this year.
Indeed, protectionism can do nothing to reduce the US trade deficit and stanch domestic unemployment. No matter how much politicians blame other countries, growing US imports mean greater reliance on international markets, and some China factor in America's investment portfolio is needed to compete against European and Japanese firms.
There is no hiding these facts from US voters now. Bush failed to honor his anti-Chinese protectionist campaign promises of 2000, as did former US President Bill Clinton throughout his term. Any China-bashing and protectionist pleas this time around will most likely ring just as hollow.
Moreover, China's geopolitical importance to the US has grown immensely since the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001. At least for now, engaging China in the global fight against terrorism is in America's interest. China does have some common interests in fighting Islamic extremist terrorism, and it did not try to block America's path to the Iraqi war in the UN Security Council. China has also been cooperating constructively with the US and its allies in dealing with North Korea's nuclear capabilities.
Of course, the US still wants to contain China and prevent it from becoming a major regional and world power. But that remains a long-term strategic goal, not the stuff of presidential campaigns, especially when China seems too weak to pose any immediate threat to the US on any front in the foreseeable future.
China has never been a positive factor in US politics, so from its perspective, the less it is mentioned in this US election season, the better. The relative silence about China in the US these days may be due merely to the Iraq war and post-war situation still dominating the news. Yet it may also indicate that US political elites are in the process of facing up to new realities and adjusting their view of China accordingly.
Fan Gang is professor of economics at Beijing University and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
RSS