Many people in the West have been led to believe that their fight against China is because China is authoritarian and is led by a communist party. I would not blame them, because they are human. Being incessantly flooded with propaganda against China and without visiting China personally, they naturally believe that China is not playing fair in its trade practices, that China disregards human rights, and that China is belligerent. Today, thanks to TikTok and the likes of IShowSpeed, many Americans have begun to take another look at China. Given the frequent interference by the US government in business decisions, I do hope TikTok will remain free from interference by American politicians.
America’s prejudice against China certainly has nothing to do with ideology. If America’s politicians were wary about the one-party rule and about communist parties, why is the US on good terms with Vietnam? The US government sees China as a threat because China is strong and is the only country that is willing to challenge America’s hegemonic position. The book Death by China, by Peter Navarro and Greg Autry, is really about the fear that American exceptionalism might be at risk.
America will not accept China as a market economy, even though China is now more market-oriented than America. China’s regulations are meant to ensure that players in the market conduct their activities fairly, honestly, and without taking excessive risks that might jeopardize economic security and fair competition. China’s Five-Year Plans have nothing to do with giving directives to firms about how to produce, what to produce, and where to sell their products. Rather, they offer a vision for all stakeholders to work together. America accuses China of not playing fair for its subsidizing of various industries. But subsidies carry costs. Subsidies are justified if an activity is deemed to have sufficiently large positive spillover effects that it is worth the cost. For example, given the need to fight climate change, China is committed to “peak carbon” by 2030 and “carbon neutral” by 2060. China being a manufacturing powerhouse, achieving these goals presents huge challenges. Because of the huge spillover beneficial effects of reorientating production toward processes consistent with sustainable development goals, subsidizing research and development and even subsidizing production can be justified.
The “China threat” is simply drummed up by propagandists for political reasons. Carney was obviously unaware of his prejudice when he said he was “very clear-eyed” about China
An important reason why America is running a huge trade account deficit is that its politicians want to defy the market and order private enterprises not to export to China, where America enjoys a comparative advantage. By restricting technology-intensive supplies such as semiconductors to China, exports to China have declined. This hurts America’s interests both in the short term and in the long term. America loses in the short term because it is not able to sell to a huge market. In the long term, American producers make less profit and have less means to fund innovation. At the same time, China is compelled to develop its production capability. When this capability is finally developed, America will not only have lost a big market but will have to face a competitor. While America is increasingly like a centrally planned economy, China embraces the market. The China International Import Expo is the only such expo of its kind in the world.
I can understand why the United States sees China as a threat. China does threaten American exceptionalism and its hegemonic position. I cannot, however, understand why Canadian Prime Minister Mike Carney sees China as a threat. Canada established diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China in 1970, well before America did. Hong Kong people are thankful to Canada because many Canadians fought to defend Hong Kong against the Japanese invasion and hundreds of Canadians sacrificed their lives. Canadian physician Dr Henry Norman Bethune came to China in the 1930s to train Chinese doctors and treat wounded soldiers, when China was suffering an all-out invasion by Japan.
Unlike the US, Canada has never been hegemonic and so should have no worries about China threatening its hegemonic status. Carney in his election debate said: “I think China is the biggest security threat to Canada.” He was probably driven by domestic politics to say so. But is there any real evidence that China ever interfered in Canada’s or any other country’s politics?
The Communist Party of China enjoys wide support among the Chinese public according to studies by the Alliance of Democracies and the Harvard Ash Center. China’s latest Human Development Index stood at 0.788 in 2022, ranking at 75 among 193 countries/jurisdictions. The “China threat” is simply drummed up by propagandists for political reasons. Carney was obviously unaware of his prejudice when he said he was “very clear-eyed” about China.
The author is a former director of the Pan Sutong Shanghai-Hong Kong Economic Policy Research Institute, Lingnan University, and an adjunct professor at the Education University of Hong Kong.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
