US China Relations
After rather lengthy negotiations between the
United States and China, there has
been a trade agreement reached between the
two countries. China has agreed to
enter into the World Trade Organization
(WTO). This along with U.S. Deputy
Assistant Defense Secretary Kurt
Campbell’s visit to China in an attempt to
mend relations damaged by the U.S.
bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade,
marked a good series of events
for U.S. and Chinese relations. The article also
shows that the relationship
between these two countries still needs work which
cannot be done with ease.
A century ago, the U.S. fought off rival countries in
a battle for economic
influence in China. The 20th century began with U.S.
Secretary of State
Jon Hay arguing that whoever understood China "has the key
to world politics
for the next five centuries." Yet, according to the article,
foreign policy
experts agree that most Americans see what they want to see.
Harvey
Sicherman, President of the Foreign Policy Research Institute put it
nicely
in the article, "The pattern of our policy toward China is a series
of
illusions punctuated by unpleasantries." Professor Michael Hunt, an
historian
of U.S.-China relations points out, "We really invest a lot of
hopes in China,
we do this repeatedly, and they’ve really been crushed. They
are so much an
expression of our own needs and our own expectations." Take
the idea of the
China market. One Far-Eastern expert proclaimed at the
end of the last century,
"No other market in the world offers such vast
and varied opportunities for
the further increase of American exports." Take
that comment with this one by
the U.S. chamber of Commerce about the recent
progress made, "This is really a
landmark opportunity to open up China’s vast
market to American companies."
These expectations could be dangerous,
points out the author. The market might
not even materialize into what many
are predicting it to be. To achieve the"dream" of a billion-plus consumers of
American products, China will have to
raise the average income of its
citizens which is no easy or short-term task.
Such changes cannot happen
overnight, China’s move toward a market economy
will require "systematic
improvement" at all levels of society according to
the author. One of the
grandest illusions of Western Policy has been the
reasoning that it can
single-handedly change China. For more than a century
Western
missionaries, businessmen, and advisers have come to China believing in
their
"superiority" over the nation. This arrogance was present because
they
possessed advanced technical skills and a sense of moral rightness.
These
Westerners thought they should be welcomed and listened to
immediately. When the
Chinese went their own way, these same Westerners
felt betrayed by the entire
nation of China. The author points out a specific
example of this occurring in
1949. When the Chinese Communist forces
finally took over the mainland and
established the People’s Republic, many
Americans engaged in a witch-hunt over
who had "lost China", as if China was
a thing that could be lost and also as
if the United States had any control
over the destiny of such an ancient and
populous nation. A key to this
historical arrogance is the American idea that
market forces can rapidly
transform an authoritarian government into a model
democracy. U.S. trade
negotiators still argue the current trade pact between
China and the
United States will help the Chinese achieve, in their words,
"greater
freedom and greater global prosperity." Robert Dallek, a foreign
policy
expert and presidential historian, says "Americans often think the end
of
such development is something that looks like the United States." This is
an
idea that goes way back to the 19th Century. According to Dallek,
"Chinese
movement toward democracy may never come about or even come near to
what we
think it should be." And if it does, "It will be their kind of
capitalism,
their kind of democracy." The author’s points seem clear in that
although
much progress has been made in recent weeks, there is still a lot of
work to be
done. Yadong Liu, a former official in the Chinese Foreign
Ministry, agrees with
the author and does not see China’s recent development
as leading to the end
of conflict with the United States. He emphasizes
China’s nationalism by
claiming that , "Both the leadership and population in
general are still
driven by desire to restore China to what it was hundreds
of years ago,"
before it was dominated by a series of foreign powers,
including the United
States. The author thinks of this nationalism as
more of a "self defensive"
form of nationalism. It seems as if anything
happens, whether it is large or
small, it can easily irritate the Chinese if
they believe it is insulting or
humiliating towards them. This helps to
explain why the U.S. bombing of the
Belgrade embassy touched off a number
of protests against the United States. For
Americans, says the author,
"The danger is that we become too mesmerized by
our own success." And by
doing so, "We miss the realities that actually
shape the future." He makes it
clear that if we expect too much out of this
current trade agreement, it will
only put off implementing it fully. The
author’s points can be used when
looking at trade dealing with China in a
business and market situation.
Although much progress has been made, it is still
up in the air as to who got
the better deal. If eventually U.S. firms are able
to export or sell their
products to the entire Chinese population, there are
unlimited possibilities.
With a massive population, and a better economy on the
way, China would be
and ideal location to sell your product. This still remains
to be in the
future according to the article. It will take some mending of
issues for the
Chinese to even consider the U.S. for major importing and
exporting. Time
will also determine if China will ever reach their goal to have
an equal
trading relationship that the U.S. has with other countries around the
world
through the World Trade Organization. Article #2 The article starts out
with
an image of Chan Yinmiao, a carpenter sitting by the side of the road on
a
Beijing overpass, waiting in the wind for work. When the author
mentioned the
breakthrough trade deal his government struck with the United
States recently,
Chan brightens up. Chan’s family lives hundreds of miles
away in eastern China
where they cultivate rice. He hopes the trade deal will
open up lucrative export
markets especially for their crop. "The more the
market opens, the more
opportunities we’ll have to make money." Chan claimed.
Obviously this
excitement regarding the new trade deal extends beyond those
who hope to measure
its benefits in dollars, cents, and improved trade
figures. The deal did mark a
major milestone in China’s campaign to join the
World Trade Organization(WTO).
Some have hoped that entry in the trade
group that makes the rules for world
trade will also spur improvements in
human rights, legal reforms, and
eventually, progress towards a democratic
government. The author reasons that an
economic opening will hopefully bring
about a political opening in a country
desperately in need of both. Also, a
free and private economy forms the base for
a democratic system, so it will
make China’s government and legal system
evolve toward democracy. President
Clinton and his supporters have argued that
growing trade, foreign contacts,
and the World Trade Organization’s rules on
fair competition will open
markets and legal processes will help bring China
closer to other
international countries. A major part in the deal between China
and the U.S.
involved the investment of China’s telephones and Internet
networks, not
allowed under the initial deal, but will make both networks
cheaper and
available to more Chinese, thus increasing the amount and flow of
information
throughout the world. Other, more social changes could occur because
of the
new deal are, more Western movies will bring more new ideas, more
foreign
lawyers and businessmen who will expect Chinese courts to enforce
contracts
could advance rule by law, rather than by bureaucrats. Also,
foreign investments
will create more new jobs, offering a wider range of
employment opportunities.
Wang Shan, a political commentator and author
believes that the Chinese leaders
have not clearly considered the social
changes that entrance into the WTO could
bring, "They are not sufficiently
prepared for the pressures on Chinese
society," he said. "Chinese leaders
feel that entering the WTO will promote
Chinese exports, open up world
markets, and attract investments. But Americans
feel that once China enters
this system great changes will occur in Chinese
society, including political
and social changes." The author goes on to
express other concerns that the
Chinese have about this new entrance into the
WTO. Specifically that
trickle-down civil rights improvements through increased
trade will come too
slowly and that foreign governments will have to pressure
China over its
human rights record to bring about deeper change. Lin Mu, a
one-time aide to
former Communist Party leader Hu Yaobang, elaborates on the
subject of social
change, "It’s an idle dream for the American government to
think it can
improve the human rights situation with economic cooperation."
The
article again shifts to other possible drawbacks that China’s new
membership
to the WTO could hold within it. Initially jobs could become scarcer
as
ailing state firms and inefficient family farms give in to the new
foreign
competition. China’s state-run media has been selling the WTO deal to
the
public all along, but does officially admit that millions of people could
be
thrown out of work, including more than nine million people associated
with
agriculture. And even though China has negotiated for WTO entry for 13
years,
its social security system remains very unsophisticated. With these
factors
combined, surely there will be a rise in the already common worker’s
protests
that have prompted a police crack down on such incidents. A major
point the
author displays in the article is the issue regarding the
exploitation of
workers in China. Long-term labor activists fear that because
the communist
government bans independent trade unions, jobs generated by
increased foreign
investment could lead to this greater exploitation of the
workers. Already tough
and unsafe factories prevail in provinces all over
China. In the province of
Guangdong which is the southern economic
powerhouse that handles forty percent
of China’s foreign trade, the rights of
the worker has extra significance
because the province stands to benefit
quite nicely through the WTO entry. Han
Dongfang a veteran Chinese labor
campaigner who lives in forced exile in Hong
Kong because China won’t let
him return to the mainland sums up the issue on
worker exploitation, "You can
say they provide job opportunities. But the
people who work there are not
‘people’, they’re ‘labor.’ They have no
rights to speak out about their
conditions, wages, or benefits." It’s clear
that the author wants to
emphasize that working conditions in China will not get
better, but possibly
even get worse. He clarifies that without the right for
workers to set up
unions, job opportunities brought by the WTO could turn
workers into slaves.
Under those conditions, there is no way that anyone can
claim that the WTO
will in any way benefit human rights in China. In terms of a
business
standpoint, this article shows how the deal between the United States
and
China could end up producing more bad press for human rights in
China.
According to this article, the cons certainly outweigh the pros
regarding
China’s new membership into the WTO. American companies
thinking about trading
with China should definitely give notice to the
production facility as well as
the establishment of employees in order to
make sure they are not being
exploited. The exploitation of workers does not
sit well with anyone in the
United States, and any correlation between
your company and a company that
offers no rights to its workers could mean
withdrawal of investors, workers, and
most importantly consumers. Article #3
This article focuses on China’s current
president, Jiang Zemin, and the role
he played in China’s recent agreement
with the United States to join the
World Trade Organization. The agreement made
with the U.S. will open China to
free international trade for the first time in
history. Along the way, the 73
year-old Jiang had to practically "move
mountains" of conservative opposition
in China where he is trying to change
the relationship between Beijing and
Washington DC. The deal was unprecedented
for China, but had equal importance
to Jiang himself. Jiang dealt with the
United States in a profound way,
waiting for United States President Bill
Clinton to call him twice before
backing the deal himself. When American
negotiators arrived in Beijing, Jiang
kept his distance from the discussions,
instead he sent Premier Zhu Rongji to
work out the details. Once the deal was
signed however, Jiang kept with his
emperor mentality and assumed direct contact
with the negotiators. An
advocate of technology, Jiang seems to be the right man
for China going into
the 21st century. Yet he doesn’t quite have the imperial
status in the eyes
of the Chinese. In Beijing, the WTO celebration was poorly
choreographed and
lacked a certain greatness to it, and Jiang’s speech
didn’t hold the people’s
attention for long at all. Despite these flaws,
Jiang clearly strives to
be as imperial as he can possibly be, perhaps join the
ranks of suck emperors
as Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping. But in China’s long
history, an Emperor
needs to inspire awe, with a little bit of fear mixed into
his subjects.
Jiang isn’t quite there but tackling such a large subject as
world trade is a
good place to start. Jiang is not one to start breaking up the
entire system
however which he leaves to Premier Zhu. It was Zhu who traveled to
the United
States in April in an attempt to strike up talks concerning WTO. He
failed
only because the White House at the time thought it would be"politically unwise"
to sign such an agreement at that point in time. Jiang
simply sat back,
gained concessus back in China, and then awaited for President
Clinton to
approach him. It was through this consensus that Jiang had
established that
the negotiations were a success. The author’s main points
concern Jiang and
his dilemma. The dilemma that he is a prisoner of the Chinese
Communist
Party that he is leading fifty years after its revolution. The
communist
party is one that is empty of vision, worried about unrest, out of
touch with
the younger generation that concerns itself more with money than
ideology. It
seems that the harder Jiang tries to impress the citizens of China,
the less
interested they become. He certainly acknowledges the fact that
economic
development is need in China, but being open politically is just simply
not
an option he has. Even immediately after the WTO deal was signed, members
of
Falun Gong, a banned meditation cult were being arrested. It is clear
that Jiang
wants to help China prosper, it might just take a little longer
than he had
hoped. The World Trade Organization or WTO has its headquarters
in Geneva,
Switzerland. It currently has 135 countries with membership.
The WTO is the
successor of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade formed
in 1947. Once
limited to goods, the WTO’s aim has been extended to include
intellectual
property and trade in services. The organization’s task is to
administer and
enforce the trade agreements made by member nations, ensuring
the flow of goods
and services. Its rulings are law among all of its members.
In terms of a
business/market situation, here is a breakdown on who got the
better deal
between China and the United States. In Telecommunications, China
will let
telecom firms, including U.S. giants such as AT&T, have new,
though still
limited access to its domestic market. The winner in this case
are the U.S.
telecom firms by a long shot. They will be able to sell their
voice and data
services to the Chinese which is a huge market. In farming,
China said it would
cut tariffs on farming goods to less than 15% by the year
2005. That should give
many Chinese access to new foods from all over the
world. Farmers in the U.S.
will be the winners in this respect because they
can expect to sell much more to
China. In the steel industry, China
agrees its state-owned and subsidized steel
industry will not dump tons of
cheap products onto crucial U.S. markets. There
really in no clear winner in
this agreement, China will sell more cheap steel
overseas while U.S. firms
will still have to compete world wide. Finally, in the
textile industry the
Chinese textile plants will be able to sell their products
anywhere around
the world. China is clearly the winner here, in this respect the
WTO is
like a dream come true. For the U.S. plants, the cheap Chinese exports
will
be a nightmare. Conclusion The World Trade Organization is going to
produce
many opportunities for the entire nation of China. For the first time
in its
history, China will be able to share its resources and receive
resources from
all around the world. The only mistake we can make regarding
this situation is
to push our (the U.S.) democratic views upon them while we
trade with them. The
politics in China will not change overnight and they
probably will not change in
the next ten years. It is extremely important
that we respect that China will do
what is best for itself throughout the
course of trading, which I believe it
will do. Another major concern
involving China and the WTO is the issue of
worker’s rights. Attention has to
be kept in regards to this touchy subject,
but again, the world must realize
that it can’t impose moral laws as well as
trade laws in a different country.
I hope that China does focus on the bettering
of working conditions and I
also hope that the majority of jobs, especially
agricultural, can be saved in
some fashion. I believe that China will succeed in
this new trade agreement,
and hopefully the rest of the world can benefit as
well. It might be rough
going at first, but only because it will be new to such
a historic and old
nation as China. I realize that old habits are particularly
hard to break,
but I am confident that under President Jiang Zemin, that China
will prosper
economically and socially under this new
agreement.
Bibliography
Shapinsky, David. Unchanging China.
ABCNews.com. November 20, 1999.
Leicester, John. WTO Entry Mixed Blessing
for China. Associated Press. November
21, 1999. McCarthy, Terry. The
Imperial Dragon. Time Magazine. November 29,
1999.