President Trump’s much-ballyhooed trade agreement with China is looking less like a done deal and more like a work in process. Statements by Chinese officials indicate that Trump’s announcement of a deal was premature and there are concerns that the president’s jumping the gun may endanger the entire agreement.In a series of tweets on Dec. 2, Trump said that China had agreed to “reduce and remove” their 40 percent tariff on American auto imports and start purchasing American agricultural products “immediately.” Before the trade war, Chinese tariffs on foreign autos were 25 percent. Since the trade dispute began, China has increased tariffs on American cars to 40 percent while reducing imports from other countries to 15 percent.The lack of confirmation from the Chinese combined with Trump’s history of prematurely claiming success in international deals led many observers to be skeptical about Trump’s claims. Those doubts fueled an 800-point drop in the stock market on Tuesday after a 600-point rally on Monday.
Now statements by Chinese officials are confirming that the deal with the Trump Administration was merely an agreement to start negotiations. The Wall Street Journal reported this morning that China’s Commerce Ministry confirmed in a statement that the nation has agreed to a 90-day negotiating period in which both sides will stop increasing tariffs. The statement said that the negotiations had a “clear timeline and road map” and confirmed that “the Chinese side will start implementing the specific items both sides have agreed on, and the sooner the better.”
How much is already agreed upon was left unclear, but the Journal notes that Chinese government agencies and the nation’s supreme court announced tough penalties for violation of intellectual property rights. Infringement on intellectual property has been a major complaint of the Trump Administration. The new rules were dated Nov. 21, but were only made public yesterday.
On the other hand, the statement by the Commerce Ministry did not mention purchases of agricultural products or reducing auto tariffs. Some Chinese officials did suggest that their country may increase purchases of products such as soybeans and natural gas, which are in high demand in China. They did not specify amounts, however, and there was no indication of whether the tariffs would be reduced.There are two schools of thought as to whether the VSG style of China engagement is 5-D chess or just clueless clumsiness:
“It’s funny how far the administration has gotten on bravado and uncertainty — the ‘crazy uncle’ strategy with almost no organization, no whole-of-government approach, insufficient preparation and no talking points,” Scott Kennedy, a China expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said in the Washington Post. “The strategy has thrown the fear of Marx into the Chinese. They have been knocked off their seats.”
Others point out that there are inherent risks in Trump’s approach. Michael Pillsbury, a former Pentagon official who Trump called “probably the leading authority on China,” told Axios that he was “getting warnings from knowledgeable Chinese about the American claims of concessions” that were never agreed upon by the Chinese. These include Trump’s claims about the immediate purchase of American agricultural products and Chinese tariff reductions.Then there's this development:
The chief financial officer of China’s Huawei Technologies faces extradition to the United States after she was arrested in Canada, Canadian officials said Wednesday.
Meng Wanzhou, a senior executive who is also the daughter of the tech giant’s founder, Ren Zhengfei, was arrested in Vancouver on Dec. 1, according to Canada’s Department of Justice.
A bail hearing has been set for Friday. The department declined to provide other details, citing a publication ban. U.S. Justice Department spokesman Marc Raimondi declined to comment on the matter.
A spokesman from the Chinese Embassy in Canada confirmed the arrest of Meng and said in a statement that Beijing “strongly protests over such kind of actions which seriously harmed the human rights of the victim.” China has lodged a protest to the United States and Canada, urging them “to immediately correct the wrongdoing,” the spokesman said.
Meng was arrested when she was transferring flights in Canada, said Huawei spokesman Chasen Skinner.
“The company has been provided very little information regarding the charges and is not aware of any wrongdoing by Ms. Meng,” Skinner said. “The company believes the Canadian and U.S. legal systems will ultimately reach a just conclusion.”
Meng is expected to face charges in the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn.
U.S. authorities have been investigating Huawei since 2016 for violations of export controls and U.S. sanctions related to Iran and other countries. It is unclear how Huawei might have violated sanctions.
The arrest comes at a tense moment in U.S.-China relations. Over the past year, China and the United States have engaged in a tit-for-tat trade war that has shaken markets around the world and hurt ties between the world’s two largest economies.
President Trump last week met with Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit in Argentina, hashing out a trade war cease-fire. But just days after they met, Chinese and U.S. officials relayed conflicting details about the deal.
At the heart of the dispute is a White House claim that China violates the rules of global trade through forced technology transfer and cyberwarfare. There have been growing calls for the United States to increase its scrutiny of Chinese firms, including Huawei, on the grounds of national security.
U.S. officials have long suspected that Huawei, a major smartphone maker, maintains ties to China’s communist leaders. Ren, Huawei’s founder, is a former officer in China’s People’s Liberation Army.
I didn't like it when the Most Equal Comrade, Madame Bleachbit, Secretary Global-Test and Wendy Sherman engaged in appeasement, and I don't like it when the VSG does it either.
And it's starting to look like fruitless appeasement on another front as well:
North Korea has reportedly expanded a long-range missile base within its mountainous interior, despite a promise from Donald Trump the country was “no longer a threat”.Satellite images obtained by CNN allegedly show Pyongyang has continued to maintain and update its Yeongjeo-dong missile base and another site nearby.US officials have long known about the Yeongjeo-dong base, but images show construction on a new facility seven miles away not previously made public, the US news channel reported.We already knew about the Yeongjeo-dong base (and probably the “new” one as well, but the government doesn’t show all of its cards in such matters), but this expansion of the nearby base is more disturbing. North Korea made a big show of blowing up one of its underground bases after Trump and Kim first started talking, but now it appears that they’ve been building another massive, underground complex at the same time.
It seems to me that if there's a saving grace in VSG-era Pacific-rim policy, it's in having John Bolton and Mike Pompeo on board. Hopefully, they can get through to their boss and let him know that this doesn't make him look like a winner.
With Bolton, and to a lesser extent Pompeo on board there is not less, but even more bullying, which never works anywhere, though bloggie seems to prefer it to so-called "appeasement." It breeds distrust, resentment and retaliation, though to the clueless it looks like strength.
ReplyDeleteBullying of whom? You're surely not saying that these guys are bullying China and North Korea, are you?
ReplyDeleteI thought it was well-known that your buddy Bolton is like Trump and he bullies everyone. But don't take it from me, just google 'bolton bully.' Here is a sample of what you'll get:
ReplyDelete"A former American intelligence chief yesterday described John Bolton, the White House's choice as ambassador to the UN, as a "kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy", who tried to bully government analysts into producing the intelligence he wanted. Mr Bolton's judgment and temperament were savaged in graphically-worded testimony by Carl Ford, a conservative Republican who ran the state department's intelligence and research branch in the Bush administration's first term."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/apr/13/usa.unitednations
Is China backpedalling on the trade "agreement"? Are Chinese "companies" (actually entities owned by the Chinese government) such as Huawei Technologies and ZTE engaging in cyberwarfare? Is North Korea continuing to build missile bases?
ReplyDeleteThen we need clear-eyed grownups who can reel the VSG back in when he gets overexcited about warm dinner conversations and beautiful letters.
And here's the refutation of that Carl Ford shit:
https://www.weeklystandard.com/william-kristol/the-character-assassination-of-john-bolton
"I worked with John Bolton in the first Bush administration. I know many people who have worked with him and for him in this administration. Carl Ford's characterization of Bolton as a "kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy" is disingenuous. No, let's call a spade a spade--it's dishonest.
John Bolton is no "kiss-up." Quite the contrary. Over the last four years, he was famously willing to challenge his bosses, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage, at the daily 8:30 State Department senior staff meeting. He paid a price for this, especially by earning the enmity of Armitage. Carl Ford, the former State Department intelligence chief, was a close associate of Armitage.
Nor is Bolton a "kick down sort of guy." In fact, Bolton has always had a reputation as a straight shooter, a good boss, and not a screamer--unlike, say, Armitage. (Not that Armitage's screaming should disqualify him from a future appointment, either. Lots of able public officials have been screamers.) The fact is, John Bolton lost trust in a subordinate of Ford who had tried an end run around him and then asked, according to the subordinate's immediate boss in the intelligence shop, only that he be "moved to some other portfolio."
This character assassination of Bolton is repugnant. If people want to oppose him because of his views, they're certainly entitled to do so. I and other Bolton supporters have welcomed such a debate (see my editorial, Bolton's the One, in the April 18 WEEKLY STANDARD). But to impugn the character of someone who has served 16 years in government, in 4 Senate-confirmed positions, and has been popular and respected (if disagreed with, at times) in each of these positions, is just plain wrong."
Got that? Just plain wrong.
Everybody got friend. Here's another to refute:
ReplyDelete"Who better to advise the bully-in-chief, Donald Trump, on when to make war and kill people than another bully? It’s difficult, after all, to avoid the label — that of a bully — when thinking of John Bolton, the former Bush administration official-turned-Fox News pundit who Trump recently picked as his national security adviser.
“John Bolton is a bully,” José Bustani, the retired Brazilian diplomat and former head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, told me when I reached him by phone in Paris earlier this month. There are a number of people who claim to have been bullied or intimidated by Bolton — including Bustani. The latter’s criticisms of the famously mustachioed hawk have been public for many years now, but some of the details of his tense encounter with Bolton at the OPCW have never been reported before in English."
https://theintercept.com/2018/03/29/john-bolton-trump-bush-bustani-kids-opcw/
"The accession of Mike Pompeo and John Bolton marks a dangerous turning point in American foreign policy – not merely because they may enable Donald Trump’s worst instincts, but because their own instincts are incendiary. However ineffectual, former secretary of state Rex Tillerson spoke for moderation; former national security advisor H.R. McMaster understood the costs of war. Pompeo and Bolton are Dick Cheney redux — prone to exaggerating threats, scorning serious diplomacy, and imagining that American power can mold the world to their liking. Their timing could not be worse. America faces two combustible nuclear threats. North Korea is imminent; Iran must be managed. Both require sound judgment, skilled diplomacy, careful planning, and a sophisticated sense of consequence — the antithesis of the blinkered belligerence that characterizes Trump’s selections."
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/04/16/fear-pompeo-and-bolton-trump-heedless-hawks/LUPEqN0PiXW7XUYEm95EXK/story.html
Is China backpedalling on the trade "agreement"? Are Chinese "companies" (actually entities owned by the Chinese government) such as Huawei Technologies and ZTE engaging in cyberwarfare? Is North Korea continuing to build missile bases?
ReplyDeleteGiven that Trump has no core view off these countries guiding him, what would you recommend from the foreign-policy and national-security specialists advising him? I'm looking for something a little more specific than "sound judgment, skilled diplomacy, careful planning, and a sophisticated sense of consequence."
I want to avoid World War III. I day hello and you day goodbye. You derided our wimps in power preTrump and I deride Trump and his bullies, including Netanyahu. Can we work it all out without a major conflagratuon that we shall surely all regret?
ReplyDelete