krueger43_Lucas SchifresGetty Images_chinausmoney

美国失败的对华战略

Sep 23, 2021 Anne O. Krueger

华盛顿—尽管华盛顿气氛恶劣、两极分化，但两党似乎至少就一件事达成了共识：中国是一个问题，美国必须应对它带来的竞争挑战。以军事和经济实力为主要组成部分的中美竞争，已被视为决定谁将领导地区和全球秩序的较量。

经济活力是建立军事实力的必要条件。美国要保持和加强其在世界经济中的领导地位，就必须同时拥有盟友和充满活力的国内经济。那么，为什么美国总统拜登政府会支持能帮助中国削弱美国自身经济优势的政策？

拜登政府不去问美国如何改善经济表现，反而模仿中国，由政府挑选技术和产业的赢家和输家。这样做，就放弃了美国对开放多边贸易体系、法治，以及在适当治理框架内的私营企业的传统支持。

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world’s leading thinkers, including long reads, book reviews, topical collections, short-form analysis and predictions, and exclusive interviews; every new issue of the PS Quarterly magazine (print and digital); the complete PS archive; and more. Subscribe now to PS Premium.

Anne O. Krueger

Writing for PS since 2014
54 Commentaries

Anne O. Krueger, a former World Bank chief economist and former first deputy managing director of the International Monetary Fund, is Senior Research Professor of International Economics at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies and Senior Fellow at the Center for International Development at Stanford University.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 7 Comments on this article

Ben Leet Sep 26, 2021

No mention is made to the expanding trade deficit in goods which the U.S. Census reports hit a record high of $918 billion in 2020, nor to currency manipulation. And the key to China's high growth rate has been its practice to Pick Winners and fund them with government resources, which is denigrated when used in the U.S.. Nor was mention made of the loss of manufacturing jobs in the U.S., a total of 5 million between 1997 and 2018, and a total of 582,000 in 2020 (see the article by Robert Scott at Economic Policy Institute). And of course the lack of democratic institutions, and civil rights in China is not mentioned. Scott also published an article, "Rebuilding American Manufacturing" recommending the Biden plan of $2 trillion to invest in clean energy, energy efficiency and conservation, and infrastructure. The author evidently does not know that income growth for the lower-earning 50% of adults was 1% during the 34 year period 1980 to 2014 (Piketty and Saez and Zucman), and others report and it's well known. The U.S. is losing its middle class. The lower-saving 40% of U.S. adults own 0.2% of all wealth, hardly a boast for the "most productive economy" in the world. (Credit Suisse report Global Wealth, Databook). that lower-earning 40% owns per adult less than $3,000, while the average for all adults is $505,000. China is catching up, and now it has stated at least a plan for Shared Prosperity, but we will have to see if it's just lip service or the real deal.
- Jonathan FitzPaine Sep 28, 2021
  
  So, you really don't understand how this stuff works.
  
  First, there's this obsession with manufacturing. The majority of the workforce is employed in services, not manufacturing. And manufacturing is a broad term that actually spans several sectors of the economy. On balance, there was a net loss in manufacturing jobs resulting from the same trade restrictions the Biden administration is pursuing. Steel-consuming firms were hit particularly hard.
  
  Every American ought to read Adam Posen's piece in Foreign Affairs, The Price of Nostalgia. He demonstrates using facts, evidence and logic that the argument that the US has been pursuing 'neoliberal' trade policies is a myth. In reality, the US has been isolating itself from the global economy.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Joe Ryan Sep 26, 2021

Several concrete observations might be added to Prof. Krueger's essay.

1) U.S. manufacturing employment fell as a result of Pres. Trump's trade war with China. The trade war harmed both importers and exporters as well as their suppliers and downstream customers in the U.S. (See the Fed's calculations on this, by Flaaen & Pierce.)

2) The Trump administration admitted to the WTO that it had no reason for its tariffs, saying literally that U.S. "public morals" were offended by buying things from firms in China because the country is run by thieves and cheaters. The WTO gave this non-argument a more-than-polite hearing and then laughed it off. The Trump administration might just as well have said "because the Chinese are not White people," which is what they really meant. (See the WTO panel's report, no. WT/DS543/R.)

3) Pres. Trump's tariffs are illegal, as they violate the terms of the "emergency" law under which he issued them. Congress had considered and not adopted the tariffs, which under the law means it's not an emergency, just a difference of opinion. (By the way, we have to understand that the GOP's operational mode has become, not "it's legal," but "who's going to stop us?") In addition, the emergency law itself is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power, because it doesn't allow a majority in Congress to reverse the executive's measures.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/JXEW1xEzh

美国失败的对华战略

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

美国失败的对华战略

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification