As you all probably know, there is currently a trade war between the United States and China, started by the belligerent leader of the former Donald Trump with wide political support domestically, and the latter not holding back from responding in kind.
The war consists of these countries imposing import duties on each other’s products. We are talking about an astronomical value of commerce. The US imported $539 billion from China in 2015 (half a trillion dollars!), and China imported $120 billion from the US in the same year. This difference is interpreted by the American President as evidence that China is taking advantage of the US.
Now this economic activity consists of independent and commercial decisions by private or state organisations in both countries, and no one is forced to buy from the other. The theory of free trade between countries is that products and services would be able to be sourced from the most efficient source, which should lead to better quality and lower prices, than if they were constrained to be purchased solely from those made in the same country as the buyer.
The problem of free trade is that if country A is more efficient than country B in producing products and services, these will have the tendency to be made in country A, which therefore employs its capital (money, machines and labour) more and better than being employed by country B which then leads to a reduction of work in its economy. Economists say that this is an incentive for efficiency to be added where it is absent. In practice, there could be social, cultural, historic and political reasons why this does not occur, and lack of work becomes permanent.
In the case of the US and China, there are other reasons which have led to a trade imbalance. The first is an accusation that China has manipulated its currency, the renminbi. Another critique is that organisations from foreign countries investing in China have to pass over intellectual property to local organisations.
In the US, the tendency to buy ‘made in China’ has led to many people being unemployed, or under-employed. Several states in the country which are considered to form the ‘rust belt’, such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and others, all in the north-east of the country, where strong industrial activity in the past has faded, replaced by to strong importation from a number of countries, primarily China. Here, this effect is felt strongest, and was one of the factors which gifted our planet with one Donald Trump, one of whose electoral promises was to fix this problem.
It seems to me that free trade between countries does increase global prosperity for the ones involved, but have also led to poverty and lack of work opportunities to many people, who in the past were hard working and skilful, and today are out of work. The problem is that the benefits gained have been too concentrated in the hands of industrialists, business people, professionals and some of the workers, but not everyone has taken a share of the benefits. I blame the political class of many countries, who only care about global indicators such as the Gross Domestic Product, and take no initiative when seeing other indicators of inequality in society getting worse.
What people need are actions that result in an improvement to their lot.
This does not mean that Trump’s actions will necessarily lead to what he is promising. His administration, supported by both main American political parties, has initially stuck a 25% tariff on almost half its imports from China, and the latter retaliated similarly, and now the situation has escalated. Discussions to reach an agreement are proceeding with fits and starts, and so far there is no positive outcome.
The impression I take however from the American attitude and rhetoric, mostly from Trump, that this is being led by a gorilla, the biggest one on the planet (anyway being blond definitely the most handsome), threatening he can do whatever he likes, attempting to intimidate by beating his chest and forcing the other side to negotiate with their tail beneath their legs and therefore at a psychological disadvantage.
I can see no indication that the Chinese are pissing in their pants. Naturally the situation is very delicate, and there will be an effect on the country’s economy. However we need to remember that today China is already the biggest economy in the world, bigger than the United States and also bigger than the European Union. It had already recognised that its own interest dictates it needed to reduce its’ economy’s dependence on exports and focus more on internal consumption.
One needs to keep in mind that commerce, apart from providing economic advantages, leads also to reduced conflict between the countries involved, as it would not be in their best interest to disrupt their own economies.
If on the other hand, countries become protectionist, only looking inwards and not outwards, caring only about themselves and not giving a hoot about anyone else, there is a higher likelihood or resulting in suspicion and conflict.
China will not defer. Until today, its’ conduct has been relatively benign in terms of foreign relations, compared to the United States, which has long been playing the cowboy around the world – just think of Iran, the Vietnam war, the Iraq invasion etc etc. Bad examples have been provided without bound.
Then you might remember about the nineteenth century, where another world power, Britain, also had a huge trade deficit with China, as it used to buy Chinese products, notably porcelain, tea and silk, paying for them in silver. In those days, it had the brainwave of solving the deficit by starting to sell opium to Chinese people, getting them dependent on the drug and being paid back in silver.
When the Chinese emperor of the Qing dynasty decided to put an end to this travesty, the British sent the navy over, causing the so-called Opium Wars and humiliated China, which then was also the largest world economy, impoverishing and reversing its progress by a hundred years.
Do you really think that China will permit itself to be humiliated once more?
----------------------------
Bħal ma probabbilment tafu, bħalissa għaddejja gwerra fil-kummerċ bejn l-Istati Uniti u ċ-Ċina, mibdija mill-mexxej belliġerenti tal-ewwel Donald Trump b’appoġġ politiku wiesgħa, b’tal-aħħar ma joqogħdux lura milli jirrispondu.
Il-gwerra tikkonsisti f’li l-pajjiżi jimponu dazji fuq il-prodotti ta’ xulxin meta jiġu importati. Qed nitkellmu fuq valur astronomiku ta’ kummerċ. L-Istati Uniti importat $539 biljun miċ-Ċina fl-2018 (nofs triljun dollaru!), u ċ-Ċina importat $120 biljun mill-Istati Uniti fl-istess sena. Din id-differenza hija interpretata mill-President Amerikan bħala evidenza li ċ-Ċina qiegħda tieħu vantaġġ mill-Istati Uniti.
Issa din l-attività ekonomika tikkonsisti f’deċiżjonijiet indipendenti u kummerċjali minn organizzazzjonijiet privati u/jew statali taż-żewġ pajjiżi, u ħadd mhu sfurzat jixtri mill-pajjiż l-ieħor. It-teorija tal-kummerċ liberu bejn il-pajjiżi hu li prodotti u s-servizzi jkunu jistgħu jinkisbu mill-iktar sors effiċjenti, li għandu jwassal għal kwalità aħjar u prezzijiet iktar baxxi, milli kieku kellhom jinxtraw bil-fors dawk magħmulin fil-pajjiż tax-xerrej.
Il-problema tal-kummerċ liberu hu li jekk pajjiż A hu iktar effiċjenti minn pajjiż B biex jipproduċi prodotti u servizzi, dawn se jkollhom it-tendenza biex jinħadmu fil-pajjiż A, li allura jħaddem il-kapital tiegħu (flus, magni u ħaddiema) iktar u aħjar milli jħaddimhom pajjiż B li għalhekk jitnaqqaslu x-xogħol fl-ekonomija tiegħu. L-ekonomisti jgħidu li dan hu inċentiv biex tiżdied l-effiċjenza fejn m’hemmx. Fil-prattika, jista’ jkun hemm raġunijiet soċjali, kulturali, storiċi u politiċi għalfejn dan ma jsirx, u x-xogħol nieqes isir permanenti.
Fil-każ tal-Istati Uniti u ċ-Ċina, hemm raġunijiet oħra li wassal għal żbilanċ fin-negozju. Waħda minnhom hi l-akkuża li ċ-Ċina timmanipola l-munita tagħha r-renminbi. Kritika oħra hija li pajjiżi barranin li jinvestu fiċ-Ċina huma kostretti li jgħaddu l-proprjetà intellettwali tagħhom lil organizzazzjoni fil-pajjiż.
Fl-Istati Uniti, it-tendenza li dak li tixtri jkun magħmul fiċ-Ċina wassal għal ħafna nies li jkun bla xogħol, jew bi ftit xogħol. Hemm stati fil-pajjiż li jitqiesu li jiffurmaw ‘ċinturin tas-sadid’, bħal Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio u oħrajn, kollha fil-grigal tal-pajjiż, fejn l-attività industrijali qawwija tal-passat majnat, mibdula b’importazzjoni qawwija minn diversi pajjiżi, ewlieni fosthom iċ-Ċina. Hawnhekk, dan l-effett jinħass bil-kbir, u kien wieħed mill-fatturi li wassal lid-dinja r-rigal ta’ Donald Trump, li waħda mill-wegħdiet tiegħu elettorali tkun li din is-sitwazzjoni jirranġaha.
Jien jidhirli li l-kummerċ liberu bejn il-pajjiżi żied il-prosperità globali tal-pajjiżi involuti, imma wassal għall-faqar u nuqqas ta’ xogħol ukoll lil ħafna nies, li fl-imgħoddi kienu beżlin u ta’ sengħa, u illum jinsabu bla xogħol. Il-problema hi li l-benefiċċji li seħħew, ġew ikkonċentrati wisq f’idejn l-industrijalisti, in-negozjanti, il-professjonisti u parti mill-ħaddiema, imma ma tgawdewx minn kulħadd. It-tort nagħtiha lill-klassi politika ta’ ħafna pajjiżi, li moħħhom biss fl-indikaturi globali bħall-prodott gross domestiku (GDP), u ma jieħdu l-ebda inizjattiva meta jaraw indikaturi ta’ inugwaljanza fis-soċjetà qiegħdin jeħżienu.
Il-poplu azzjonijiet li jwasslu għal riżultat fejjiedi għandhom bżonn.
Dan ma jfissirx li l-azzjonijiet ta’ Trump neċessarjament se jwasslu għal dak li qed iwiegħed. L-amministrazzjoni tiegħu, b’appoġġ miż-żewġ partiti prinċipali Amerikani, waħħlet tariffa ta’ 25% fil-bidu fuq kważi nofs l-importazzjoni miċ-Ċina, u tal-aħħar irritalja b’mod simili, u issa s-sitwazzjoni reġgħet eskalat. Taħdidiet biex jintlaħaq ftehim qiegħdin isiru bis-sulluzzu, u s’issa ma wasslu għal ebda riżultat pożittiv.
L-impressjoni li nieħu madankollu mill-attitudni u r-retorika li toħroġ mill-Amerikani, u iktar u iktar minn Trump, li din qed titmexxa minn gurilla, l-ikbar wieħed fid-dinja (insomma l-isbaħ għax bjond) jhedded li jista’ jagħmel li jrid, jipprova jbeżża billi jħabbat fuq sidru u jġiegħel lin-naħa l-oħra tinnegozja b’dembha bejn saqajha u għalhekk b’inferjorità psikoloġika.
Jien ma għandi l-ebda indikazzjoni li ċ-Ċiniżi qiegħdin ipixxu taħthom bil-biża’. Naturalment is-sitwazzjoni hija delikata, u effett fuq l-ekonomija tal-pajjiż se jkun hemm. Madankollu irridu niftakru li llum iċ-Ċina diġà hija l-ikbar ekonomija fid-dinja, ikbar mill-Istati Uniti u ikbar ukoll mill-Unjoni Ewropeja. Ukoll kienet diġà għarfet li huwa fl-interess tagħha li tnaqqas id-dipendenza tal-ekonomija tagħha fuq l-esportazzjoni, u li hemm bżonn li jiżdied il-konsum intern.
Wieħed irid iżomm quddiem għajnejh li l-kummerċ bejn il-pajjiżi, apparti vantaġġi ekonomiċi, iwassal ukoll għal nuqqas ta’ kunflitti bejn il-pajjiżi involuti, għax ikun jaqblilhom ma jfixklux l-interessi ekonomiċi tagħhom.
Jekk mill-banda l-oħra l-pajjiżi jibdew isiru iktar protezzjonisti, u jħarsu biss ‘il ġewwa u mhux iktar ‘il barra, jimpurtahom biss minnhom infushom u xejn affattu minn ħaddieħor, dan iktar hemm ċans li jwassal għal suspetti u ġlied.
Iċ-Ċina mhux se tbaxxi rasha. Sal-lum imxiet relattivament bir-rażan fir-relazzjonijiet barranin tagħha, imqabbla mal-Istati Uniti, li ilha tilgħabha tal-cowboy madwar id-dinja – aħseb biss fl-Iran, il-gwerra fil-Vjetnam, l-invażjoni tal-Iraq eċċ eċċ. Eżempju ħażin ingħatat kemm trid.
Imbagħad tiftakar fis-seklu dsatax, fejn qawwa mondjali oħra, dik Brittannika, ukoll kellha defiċit kbir fil-kummerċ maċ-Ċina, fejn kienet tixtri prodotti Ċiniżi, bħall-porċellana, it-te u l-ħarir, u tħallas għalihom bil-fidda. Dakinhar ġietha l-ideja brillanti li d-defiċit issolvih jekk tibda’ tbigħ il-loppju liċ-Ċiniżi, isseddaq id-dipendenza tal-poplu għal din id-droga, u titħallas lura bil-fidda.
Meta l-imperatur Ċiniż tad-dinastija Qing iddeċieda li jwaqqaf din il-ħniżrija, il-Brittanniċi bagħtulu l-flotta navali tagħha, seħħew l-hekk imsejħa Gwerer tal-Loppju u umiljaw liċ-Ċina, li dakinhar kienet diġà l-ikbar ekonomija fid-dinja, faqqruha u tefgħuha lura mitt sena.
Taħsbu li ċ-Ċina se terġa tippermetti li tkun umiljata?
No comments:
Post a Comment