From NEW YORK TIMES
OPINION
China’s Economic EmpireVicto Ngai
By HERIBERTO ARAÚJO and JUAN PABLO CARDENAL
Published: June 1, 2013 8 Comments
HONG KONG
— THE combination of a strong, rising China and
economic stagnation in Europe and America is making the West increasingly
uncomfortable. While China is not taking over the world militarily, it seems to
be steadily taking it over commercially. In just the past week, Chinese
companies and investors have sought to buy two iconic Western companies, Smithfield Foods, the American pork producer,
and Club Med, the French resort company.
Europeans
and Americans tend to fret over Beijing’s assertiveness in the South China Sea,
its territorial disputes with Japan, and cyberattacks on Western firms, but all
of this is much less important than a phenomenon that is less visible but more
disturbing: the aggressive worldwide push of Chinese state capitalism.
By buying
companies, exploiting natural resources, building infrastructure and giving
loans all over the world, China is pursuing a soft but unstoppable form of
economic domination. Beijing’s essentially unlimited financial resources allow
the country to be a game-changing force in both the developed and developing
world, one that threatens to obliterate the competitive edge of Western firms,
kill jobs in Europe and America and blunt criticism of human rights abuses in
China.
Ultimately,
thanks to the deposits of over a billion Chinese savers, China Inc. has been
able to acquire strategic assets worldwide. This is possible because those
deposits are financially repressed — savers receive negative returns because of
interest rates below the inflation rate and strict capital controls that
prevent savers from investing their money in more profitable investments
abroad. Consequently, the Chinese government now controls oiland gas pipelines from Turkmenistan to China and
from South Sudan to the Red Sea.
Another
pipeline, from the Indian Ocean to the Chinese city of Kunming, running through
Myanmar, is scheduled to be completed soon, and yet another, from Siberia to
northern China, has already been built. China has also invested heavily in
building infrastructure, undertaking huge hydroelectric projects
like the Merowe Dam on the Nile in Sudan — the biggest Chinese engineering
project in Africa — and Ecuador’s $2.3 billion Coca Codo Sinclair Dam. And
China is currently involved in the building of more than 200 other dams across
the planet, according to International Rivers, a nonprofit environmental
organization.
China has
become the world’s leading exporter; it also surpassed the United States as the
world’s biggest trading nation in 2012. In the span of just a few years, China
has become the leading trading partner of countries like Australia, Brazil and
Chile as it seeks resources like iron ore, soybeans and copper. Lower tariffs
and China’s booming economy explain this exponential growth. By buying mainly
natural resources and food, China is ensuring that two of the country’s economic
engines — urbanization and the export sector — are securely supplied with the
needed resources.
In Europe
and North America, China’s arrival on the scene has been more recent but the
figures clearly show a growing trend: annual investment from China to the
European Union grew from less than $1 billion annually before 2008 to more than
$10 billion in the past two years. And in the United States, investment surged
from less than $1 billion in 2008 to a record high of $6.7 billion in 2012,
according to the Rhodium Group, an economic research firm. Last year, Europe
was the destination for 33 percent of China’s foreign direct investment.
Government
support, through hidden subsidies and cheap financing, gives Chinese
state-owned firms a major advantage over competitors. Since 2008, the West’s
economic downturn has allowed them to gain broad access to Western markets to
hunt for technology, know-how and deals that weren’t previously available to
them. Western assets that weren’t on sale in the past now are, and Chinese
investments have provided desperately needed liquidity.
This
trend will only increase in the future, as China’s foreign direct investment
skyrockets in the coming years. It is projected to reach as much as $1 trillion
to $2 trillion by 2020, according to the Rhodium Group. This means that Chinese
state-owned companies that enjoy a monopolistic position at home can now pursue
ambitious international expansions and compete with global corporate giants.
The unfairness of this situation is clearest in the steel and solar- panel
industries, where China has gone from a net importer to the world’s largest
producer and exporter in only a few years. It has been able to flood the market
with products well below market price — and consequently destroy industries and
employment in the West and elsewhere.
THIS is
the real threat to the United States and other countries. However, most Western
governments don’t seem to be addressing China’s state-driven expansionism as an
immediate priority.
On the
contrary, European governments dealing with their own economic crises see China
as a country that can help, either by buying sovereign debt or going ahead with
investments in their countries that will create jobs.
The Chinese state-owned company Cosco currently manages the main
cargo terminal in the biggest Greek port, Piraeus, near Athens — a 35-year
concession deal. And China’s sovereign
wealth fund, C.I.C., took a 10 percent stake in London’s Heathrow
Airport in 2012, as well as a nearly 9 percent stake in the British utility
company Thames Water. The state-owned firms Three Gorges Corporation and State
Grid are the main foreign investors in Portugal’s power-generation sector, and
C.I.C. also bought a 7 percent stake in France’s Eutelsat Communications.
In the
Greek port the Chinese have been able to triple capacity, amid local unions’
criticism of worsening labor conditions. It’s too early to measure China’s
impact in the other investments, but the fact that Chinese companies are able
to invest in sectors that are closed or restricted for European firms in China
says a lot about how minimal Europe’s leverage with China is.
Take
Germany, which accounts for nearly half of the European Union’s exports to
China. It’s highly unlikely that Berlin would make unfair competition the
cornerstone of its China policy. Moreover, the lack of leverage and leadership
in Brussels means that the union is unable to take firm action to force China
into adopting measures that would level the playing field or guarantee
reciprocity in its domestic market.
The only
exception is the United States, which seems to be addressing the issue by
pushing forward the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a regional trade association
that is seen by critics in Beijing and elsewhere as an American-led policy to
contain China. The club is thought to be restricted to countries that meet high
American standards on issues like free competition, labor and environmental
standards and intellectual property rights. As China doesn’t meet those
standards, it will have to reform or risk regional isolation. Moreover, the
United States has made life difficult for the Chinese telecom giant Huawei by
refusing to grant it contracts from leading American telecom companies. This is
not just about national security concerns but also about sending Beijing a
clear message that the United States government is willing to block one of
China’s most visible and successful companies.
While
Western companies complain about barriers to public procurement and bidding and
struggles to compete in restricted sectors in China, Chinese companies enjoy
red carpet treatment in Europe, buying up strategic assets and major companies
like Volvo and the German equipment manufacturer Putzmeister.
The
perception is that China is now unavoidable and, consequently, the only option
is to be accommodating — offering everything from a generous investment
environment to essentially dropping human rights from the agenda. “We don’t
have any stick. We can just offer carrots and hope for the best,” a senior
European official told us.
Greenland,
a massive resource-rich territory largely controlled by Denmark, is a case in
point. Last year, it passed legislation to allow foreign workers into the
country who earned salaries below the local legal minimum wage (the minimum
wage there is one of the highest in the world). Chinese representatives had
made it clear that Chinese state-owned banks and companies would invest in the
high-risk, costly exploitation of Greenland’s vast mining resources only if the
modification of local regulations would allow the arrival of thousands of
low-wage Chinese workers.
The
Arctic territory didn’t have too many alternatives. No other country is in a
position to become Greenland’s strategic partner for its future development,
given the business risks involved in the Arctic region and the scale of the
investment needed in a territory bigger than Mexico but without a single
highway. An American oil company couldn’t have handled the task alone. The
Chinese state capitalist system, by contrast, allows multiple state-owned
companies to work together, making it possible for the China National Petroleum
Corporation, for instance, to extract oil while China Railway builds basic
infrastructure.
No comments:
Post a Comment