Henry Paulson, writing in today's Wall Street Journal, wants American economic 
interests to top the agenda during Xi Jinping's forthcoming visit to the US. 
Paulson, the former Goldman Sachs CEO and Treasury Secretary, reflects the 
views of the Wall Street banks who would like to see progress on a  Bilateral 
Investment Treaty to accelerate the opening of China's financial sector. He 
also touches on the other US economic aims, which include the elimination of 
subsidies to China's expanding state-owned firms who present an increasing 
challenge to US multinationals; easing of government procurement policies to 
improve access for American manufacturers; continued measures to promote 
Chinese consumer spending on US imports, and Chinese convergence with US 
policies on cybersecurity and climate change. Implicit in Paulson's op-ed is a 
reminder to the American ruling class faction which wants a more aggressive 
posture towards China that the country is by far the US's fastest growing 
export market and that "China's new leadership team is beginning to act in 
ways…(that) will mean new markets and opportunities for U.S. companies. 
Clearly, it is in Washington's best interest to use bilateral negotiations to 
help Beijing make this transition."


The Path to Double Happiness
By HENRY M. PAULSON JR.
Wall Street Journal
June 5 2013

When President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping meet this week in 
California for an unusually private set of conversations, national-security 
issues are sure to dominate. Make no mistake: Whether, and how deeply, the two 
countries cooperate on North Korea and Iran will be an important test of their 
relationship. Another top priority will be growing American concerns about 
cybersecurity, which, more than any issue, has the potential to damage trust 
and confidence in relations with China.

But because economic issues have anchored the Chinese-American relationship in 
recent decades, it is important that the two presidents seize this moment to 
reinvigorate their shared economic agenda. This is the first time since China's 
accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001 that the political and 
economic climates in both countries are ripe for establishing mutually 
beneficial economic agreements.

China has made strong economic progress over the past decade because of 
adaptations required by WTO membership. That process has benefited the U.S. and 
China significantly. Yet in recent years, reform in China has stalled. There is 
an urgent need for China to restart its reform process and continue to open its 
markets to competition.

Just as China's WTO accession furthered the cause of economic reform, so too 
can negotiating new economic agreements with the U.S. President Xi Jinping and 
the new leadership team recognize that reforms are essential for China's 
economic success. Meantime, President Obama is focused on restoring America's 
competitiveness, and he understands the importance of international trade and 
investment to accomplish that goal.

The case for launching significant economic negotiations this week is 
compelling. For starters, China and the U.S. have the world's largest economies 
and did a record-shattering $493 billion in two-way trade in 2011. U.S. exports 
to China have more than quintupled since China entered the WTO and have grown 
more quickly than imports. In fact, China is America's fastest-growing export 
market. When world-wide U.S. exports dropped almost 18% during the 2009 
financial crisis, exports to China dropped only about 2.5%.

This demonstrates China's potential to become a demand driver for U.S. products 
over the long haul. It also demonstrates the degree to which our economies are 
intertwined.

This interdependence has touched the lives of ordinary Americans and Chinese: 
U.S. innovations have helped raise living standards across the world, including 
for hundreds of millions of Chinese. For its part, China has exported capital 
at a time when Washington has been a major borrower. More than $1 trillion in 
Chinese holdings of U.S. Treasury securities have helped finance U.S. deficit 
spending and keep interest rates low.

Given such extraordinary interdependence, economic tensions are too high. In 
China, export lobbies have fought for policies that favor their interests and 
limit foreign competition. Although the U.S. economy is much more open than 
China's, national security concerns and increasing Chinese cyberintrusions have 
led to rising levels of anti-China sentiment that have made Chinese investment 
here more difficult. Trade deficits persist. And many U.S. companies argue that 
Beijing is tilting the playing field to favor its own national champions.

But the fundamental issue is that U.S.-China economic relations would be more 
secure if our economies were better balanced and on more sustainable, 
complementary trajectories.

Right now, they aren't. China saves too much, produces too much, sells too much 
to Americans and consumes too little. For its part, the U.S. saves too little, 
consumes too much and would like to produce and sell more to China. The 
challenge for both countries is to fashion an agenda that makes future economic 
success more secure.

Here's the good news: In addition to setting a positive tone, China's new 
leadership team is beginning to act in ways that have the potential to 
rebalance the country's economy. These leaders aim to replace a growth model 
that has relied too heavily on government investment and exports with a model 
focused on household consumption and competition. This won't be easy. But if 
they succeed, it will mean new markets and opportunities for U.S. companies. 
Clearly, it is in Washington's best interest to use bilateral negotiations to 
help Beijing make this transition.

Both countries have recently agreed to tackle two important issues as part of 
their Strategic and Economic Dialogue. One, on climate, offers an opportunity 
to make breakthroughs on this major threat to the global economy and ecosystem. 
The other, on cybersecurity, could forge common ground on a problem so fraught 
it could easily derail the U.S.-China relationship.

In addition to addressing these two key issues, promoting cross-border 
investment flows is also necessary. One vehicle for doing so, while advancing 
negotiations on market access and securing equal competitive conditions, is the 
Bilateral Investment Treaty, or BIT. Such a treaty would enhance investor 
protections for both sides.

If China is to achieve its new economic model, it must introduce competition 
into its economy. In financial services, for example, allowing foreign 
financial firms to compete equally will create more open and efficient capital 
markets and help transition China to a nation of investors, not just savers.

Beijing should also introduce more competition to help its own private sector. 
Anticompetitive practices hurt Chinese private firms nearly as much as foreign 
ones. For all their subsidies, benefits and preferential access to credit 
available only to state-owned enterprises, it is private firms that are the 
major source of Chinese job creation. Weaning state-owned companies off 
subsidies will benefit them by making them more competitive. It also would 
ensure market rules for the private, small and medium-size businesses that 
create most Chinese jobs, yet are largely excluded from state-backed loans and 
resource subsidies.

Ultimately, both countries need capital to flow more freely: Americans because 
they need job-creating capital flows, including direct investment from China, 
and the Chinese because Beijing wants to invest more in the U.S. China 
complains about a lack of clarity in the U.S. regulatory framework. The U.S. 
could help address that concern by enacting more transparent investment 
policies, which would lead to more Chinese investment in the U.S.

This is a rare moment of opportunity for both countries. We can continue to 
play defense, or we can play offense by using negotiations to make our 
economies more balanced. If we squander the moment, we will regret it.

Mr. Paulson, chairman of the Paulson Institute, served from 2006-09 as the 74th 
U.S. Treasury secretary. Previously, he was chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to