China's 'State Capitalism' Sparks a Global Backlash 
 
By JASON DEAN, ANDREW BROWNE And SHAI OSTER 
Wall Street Journal November 16 2010 
 
BEIJING-Since the end of the Cold War, the world's powers have generally  
agreed on the wisdom of letting market competition-more than government  
planning-shape economic outcomes. China's national economic strategy is  
disrupting that consensus, and a look at the ascent of solar-energy magnate Zhu 
 
Gongshan explains why. 
 
A shortage of polycrystalline silicon-the main raw material for solar  
panels-was threatening China's burgeoning solar-energy industry in 2007.  
Polysilicon prices soared, hitting $450 a kilogram in 2008, up tenfold in a  
year. 
Foreign companies dominated production and were passing those high costs  
onto China. 
 
Beijing's response was swift: development of domestic polysilicon supplies  
was declared a national priority. Money poured in to manufacturers from  
state-owned companies and banks; local governments expedited approvals for new 
 plants. 
 
In the West, polysilicon plants take years to build, requiring lengthy  
approvals. Mr. Zhu, an entrepreneur who raised $1 billion for a plant, started  
production within 15 months. In just a few years, he created one of the 
world's  biggest polysilicon makers, GCL-Poly Energy Holding Ltd. China's  
sovereign-wealth fund bought 20% of GCL-Poly for $710 million. Today, China  
makes about a quarter of the world's polysilicon and controls roughly half the  
global market for finished solar-power equipment. 
 
Western anger with China has focused on Beijing's cheap-currency policy;  
President Obama blasted the practice at the G-20 summit in Seoul last 
weekend.  Mr. Zhu's sprint to the top points to a deeper issue: China's 
national 
economic  strategy is detailed and multifaceted, and it is challenging the 
U.S. and other  powers on a number of fronts. 
 
Central to China's approach are policies that champion state-owned firms  
and other so-called national champions, seek aggressively to obtain advanced  
technology, and manage its exchange rate to benefit exporters. It leverages 
 state control of the financial system to channel low-cost capital to 
domestic  industries-and to resource-rich foreign nations whose oil and 
minerals 
China  needs to maintain rapid growth. 
 
China's policies are partly a product of its unique status: a developing  
country that is also a rising superpower. Its leaders don't assume the market 
is  preeminent. Rather, they see state power as essential to maintaining 
stability  and growth, and thereby ensuring continued Communist Party rule. 
 
It's a model with a track record of getting things done, especially at a  
time when public faith in the efficacy of markets and the competence of  
politicians is shaken in much of the West. Already the world's biggest 
exporter, 
 China is on track to pass Japan this year as the second-biggest economy. 
 
Charlene Barshefsky, who as U.S. trade representative under President Bill  
Clinton helped negotiate China's 2001 entry into the World Trade 
Organization,  says the rise of powerful state-led economies like China and 
Russia is  
undermining the established post-World War II trading system. When these  
economies decide that "entire new industries should be created by the  
government," says Ms. Barshefsky, it tilts the playing field against the 
private  
sector. 
 
Western critics say China's practices are a form of mercantilism aimed at  
piling up wealth by manipulating trade. They point to China's $2.6 trillion 
in  foreign-exchange reserves. The U.S. and the European Union have lodged a 
series  of WTO cases and other trade actions targeting Beijing's policies, 
and hammer  China's refusal to let its currency appreciate more quickly, 
which they argue  fuels global economic imbalances. 
 
Top executives at foreign companies have started griping publicly. In July, 
 Peter Löscher, Siemens AG chief executive, and Jürgen Hambrecht, chairman 
of  chemical company BASF SE, in a public meeting between German 
industrialists and  China's premier, raised concerns about efforts to compel 
foreign 
companies to  transfer valuable intellectual property in order to gain market 
access. 
 
Some observers think Beijing's vision is rooted in a desire to avenge  
China's "century of humiliation" that started with the 19th-century opium wars. 
 
Such critics believe that China's focus on "indigenous 
innovation"-nurturing  home-grown technologies-entails appropriating others' 
technology. China's 
 high-speed trains, for instance, are based on technology introduced to 
China by  German, French and Japanese makers. 
 
"The Chinese have shown that if they have the ability to kill your model  
and take your profits, they will," says Ian Bremmer, president of New 
York-based  consultancy Eurasia Group. His book, "The End of the Free Market," 
argues that a  rising tide of "state capitalism" led by China threatens to 
erode 
the  competitive edge of the U.S. 
 
So far, though, multinationals aren't staying away, because China remains a 
 vital source of growth for companies whose domestic markets are saturated. 
 
China's strategy echoes the policies Japan employed in its economic  
rise-policies that also rankled the U.S. But China's sheer scale-its population 
 
is 10 times Japan's-makes it a more formidable threat. Also, its willingness 
in  recent decades to open some industries to foreign firms makes its market 
far  more important for global business than Japan's ever was, giving 
Beijing much  greater leverage. 
 
China's sovereign-wealth fund bought 20% of GCL-Poly Energy Holding for  
$710 million. Today, China makes about a quarter of the world's polysilicon 
and  controls half the global market for finished solar-power equipment. A 
company  handout shows a GCL control room. 
 
Chinese leaders have begun to acknowledge the backlash. At the World  
Economic Forum in Tianjin in September, Premier Wen Jiabao said that the recent 
 
debate about China among foreign investors "is not all due to 
misunderstanding  by foreign companies. It's also because our policies were not 
clear 
enough." 
 
"China is committed to creating an open and fair environment for  
foreign-invested enterprises," Mr. Wen said. 
 
The state has always played a big role in China's economy, but for most of  
the reform era that started in the late 1970s, it retreated as state-owned  
collective farms were dismantled and inefficient state industrial 
enterprises  closed. Accession to the WTO in 2001 represented a big bet by the 
leadership on  liberalizing markets further. The gamble paid off, with growth 
rocketing much of  the past decade. 
 
But the state is again ascendant. Many analysts say the pace of  
liberalization has slowed, and point to vast swaths of industry still 
controlled  by 
state companies and tightly restricted for foreigners. The government owns  
almost all major banks in China, its three major oil companies, its three  
telecom carriers and its major media firms. 
 
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao acknowledges a foreign backlash, but says  
Beijing "is committed to creating an open and fair environment for  
foreign-invested enterprises." 
 
According to China's Ministry of Finance, assets of all state enterprises  
in 2008 totaled about $6 trillion, equal to 133% of annual economic output 
that  year. By comparison, total assets of the agency that controls 
government  enterprises in France, whose dirigiste policies give it one of the 
biggest state  sectors among major Western economies, were €539 billion ($686 
billion) in 2008,  about 28% of the size of France's economy. 
 
The government's increased involvement in sectors from coal mining to the  
Internet has spawned the phrase guojin mintui, or "the state advances, the  
private sector retreats," among market proponents in China. A January report 
by  the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said China's 
economy  had the least competition of 29 surveyed, including Russia's. 
Prominent Chinese  economist Qian Yingyi has said he worries over what appears 
to 
be "a reversal of  market-oriented reforms in the last couple of years." 
 
The state's huge role in the economy gives it enormous sway to pursue its  
policy goals, which are often laid out in voluminous five-year (sometimes  
15-year) plans. These relics of the Mao-era command economy are central to 
the  corporate fortunes of Western giants like Caterpillar Inc. and Boeing Co. 
that  rely on the country's market. China is now one of the biggest sources 
of revenue  growth for Caterpillar, and is the biggest buyer of commercial 
jets outside the  U.S., according to Boeing. 
 
Huawei has long had its overseas expansion supported by China Development  
Bank, which in 2004 extended a five-year, $10 billion credit line and 
routinely  lends money to foreign buyers to finance their purchases of Huawei 
products. 
 
One of Beijing's most important goals: wean China off expensive foreign  
technology. It is a process that began with the "open door" economic policies  
launched by Deng Xiaoping in 1978 that brought in waves of foreign 
technology  firms. Companies such as Microsoft Corp. and Motorola Inc. set up 
R&D  
facilities and helped train a generation of Chinese scientists, engineers and 
 managers. 
 
That process is now in overdrive. In 2006, China's leadership unveiled the  
"National Medium- and Long-Term Plan for the Development of Science and  
Technology," a blueprint for turning China into a tech powerhouse by 2020. The 
 plan calls for nearly doubling the share of gross domestic product devoted 
to  research and development, to 2.5% from 1.3% in 2005. 
 
One area of hot pursuit: green technology. China's "Torch" program  
fast-tracks industries, attracting entrepreneurs with offers of cheap land for  
factories, export tax breaks and even a free apartment for three years. 
 
Take the case of Deng Xunming, a China-born U.S. citizen who is a pioneer  
of America's solar industry and whose innovations light up the first  
solar-powered billboard on New York's Times Square. 
 
His company, Xunlight Corp., has been nurtured by U.S. financial aid and  
embraced by politicians eager for the U.S. to win the race to develop new 
energy  technologies. Xunlight has pulled in more than $50 million in state and 
federal  grants, loans and tax credits, partly aimed at bringing needed 
jobs to Toledo,  Ohio, where the company is based. 
 
But two years ago, Mr. Deng, who left China in 1985 to study at the  
University of Chicago, set up a Xunlight unit on a giant industrial estate near 
 
Shanghai. The company now also makes its thin-film solar panels there and  
employs 100 workers. The panels are exported back to the U.S. 
 
Mr. Deng says he is trying to keep the Chinese operation "low key." It  
isn't mentioned on Xunlight's website, and Mr. Deng declined to comment on the  
China factory in an interview. "China will be a good market for the 
future," he  said. "But right now, the bigger market is in Europe. We're 
putting 
our  attention on the Europe and U.S. market. But meanwhile we're developing 
efforts  for the China market," which could eventually be bigger, he said. 
 
While the state seeks new technology, it also uses control of banking to  
feed cheap credit to industries it wants to foster. The government sets 
interest  rates for China's bank depositors low relative to rates of growth and 
inflation.  That means Chinese households, through the banks, effectively 
subsidize the  state's industrial darlings. 
 
Xunlight has pulled in more than $50 million in state and federal grants,  
loans and tax credits, partly aimed at bringing jobs to Toledo, Ohio, where 
the  company is based. But two years ago, CEO Deng Xunming, second from 
left, set up  a Xunlight unit near Shanghai. The company now also makes its 
thin-film solar  panels there and employs 100 workers. The panels are exported 
back to the U.S. 
 
Privately held telecommunications equipment maker Huawei Techologies Co.  
has long had its overseas expansion supported by China Development Bank, 
which  in 2004 extended a five-year, $10 billion credit line and routinely 
lends 
money  to foreign buyers to finance their purchases of Huawei products. 
Revenue has  risen more than 200% in the past five years, and it has become one 
of the top  three telecommunications companies, along with Nokia Siemens 
Networks and  Telefon AB LM Ericsson. 
 
Sprint Nextel Corp. recently excluded Huawei and fellow Chinese telecom  
company ZTE Corp. from a contract worth billions of dollars, prompted by U.S.  
fears that the companies have ties to China's military. The Sprint decision 
was  a setback for Huawei in the one major market it has had difficulty 
penetrating,  the U.S., and shows how mounting concerns over China's policies 
are starting to  exact a cost. 
 
Huawei has also faced complaints in Europe that Chinese government backing  
gives it an unfair advantage. Both Huawei and ZTE have said their equipment 
 poses no threat to U.S. security, and deny benefiting unfairly from 
government  support. 
 
Zhao Changhui, chief country-risk analyst at Exim Bank of China, speaks to  
the WSJ's Mohammed Hadi about whether China's banks will become global 
champions  at the China Financial Markets conference. 
 
For China, the biggest risks may be internal. Some attempts to generate  
high-tech breakthroughs by fiat have fizzled. A drive to produce a home-grown  
microprocessor took years to replicate features of those from Intel Corp. 
and  Advanced Micro Devices Inc., whose products had continued to evolve. A  
Chinese-developed mobile phone technology has yet to gather significant 
momentum  abroad, despite the government forcing China's largest phone company 
to adopt  it. 
 
Longer term, China faces a host of challenges that threaten growth. They  
include a population that is aging quickly because the one-child policy 
limited  births in recent decades, and environmental damage resulting from the 
country's  breakneck pace of industrialization. 
 
For now, that pace has the West on guard. "Our competition has gotten  
tougher during a period for the U.S. of profound economic weakness that  
magnifies any perceived threat," says Ms. Barshefsky, the former U.S. trade  
representative. There is a "significant and profound-almost 
theological-question  
about the rules as they exist." 
 

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list  _pe...@lists.csuchico.edu_ 
(mailto:pe...@lists.csuchico.edu)  
_https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l_ 
(https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l) 
 
 

_______________________________________________
Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list
Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list

Reply via email to