- 当前位置:
- 首页>
- 活动>
- ������������
������������
CCG持续关注国际关系议题,推动中国与全球化的发展,积极开展国际交流,充分发挥智库“二轨外交”作用,在巴黎和平论坛、达沃斯世界经济论坛、慕尼黑安全会议等重要国际政策与意见交流平台上组织分论坛、边会、圆桌会议、晚宴等活动,促进国际政商学界对话,凝聚共识;CCG积极与各国政界、智库界、工商界开展“二轨外交”活动,每年常态化赴多国调研与交流,促进中外关系攸关方互动,保持与多国政策圈层的沟通渠道。
-
陈启宗:香港过去追求速度的房地产“疯子”,一个都没活下来
理事简介陈启宗,全球化智库(CCG)联席主席,香港恒隆地产董事长。 2018年8月2日,在2018博鳌房地产论坛上,恒隆集团、恒隆地产有限公司董事长陈启宗表示,中国房地产的“疯子”很多,对于未来房企发展之路,陈启宗认为,房企量的较量、速度的较量已是过去的事,房企们需要改变心态、改变经营模式,做一个“长命”的房地产商。【演讲全文】 大家好,我们现在回归地产的话题。我的题目是反思地产,允许我作为一个半外围人来看怎么看待中国以往40年房地产市场,从而让我们知道今天可能往前去的路应该是怎么样。 以往这40年,中国房地产市场的发展可以说是历史上前无古人,也绝对是后无来者,因为体量之大简直不可思议,回想二三十年前,中国的住房是什么样的情况,到今天是什么样的情况,相比一下大家就知道了。就像刚才樊纲说的,30年前的房子质量是怎么样的,现在的质量是怎么样的,有非常大的差异。更不用说量的进步,简直是非常了不起。 以往这40年是中国房地产一个最佳的机遇,当然在那个年代,可以说房地产商基本上只有一个思维,也只有一个战略,无论你是北方的还是南方的,哪里的都好,基本上所有的房地产商都是在一个战略之下而往前去的。简单来说是什么呢?就是一个量的比较,越大越好。 昨天晚上跟观点的朋友聊天,我说你们怎么都受了这个影响,动不动就是5000多亿、3000多亿,还完全是在量的领域里的考量。我不否认在住房房地产发展的早期,量是极度重要的,但是随着时间的推移,那个量是不是还是那么重要呢?这是值得我们思考的一件事。 当你有量的时候,速度也就变成一个大问题,你的速度不够,你绝对是比不过别人,你要每年推出那么大的量,你的速度就要比别人快。 当然在以往的年代里,怎么拿地的我不知道,在座的很多朋友都非常知道,但是是我不想知道的,因为有很多不正规的方法拿地。 第二是拿钱,拿钱的方式也是我不知道的,总之在那个年代拿地、拿钱都是很特别的方式,作为住宅房地产商完全是一个量和速度的发展,所以在房地产行业里面出现了很多“疯子”。 我以前用过这个词,被很多人骂过,我今天还是说,我觉得中国的房地产疯子很多。 你说这种现象是不是中国独有的?不是这样的,我们在以往的历史上见过这样的人,以往的四五十年里,香港也有不少的“疯子”,有本地疯子,还有外边来的疯子,有日本来的,有东南亚来的,还有澳大利亚来的,疯子很多,所以我一见到“疯子”我就很敏感。 以往二三十年在中国内地,在房地产商朋友中我也见到有相当多的“疯子”,因为只有量的比赛,只有速度的比赛,你不是疯子就不容易致胜,所以在过往几十年有了很多疯子出现。 有朋友问我,香港过去几十年的疯子,现在到哪里去了?没有了,没有一个能存活下来的,绝大部分破产了,有一部分进了监牢。所以疯子的前途大半就是这两个,一个是进监牢,一个是破产。 中国的疯子会不会这样呢?我个人觉得应该也差不多。哪里都有疯人院,外国有,中国也有。所以你们要做各种各样的地产,有文旅地产、养老地产,将来还有一个疯人院的地产业是大家可以考虑的。 到了今天,我们再问一个问题,以往这个模式能否继续在中国持续下去?昨天晚上我问了一个问题,我说中国头10名住宅房地产商占了市场份额的多少?大概20%到25%,前50名占了市场份额的大概50%。 我还记得大概10年前,好像是郁亮说前10名占的份额只有5%左右,今天到了25%,这个数字可不可能再往下发展下去?当然我们也知道这个数字不是特别奇怪的,因为市场经济就是这样的,一定是往这个方向走的。但是一个国家不可能让那么重要的行业操纵在少数人手上,一定会用各种方法把这种情况改变过来。 所以我个人非常相信这个量的较量、速度的较量是过去的事,要是你今天还是保持这种态度,恐怕在未来你不容易致胜。问题是要改变的时候,什么时候改变,怎么改变? 我认为现在改变已经开始,要是你还是抱着一个量的心态、速度的心态,可能你就晚了。当然晚改比不改还是好的,所以我奉劝各位,要是你还以为这是一个量的较量,希望你要改一改。 这里要改的话,最困难的是什么?我认为最困难的是你自己,就是你的心态的问题,你的心态不调整过来,你是改不了的。 原因有两个,第一,人性所及,人都不喜欢变,也不容易变,以往的20年、30年都是这样子,你今天要改变过来不容易。第二,以往二三十年你非常成功,成功的不容易改变。但是当大环境改变的时候,你不跟着改变的话,恐怕你也很容易被淘汰。所以内地的住房房地产商,希望你们在心态上要调整自己。 为什么要心态改变呢?因为经营的模式一定是改变的。所以我很高兴刚才听到诗涛的白皮书中提到的一点,有很多不同类型的跟房地产有关的,有商业地产、文旅地产、产业地产、养老地产等等。这些都跟从前的模式有基本上的不一样。量的较量和速度的较量,在将来的模式里不一定能够合用。 还有一个问题,你做那些东西能否赚跟以往那么多年同样多的钱,这又是一个问题,因为模式的改变就需要有不同的管理方式,也就需要有不同的管理的心态,你的心态改不过来就不行。 以往这5年,有好几家公司、好几个内地的房地产商跟我说,我们现在要开始向恒隆学习,当然别人向我学习是我的荣耀,但是我心里明白,他们绝对是学不来的,为什么学不来呢?因为他们的心态调整不过来,心态调整不过来,你就不能在一个新的经营模式里致胜,所以我就说这完全是一个心态的问题。 我去年在这里说了一句非常不客气的话,允许我再提醒你们一下,我去年在这里说的最后一句话是说,“希望大家做一个长命的房地产商”。 恐怕一年一年的过去,做到这一点越来越难,因为环境越来越改变,市场越来越逼着你必须要调整你的经营模式,也就是要调整你的心态,调整不过来的人,恐怕就要成为市场的牺牲品。 所以我还是说去年的那句话,希望大家能够借着心态的改变,借着经营模式的改变,从而做一个长命的房地产商,做一个长命的企业家。当下企业改革好时机 陈启宗在接受人民网记者专访时表示,任何经济体经历季节更替都是正常现象,从企业的角度讲,行业的“冬天”正是企业改革内部治理的好机会。 陈启宗表示,零售业进入“寒冬”,或许在未来一两年内都将无法改善。从长远角度看,任何经济体有春夏秋冬很正常。凡是能在“春天、夏天”生存的不一定是好企业。从企业的角度看,在管理、人力、培训、企业文化等问题刚好在“冬天”来临时整治。 对于经济学家樊纲此前提出的以人口流入或流出划分城市更具合理性的说法,陈启宗表示非常赞同,他认为,一线城市依然是抵御风险的最佳置业选择,而二线城市也将随着人口的流入流出情况不同形成分化。 从市场总量来看,一线城市的总量远小于二线城市,所以中国的房地产市场主要看二线城市。随着房地产行业黄金时代的渐渐逝去,对于房地产开发商不是好事,但对于整体经济来说却是件好事。 对于房地产去库存的问题,陈启宗表示,去库存本身并不足以担心,而质量差、产品落后的库存才令人担心。陈启宗还建议,过去几年商业地产库存可以在未来向养老、幼教等体验式方向转变。文章选自凤凰网、人民网,2018年8月2日
2018年8月6日 -
张燕生:国际贸易失序风险显著上升
专家简介张燕生,全球化智库(CCG)学术委员会专家,中国国际经济交流中心首席研究员。 当前,可能导致国际贸易失序的复杂因素交织,增大了全球经济不确定性。一方面,世界主要经济体中形成三种声音或力量,正左右着国际贸易秩序的走向。仅从年初的达沃斯世界经济论坛上看,法德等国致力于推进基于传统规则的自由贸易秩序,美国总统特朗普倡导基于对等开放的公平贸易秩序,我国则大力推动基于开放包容的自由贸易秩序。另一方面,主要发达国家正以多种方式推动新议题和新规则的设定,谋求为未来国际贸易秩序变革建章立制。同时,G20、“金砖+”合作机制等也在积极推动全球治理变革。 这些不同主张,深刻反映了现有国际贸易秩序存在的制度性缺陷。世界经济领域三大突出矛盾,即增长动能不足、经济治理滞后以及发展失衡等,仍未得到有效解决,原因在于现有国际贸易秩序缺乏效率和公平,表现为发达国家内部的分配不公平、发展中国家与发达国家间的发展不平衡以及国际宏观经济政策的不协调。 在诸多因素中,美国挑起贸易冲突以及可能衍生出来的局面失控,可谓导最大风险。无论与欧盟的关税博弈,还是与北美自贸区成员重新谈判,尤其是挑起与中国的贸易战,美国都是想依靠作为全球第一大经济体的地位、基于它定义的所谓公平贸易原则来重构国际贸易秩序。维护国际贸易秩序需要大国承担责任,而美国目前的做法,实际是想推卸理应承担的责任。谁妨碍美国为国际贸易新规则建章立制,它就施以贸易报复和惩罚。 综合考量全球贸易中的三种不同主张,如果它们之间能够有效沟通与协调合作,国际贸易秩序就能朝着改革和逐步完善的方向发展。相反,如果相互对抗或串谋角逐,那就可能导致国际贸易失序。当前的形势,恰是国际贸易失序的风险在显著上升。目前来看,让全球第一大经济体美国承担更多大国责任、合作推动全球贸易投资开放和多边贸易规则体系完善,很有难度。 较之美国,作为全球第二大经济体和全球第一大货物贸易国家的中国,则希望自由贸易制度更加开放和包容,能使发展中国家和转型中国家在全球开放、全球治理和全球发展中获得更多的发言权、参与机会和发展权益。但未来多边贸易规则体系发展趋势不容乐观,尤其对中国这样的新兴大国。这种不稳定、不确定的趋势可能还要持续七八年。期间,国际贸易规则和秩序分歧、动荡的风险在明显加大。 在不稳定、不确定因素显著增多的形势下,全球经济将更加无所适从。原本,2017年全球GDP增长态势明显企稳向好。根据IMF测算,全球GDP增速已从上一年的3.2%增长到3.7%,今明两年有可能达到3.9%,高于1990年以来年均增长3.74%的水平。全球货物贸易量的增长亦如此,根据WTO的数据,2016年—2018年全球货物贸易量的增速分别是1.3%、4.7%和4.4%,呈现向好趋势。 在此关键时期,美国却偏偏执意挑动全球贸易战,这很可能会阻断全球经济增长势头,给全球贸易的前景蒙上阴影。比如,近年势头较好的全球制造业尤其高技术和中高技术制造业的增长,将会因此丧失发展势头。在全球化背景下,一个产业链条的各环节和工序往往分散在不同国家。这样的全球供应链体系遭遇贸易战和产业战,很可能造成全球产业链的失序,混乱的经济贸易和产业秩序或将导致衰退提前到来。 在全球贸易有失序之虞的关口,世界主要经济体都应慎重考虑贸易战对全球经济的外溢影响,否则就是不负责任。正是基于这种考虑,虽然美国挑起贸易战并一再让它升级,中国始终采取有节制的回应和反制,尽量降低其对全球经济贸易的冲击和影响。作为负责任大国,中国谴责贸易保护主义倒行逆施,谴责以邻为壑的机会主义行为,同时也在全面深化国内的改革开放,继续推动“一带一路”建设,增强全方位的国际合作。在全球贸易失序的十字路口,最大限度的寻求全球合作。 最近日欧签订自贸协定,美欧有意探讨建立零关税贸易区,一些主要发达经济体酝酿推动世贸组织现代化改革,这些都意味着国际贸易秩序正发生新的变化。有人担心,发达国家是想把中国排除在国际贸易新体系和新规则之外。这不可能实现,但西方国家对中国经济的防范与偏见一直都有。在中国加入WTO 15年后,欧盟、日本和美国仍不承认中国市场经济地位,但当前经特朗普的一通乱拳,世界经贸格局又面临大分化和大组合。 在新形势下,中国会继续全面深化市场化改革,全面扩大开放,推动高质量发展,一个有着世界上最多中等收入以上人群的市场、世界上最大储蓄规模的经济、门类最齐全完整的产业体系的中国,是不可能被边缘化的。就像当年入世时一样,中国会继续积极参与和推动经济全球化,与高标准市场经济规则接轨,提升产业的国际竞争力,只要做好自己的事,就一定有自立于世界民族之林的综合实力和全球影响力。到时候,是继续另搞一套规则来排斥中国,还是以合作态度共同完善多边贸易规则和体系,国际贸易的其他参与方自会做出理性选择。文章选自《环球时报》,2018年8月
2018年8月6日 -
梁建章:只有真金白银补贴 人们才会提高生育意愿
梁建章,CCG 资深副主席,携程联合创始人、执行董事局主席 “不生了,前两年怀孕生孩子,之后又哺乳一年半,什么都耽误了。”被问到打算何时要二孩时,王颖(化名)轻笑着摇头,“现在有了孩子,我没办法牺牲家庭去做很多工作,升职加薪也没指望。累怕了,不想再要了,一个就好。” 据国家统计局数据,2017年全国出生人口1723万人,比2016年减少了63万。王颖的焦虑解释了“全面放开二孩”政策实施逾两年,出生人口数未达预期的原因。少子化和老龄化已经成为当下中国在人口方面面临的双重挑战。 “由于堆积生育意愿的高峰,会在全面两孩政策实施后两三年内基本释放完毕,因此,需要尽快出台鼓励生育的政策。”携程旅行网联合创始人兼执行董事局主席、北京大学光华管理学院教授梁建章在接受时代周报记者采访时呼吁。 生育意愿下降 中国的人口政策几经变化。 1982年9月,计划生育被定为基本国策,同年12月正式写入宪法。“晚婚、晚育,少生、优生”成为社会生活的常态。 2011年11月,政府出台“双独二孩”政策;2013年12月,一方是独生子女的夫妇可生育两个孩子的“单独二孩”政策依法启动实施;2016年1月1日,正式放开“全面二孩”。 “世界各国的经验表明,降低生育率比较容易做到,但要提升生育率却要难得多。近几年我国陆续出台了单独二孩政策和全面二孩政策,从‘放宽’这个方向上来说是正确的,但步子太小、太慢。我国需要尽快出台鼓励生育的政策,而不能满足于仅仅放开二孩。”梁建章强调。 “谁也没预料到老龄化会来得这么快,现实中这两个方面都比以往预估的更严峻。2016年全面放开二孩之后,两年来生育率远不如预期,尽管去年二孩比例稍微有所上升,但一孩的比例却在下降。”北京大学社会学系教授陆杰华向时代周报记者透露,政策决策者和生育主体思维方式的差异是造成落差的重要原a因,“改革开放40年,除了促进经济发展,也带来生育观念的改变。部分年轻人已经改变了生育观,不认为孩子多了是一件好事,在观念上对生一个孩子或者不婚、裸婚、同性婚都更加包容。” 陆杰华认为,社会经济发展以后,以前对生育很重要的一些有利条件转为不利条件。比如抚育孩子的成本越来越高,一二线城市的高房价,都成为生育上一个不可逾越的鸿沟。此外,大部分年轻人具有多样性的人生目标,人生目标多元了,不见得就认为生孩子或者多生孩子是其必经的事情。社会保障体系的逐渐完善,也使得过去养儿防老观念逐步弱化。 鼓励生育的积极人口政策 面对人口困境,不少地方陆续推出了鼓励生育的支持性政策。 天津市提出对符合二孩政策的职工增加30天生育津贴;湖北宜昌按照“限额内报销”办法“对合法生育第二个及以上孩子的对象,以县市区为单位,落实住院分娩基本生育免费服务,城区按每例2500元标准,并适时调整”;湖北仙桃全面实施基本生育免费服务,对符合政策家庭,生育二孩可获1200元补助;新疆石河子市对生育二孩(不含领养)的家庭,可领取顺产500元/户、剖宫产1000元/户的住院分娩补助。二孩0–3岁期间,每户还将给予适量奶粉补贴。 6月29日,陕西省也提出要“适时全面放开计划生育,出台鼓励生育措施,通过对生育进行补贴奖励等方式提高生育意愿”。 7月5日,辽宁省政府印发《辽宁省人口发展规划(2016–2030年)》,提出将完善生育家庭税收、教育、社会保障、住房等政策,探索对生育二孩的家庭给予更多奖励政策,减轻生养子女负担。同时提出,辽宁省的总和生育率要从2015年的0.9提高到2020年的1.4、2030年的1.8。 辽宁是第一个从省级层面提出鼓励生育政策的,这背后是其步入深度老龄化及人口负增长的现状。截至2017年末,辽宁省户籍总人口为4232.57万人,60周岁及以上户籍老年人口958.74万人,占总人口的22.65%。辽宁省人口从2011年就开始进入了负增长,2016年和2017年辽宁省人口自然增长率分别为-0.18‰和-0.44‰。 “生育率更低、老龄化更严重、流动外迁加剧等问题都集中体现在这一个过去计划经济时发展较好的省份上,辽宁的现状只是当下中国的一个缩影,未来各地可能都会出现这种情况。”陆杰华不无担忧地坦言,“辽宁提出鼓励生育的政策,但可能达不到预期效果,2030年恢复到1.8生育水平难度非常大。” 建议要用GDP的2%-5%补贴和奖励生育 美国经济学家哈瑞·丹特在《人口峭壁》一书中指出,人口下降将是中国债务、房地产泡沫加速破灭的根本原因。 丹特的预言是警示,放眼全球,少子化和老龄化并不只是中国面临的难题。20世纪70年代末以来,欧洲开始持续出现低生育率和极低生育率的人口现象,不久,低生育率迅速扩散到世界各地。到2012年,在除法国、冰岛、爱尔兰、新西兰等少数国家,绝大多数国家和地区的总和生育率都远低于2.1的更替水平,在亚洲,新加坡、韩国的总和生育率甚至低于1.3。 因此,相关国家推出生育福利政策,对提高生育率起到一定作用。以法国为例,现在法国的生育率已经接近更替水平,是欧洲生育率最高的国家。法国孩子出生首先可获928欧元奖金,0–3岁每月有185欧元补助,3–20岁每月有65–231欧元补助,视孩子排行和年龄而定。有三个以上孩子的中等或以下收入家庭,每月还可获得169欧元的额外补助。孩子满6岁前,父母休育儿假或返回工作还可获金额不等的育儿、托护补助。养育家庭还能减免所得税,算法向多孩家庭倾斜。此外,多孩家庭在交通和廉租房安置方面,还可享受优惠和优先。 在陆杰华看来,老龄化和少子化共生共存,其他国家也没有特别好的经验。“比如我们的近邻日本、韩国推出的鼓励生育的政策,效果也没有预期那么好。所以,应该客观地看待相关政策的效应,但不能不做,做能够使生育率保持在一定水平或者略有回升,如果相关政策缺失,生育率可能会更低。” 梁建章强调,除了提高教育便利、高考改革、兴建托儿所、提供各种生育福利之外,最根本、最重要的政策是直接的财政补贴以及减免税收。“对于普通家庭来说,如果不通过财政补贴的手段降低生育成本的话,人们是不会多生的,只有真金白银人们才会提高他们的生育意愿。” 在梁建章看来,每个国家用于补贴有孩子家庭的财政补贴占GDP的比例和这个国家的生育率成正相关。“世界其他国家都给了GDP的1%–5%,奖励生育真正比较成功的北欧国家,给了GDP的5%。所以中国很有可能至少要用GDP的2%–5%来奖励生育,才能够提升生育率到一个相对比较好的水平。” 2%–5%是什么概念?梁建章算了一笔账,中国现在的GDP是80万亿元,5%就是四万亿元,四万亿元听起来就是一个非常大的数字,但是如果分摊到中国两亿多的孩子,每个人每年也就只有一万多元。“我们知道大城市抚养小孩的成本远远高于这个数字,所以这个数字说起来多,但是其实不多,我们真的需要这么大的奖励力度才能提升一部分人的生育意愿。”文章选自时代周报,2018年7月31日
2018年8月3日 -
【上观新闻】英国新外交大臣履职未“满月”就访华释放什么信号?
下周一,英国新任外交大臣杰里米·亨特将正式访华,并出席第九次中英战略对话。任职尚未“满月”即到中国访问,英国新外相此举释放出什么信号? 首月出访为何来华 中国虽非亨特上任后的首访国,此前,他已访问过德国柏林,但是,中国是亨特在欧洲之外访问的第一个国家,而且出现在他履新首月的外访行程单上。对英国而言,世界之大,盟友之多,为何新外相首月出访会选中国? “亨特此行的目的是想传递这样一个信号:英国是稳定的。” 全球化智库(CCG)特邀高级研究员、中国国际问题研究院欧洲研究所所长崔洪建说。当前,对英国来说,最大的政治议题就是“脱欧”。最近,“硬脱欧”和“软脱欧”的分歧引发英国政治动荡,特雷莎·梅政府刚渡过一系列危机,目前暂时稳住阵脚。但“脱欧”谈判前景并不乐观,英欧谈判立场差距依然较大,而且时间也较紧迫。无论是之前访德,还是这次访华,这些访问的一个共同目的就是给外界派送“定心丸”,即梅能掌控“脱欧”进程,已摆脱此前疲于应付国内危机的局面,这是其一。其二,访华还想促使中国对“脱欧”以后的英国发展前景保持乐观,表明英国希望继续稳定并发展与中国关系的意愿。考虑到现有中英合作水平,以及中国的巨大市场,无论最终做出什么“脱欧”安排,对英国来说,与中国合作都是至关重要的事,所以亨特会选择访华。 上海国际问题研究院研究员、上海欧洲学会副会长叶江认为,亨特此访的首要任务是争取大国的支持与配合,推进梅政府“脱欧”白皮书制订的“软脱欧”方案。此前,美国总统特朗普访英已经使英国与美国之间达成共识(虽然特朗普一开始批“软脱欧”扼杀美英贸易协议,但最终表示如何“脱欧”由英国自便)。接下来就需要获得世界第二大经济体中国的支持。亨特访华想要了解中国对英国“软脱欧”的态度,并与中国进行协调,进而获得支持。这也从侧面反映中国在国际贸易体系、全球事务中的重要性。 各有聚焦和关切 据中国外交部介绍,亨特访华期间,将会见国务院总理李克强,中共中央政治局委员、中央外事工作委员会办公室主任杨洁篪。国务委员兼外交部长王毅将同其共同主持战略对话,就双边关系和国际地区的热点问题交换意见。 崔洪建表示,在全球层面,针对美国的单边主义、贸易保护主义做法,双方预计会作出回应。如今,英美特殊关系已明显褪色,在此背景下,中英在全球层面会有更多共同话语。 在双边层面,英国捕捉到中国进一步扩大开放的积极信号,希望抓住这一机会,把两国合作与中国改革开放措施更好地结合。 作为外交大臣,亨特此访肯定也会讨论地区、外交、安全问题,比如伊核、朝核问题,双方都可能去寻找一些共识。比如亨特这次访华的另一项任务是出席第九次中英战略对话。作为中英战略和外交方面的对话机制,中英战略对话主要讨论全球和地区层面的外交和安全问题。英国希望借这一平台,与中国加强协调,在全球和地区事务中争取更多话语权,以便维持英国的大国地位。 在叶江看来,协助梅首相落实“软脱欧”思路和方案是亨特此行的重头戏,其中,“脱欧”之后的英国如何与中国作出贸易安排也会是双方触及的具体议题。是以中英自贸协定的方式,还是达成其他类型的贸易协议,以及是否承认中国市场经济地位等问题,在这次访问中,双方应该会进行讨论,了解彼此诉求。 英国聚焦“脱欧”,中国也有自身关切。 近日,两个消息似乎为中英关系吹来冷风。一是英国扬言要派航母与澳大利亚海军一起在中国南海宣誓“航行自由”。二是英国公布一项提案,将以国家安全为由加强审查外企并购交易。虽然英国政府表示并不针对任何特定国家,但是,分析人士指出,考虑到中国在英国的投资规模以及中国对英国高科技领域的并购兴趣,这个决定将会影响到中国的投资者。 叶江指出,中国一直不主张将南海问题国际化,英国要派航母巡航南海是对中国的严重挑衅,中国会向英方提出关切。在投资问题上,英国准备加强对外资并购的审查表现出英国对中国投资“既欢迎又担心”的矛盾心态。中国同样会表达立场,不希望英方以国内条例限制外部投资。 对于英国将严查外资并购的举动,中国外交部已作出回应,希望英国为外国企业在英国开展投资活动创造一个公平公正的环境。 叶江说,中英在推进“黄金时代”、构建面向21世纪全球全面战略伙伴关系的过程中,双方也存在各自关切和不同利益,这需要双方求同存异,扩大共同利益,亨特这次访华不可能完全解决分歧,但是提供了沟通和增信释疑的机会。 不必夸大“中国情结” 和前几任外交大臣相比,亨特有一个与众不同的特点,就是他与中国的特殊缘分。 妻子来自中国,本人热爱中国文化,在英国华人圈子里知名度高。亨特还是英国保守党成立的“华人之友”组织的赞助者,该组织旨在促进与英籍华人社区的联系,推动英中两国建立更紧密的关系。 2015年,亨特的一番言论还引起不小争议。他说,如果英国想在20年、30年或40年后继续屹立于世界最成功国家之林,那么英国人就应该像中国人一样勤奋工作。 那么这位英国新外交大臣,是否会把“中国情缘”注入英国政府的对华政策?对未来的中英关系又会产生何种影响? 崔洪建认为,这次梅内阁调整,外交大臣换人,对英国外交将产生正向帮助。前外交大臣鲍里斯·约翰逊有鲜明的“脱欧派”痕迹,个人行为风格也不太被主流认可。但亨特没那么沉重的历史包袱,比约翰逊更能被主流和国际社会所认可和接受,因此,对改善英国外交形象、平衡中英关系能起到积极作用。 在英国政坛崭露头角的华裔政治家、保守党议员黄精明(Jackson Ng)说,亨特被任命为外交大臣,对后“脱欧”时代的世界来说,是一个非常积极的信号。亨特一直呼吁,英中两国应加强在商业、教育和文化领域的联系。他出任外交大臣会使中英达成贸易协议富有希望。 在叶江看来,亨特的“中国情结”会对其本人产生潜移默化的影响,但不必夸大这种影响。身为外交大臣,始终是以英国国家利益为上。个人的文化偏好、兴趣爱好,最多在技术层面会产生影响,比如在推进和实现国家利益的操作过程中,他或许会更理解中国的一些关切,但不会成为亨特与中国打交道时的主导思想和推进动力。文章选自上观新闻,2018年7月26日
2018年8月3日 -
【CGTN】中美智库专家接受央视采访谈中美贸易摩擦
[视频观看]2018年8月1日,美国Hudson研究所中国研究中心主任白邦瑞(Michael Pillsbury)和全球化智库CCG创始人王辉耀(Henry Wang)做客央视CGTN访谈节目,就中美关系的前景、贸易逆差的来龙去脉等热点话题展开精彩对话。中美贸易战是否会全面爆发?央视采访中美智库资深专家China and the United States just can’t seem to bridge their differences on trade, even though the US seems to be making major headway with Europe and its North American neighbors, Canada and Mexico. Currently, there are no official talks underway between the two sides, but scholars and analysts from both sides are communicating and collaborating in research efforts. How will their research influence policy-making? And exactly where are we in this trade war? CGTN’s Zuo Yue talked to Michael Pillsbury, senior fellow and director of Chinese Strategy at the Hudson Institute, and Wang Huiyao, founder of the Center for China and Globalization, the largest independent global think tank in China. The following is the full conversation. ZOU YUE: Let me start with you, Mr. Pillsbury, because last time, when we were talking to you, you aired your opinions on China-US relations. You said China-US ties will definitely get better under the Trump administration. Is it better?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Yes, it’s better.ZOU YUE: In what way?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: The cooperation on North Korea is very impressive. This has not happened with any previous Chinese president and American president. That’s the main thing. Secondly, President Trump has not taken any moves on Taiwan. He has not sold a big package of weapons to Taiwan. There are no more telephone calls to Tsai Ing-wen. President Trump has not received the Dalai Lama in the White House. President Trump has not done any really aggressive freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea. So if you look at all the main issues, President Trump has avoided creating trouble in US-China relations, and he has many channels to President Xi Jinping. According to one friend of mine, President Xi Jinping and President Trump have enjoyed more than 30 phone calls to each other. Sometimes as long as one hour. They’ve met in person several times.ZOU YUE: But you seem to forget one big trouble that is looming large-the trade war. Could that undermine everything that we’ve seen over the past two years?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Well, yes. If it’s a major trade war in which both sides place 10% tariffs on all products, this would slow down the growth rate of both sides, and it will affect global economic growth. So a major trade war obviously would be a disaster. We are moving in that direction, but I don’t think the major trade war has begun yet. So if there is a gigantic trade war, you can call me in Washington DC, and I will admit to you I was wrong. Relations did not improve between President Trump and President Xi. But I’m still very optimistic we can avoid a major trade war. That’s one reason why think tanks have to do research on the causes of the situation. As we say, how we got here may have a lot to do with how we can untie the knot.ZOU YUE: And Mr. Wang, do you share Mr. Pillbury’s optimism that [there] wouldn’t be a major full-blown trade war?WANG HUIYAO: Personally, I agree with Mr. Pillsbury, that since President Trump came to office, there were quite a few positive things-North Korea and quite a few positive things obvious. But of course, this trade friction or trade war that is currently happening is also causing a lot of alarm, as Mike mentioned. The key is also that probably we need better communication or need a better dialogue. That’s why CCG, Center for China Globalization, and Hudson Institute are trying to work together, trying to have this joint research project to really review the 40 years of US-China relations since they built up diplomatic ties. It’s also the 40-year anniversary of China opening up. So I think there is a lot of common progress that both countries have made, and all previous leaders. Now we are getting to the next 40 years, and I think at this critical juncture, it is good to look at all those pros and cons and the progress made, where are the lessons, and how can we improve that. And also how we can do the research and then generate recommendations.ZOU YUE: According to your research, why are China and the US now facing the danger of a trade war at this particular moment. What is the crux?WANG HUIYAO: Basically I think there are quite a few areas. First of all, there are structural reasons. I mean the US economy has been developing over the last 100 years. And coming to that stage, a lot of manufacturing has been shifted to China. That’s because of the productivity, shift-a lot of major, old-fashioned manufacturing has actually come to China. That’s one reason. Another reason is having US dollars be very strong. It’s a world currency, and that actually helps the US to buy a lot of products from China. And also, thirdly, US trade has a surplus with China. But also it cut the surplus with other countries, other Asian countries, other partners. So China replaced many other parts of the world to contribute to the US in that kind of deficit problem situation. And the other reason is the calculation. The services trade-the tourism, the student movement, and those kinds of services trade were not calculated into this trade deficit. So there are many reasons. I think for China too. When they do the transition, we probably need to diversify. We shouldn’t really just be working in one country maybe. Maybe we should have more markets. So there are a lot of reasons to examine, to find out. That’s why we want to do more research on this subject.ZOU YUE: Mr. Pillsbury, you also think the trade deficit, which is huge between China and the US, is the biggest problem. That’s why we have trade friction?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I think President Trump has said that several times, that the enormous trade deficit is the biggest problem. It’s the biggest trade deficit in the world, and as Henry says, we have to find out the origins. This didn’t just happen in one year. We didn’t go from zero, now let’s trade, to a 500 billion deficit. It happened very slowly, and it’s not clear to me if it was decided by state-owned enterprises. They want to buy European products for some reason. Or if it was decided by the government. But that problem has probably 20 years of background. But it’s not the only major problem. Technology theft is a big one. Here, President Xi Jinping has said several times he opposes intellectual property theft. He has increased the number of courts, intellectual property courts inside China, increased the number of judges, taken it seriously. But the White House has released these two very long reports, with hundreds of examples, of either intellectual property theft or what we call forcible technology transfer. And so far, there’s no satisfactory answer from Chinese media or Chinese scholars about all these allegations. There’s a third area, which is investment. China has a so-called Negative List that does not accept foreign investment in many, many sectors. This is being reduced as China opens up, but China’s speed or rate of opening up really affects the trade with the US. Also Chinese investment in the US has had many problems that have been documented in these reports. So it’s not just one problem. President Trump summarizes it all in one word. I don’t know if you’ve heard this before: reciprocity.ZOU YUE: Reciprocity? OK. Let’s talk about those three problems one by one. First of all, the loss of jobs and the trade deficit. According to many Chinese economists, the trade deficit is a structural problem. Basically, is America not saving enough? Basically, it’s the structural change of the world economy, and also they have different math. The Chinese say we actually buy a lot of services from you, but you don’t count that. We also buy a lot of stuff from Hong Kong and Macau, but you don’t count that. The natural deficit is not that huge. It can be solved by us buying more. But it seems the Americans are in no mood to talk about that. Is that correctly understood?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: It’s basically correct. Most economists tend to play down the importance of the deficit. As you said, they think it’s some sort of structural problem based on the savings rate. However, these economists are not the President of the United States.ZOU YUE: And they don’t have the ears of President Trump.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: So President Trump does have an economist with a Harvard PhD in economics, advising him that the trade deficit is extremely important. President Trump himself… ZOU YUE: You’re saying Peter Navarro…MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Yes, and President Trump himself didn’t get this idea from Peter Navarro. He wrote a book about it almost 20 years ago. He had a long chapter about how our biggest challenge in the future will be China, and the biggest problem will be the trade deficit. So President Trump’s idea of reciprocity is to measure products that are being sold. But Henry makes a very good point. If you count services and investment, things like tourism…ZOU YUE: Which the United States is good at…MICHAEL PILLSBURY: We don’t count it now, when we talk about trade deficit. It means merchandise products trade deficit. But one possibility in our CCG-Hudson joint research we are going to take a look at is how do you define a trade deficit. Other countries include services like tourism and investment returns, so we are trying to take a new look at the trade relationship between the US and China. And not just look back at 40 years, but also look ahead, to 10 or 20 years, with several scenarios, one could be a super trade war scenario.ZOU YUE: You mentioned Peter Navarro. I know that you invited Peter Navarro to Hudson Institute after your trip in Beijing.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Yes.ZOU YUE: Have you talked to him about this structural problem? It is not just a trade deficit. There is a reason why there is a trade deficit. And it is not necessarily against America’s interests.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Yes. I have talked to him, and I have read-he wrote three books about China. He doesn’t agree. He thinks the trade deficit is extremely damaging to American workers. In fact, he was not a China expert for most of his life. So, people ask him why did you take an interest in China only in the last few years. He said my students could not get jobs. They are all unable to join the workforce, because China stole all these American jobs. This is his personal observation. But Peter Navarro also has written a lot about intellectual property theft, forcible transfer, and especially the treatment of American companies inside China. So, you see how big this problem is. And lots of other people agree with Peter Navarro. He’s not all by himself.ZOU YUE: Do you think President Trump should listen to both sides of the argument? It seems after Gary Cohn and McMaster left the White House, the White House is full of hawkish voices rather than moderates. That’s why those aggressive trade policies have been put forward, which is dangerous.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I don’t agree. As I mentioned, President Trump had this idea himself in his book published in the year 2000. Number two, he does have many voices. In the White House, he calls people on the outside. He is known to invite Henry Kissinger to get his views.ZOU YUE: But only to those who are with him on his ideas?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: No. I would say some American billionaires oppose trade deficit problems, and President Trump talked to them. So, he is very open, seeking advice. The only thing is, he has already believed this for almost 20 years.WANG HUIYAO: Also recently, you have many senators actually voting against the tariff increase, and you also have some congressmen who wrote a letter to President Trump, talking about resuming talks with China. So he has other people in the Congress against him as well.ZOU YUE: And the problem is, those voices-will they get loud enough from Congress, from business circles, and that will force President Trump to think twice about whether he should double down on those aggressive tariff policies?WANG HUIYAO: I think, you know, first of all, there is a calculation problem. I think the deficit problem is a little overstated, exaggerated. But I think the key is now to really have this dialogue. I think governments should have dialogue. Think tanks should have dialogue, to explain the situation. And then the media, also the public arena, we should really talk about these trade issues and also the benefits. I also think there’s more to talk about. China and the US make contributions of 40-50% of the growth of the economy of the world. If China and the US get into the trade war, it is going to impact not only China and the US, but also the world. So it’s extremely important to avoid that. And also, furthermore, the multinationals are not happy about this. They actually air their concerns. It also impacts the employment back in the United States and also here in China. So, I think there are many multifaceted issues that both countries, particularly think tanks, can get together about and then find solutions and recommendations, and that’s where CCG and Hudson are trying to work on those issues.ZOU YUE: But it seems a lot of signals are pointing to the other direction, because the news is that the Americans and the Europeans have struck a deal on zero tariffs on each side, although that is not confirmed yet. They still agree to talk later on about whether to lift tariffs on all products, including agricultural products, which is very important for Europeans. Is this President Trump’s tactic? To divide and conquer, so that he can concentrate on China?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I would say it’s possible that a trade war will begin. And then the scholars and think tanks will have to find an exit to stop it. The reason I say the trade war likely will begin is because in China there is too much of what I call conspiracy thinking. That somehow the US is trying to choke China’s development, or there is something behind all these trade issues. But actually it’s not true. The contents of these reports are what it’s all about. So, if the Chinese side would make some meaningful research on this American case, a lot of it are things President Xi Jinping would not approve of. He wants further opening up, he wants more reform. Many of these American complaints would be solved or at least reduced if there was further opening up.ZOU YUE: I think suspicion exists on both sides. America also has doubts about China’s stealing technologies. You also doubt that China wants to play a one-hundred-year marathon to overtake the US as the superpower. Isn’t that the case?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Well, I’m only quoting from Chairman Mao in 1955. Actually the marathon has already been going on for more than 70 years, and China is at least the number two country in the world. By some statistics, the Chinese economy already is the number one. So I would say that the marathon is correct and is almost a success for China.ZOU YUE: But I wonder whether that marathon has only two players-that China wants to take over the US and become a world leader. Many people here in China don’t think so.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I know in the Chinese point of view, there is a very bad word called ‘Ba’ or ‘Baquan’-hegemony. So Chinese like to say America is a ‘Baquan’ because it’s the number one military and economic power. But also Chinese like to say, ‘We Chinese will never do this.’ZOU YUE: But you don’t believe it. You don’t take it at face value.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I think it’s a definition of ‘Ba.’ ‘Ba’ actually is a tyrant or someone who does not have any ‘Daode’ (virtue), and the Chinese belief seems to be: yes, we will be the number one power in the world, but unlike the Americans, we will have virtue; we will have consensus. There is a good example today in China Daily. China’s ambassador in London wrote a long op-ed piece. It’s very good, about the joint common destiny of the whole world. So this is how China sees the future, not like a ‘Baquan’ like America, but more virtuous…ZOU YUE: My question is, do you believe in the benevolence of a growing power like China or do many Americans believe that?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I think Americans, like me at least, we see cooperation as the future. We like to not see a zero-sum game, but I’m not in the majority. A lot of Americans now see China as a threat. A lot of Chinese see America as a threat to China. So if you want to think about a really bad nightmare, it’s a trade war from which there is no exit combined with nationalistic thinking in the military area and political area. I want to avoid this nightmare. But it may not be possible.ZOU YUE: What can be done to avoid this kind of a nightmare? The likelihood of which is increasing, we have to agree, Mr. Wang.WANG HUIYAO: I think that it would really be a disaster if both countries really go deep into the trade war. And I think China has actually, for its own interest, pledged to continue to open. That’s really very significant. I think President Xi mentioned at the Boao Forum that China is going to have a high-level opening up, and China has also recently done many actions as well. You know they reduced the auto import tariff by half, and also they have reduced many tariffs on many products as well. And also China has relaxed on ownership control of the financial institutions and many other sectors as well. So I think it’s for China’s interest to open up and to continue to reform. I think it’s in the world’s interest as well. The same for the US. So, the misunderstanding and the mistrust existing now, which is also increasing, is really very bad. So I think we have to solve this misunderstanding and mistrust. You know, if you talk about opening, if you talk about respecting intellectual property, if you talk about deepening reform, if you talk about reducing tariffs, if you talk about globalization, like if President Trump likes global trade alliance now with EU, with Mexico, and Canada, so why can’t China and the US work together on these global trade issues? And I think that we can avoid this kind of trade war. I think that think tanks are really needed now and also the think tank community of China-US should work together and solve this kind of misunderstanding and mistrust.ZOU YUE: I want to get one important aspect of this message to the Americans, probably they haven’t wrapped their minds around it, but China will be the biggest market in the world. We will probably have 600 million in the middle class next year. And China’s consumption is already 70% of its own GDP. China will buy a lot, and a lot more from America, from Europe. Have Americans forgotten that?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: No. In fact, there is a solution to the possibility of a trade war. You know President Xi Jinping has had a very successful campaign against corruption for the last five years, including corruption in the state-owned enterprises, and inside the Communist Party. The list of bad behavior in these two reports, President Xi could say, I agree, I don’t want this bad behavior to be carried out by Chinese enterprises or Party members. And I think President Xi would be immediately respected and obeyed. So my hope is these documents are really written only for one person, Xi Jinping himself.ZOU YUE: But when you look at the ten demands from the US delegations, when they come to Beijing, when we go to Washington, it sounds like they’re asking China to capitulate, to kowtow to the US’ demands. You have to drop a hundred billion dollars of tariffs in the first year and then another hundred billion dollars the next year. You have to restructure your economy. No national subsidies. You have to stop Made in China 2025. All these demands sound like China has to capitulate.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: That’s what your media said. Actually, it’s eight.ZOU YUE: You’re saying these are not the demands.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: They were not demands. They’re called the eight points. And your side leaked them to the media.ZOU YUE: I don’t know who leaked…MICHAEL PILLSBURY: And then somebody leaked them to Bloomberg. So everybody can read these eight points. They are descriptions of problems. They’re not negotiating demands. But I think the Chinese side was not willing to make any kind of offer, you know, on the eight points. That’s why today we have no negotiations.ZOU YUE: What is the offer that will satisfy Americans? Your several-reduce the trade deficit, stop Made in China 2025?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: There’s only one American to satisfy, President Trump.ZOU YUE: But who?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: This is his personal leadership.ZOU YUE: What are the exact terms that President Trump will accept, as a truce?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: So far, President Trump has only done two things. He released the eight points that are a general description of what should be US-China trade relations. And number two, he issued these White House reports based on testimony, internal Chinese documents, like the subsidies for 2025. There’s a long description of internal Chinese documents about how that would be done. One of the eight points said please don’t have illegal subsidies of the 2025 plan. So I hope there will be actual negotiations, but so far, I think it’s just exchanging kind of long-term thinking about both sides’ hope.ZOU YUE: I want to talk a little bit about the second point, which is the transfer of technology. It is in relation to Made in China 2025. What kind of concessions can China make? Can China stop Made in China 2025? China doesn’t accept that we steal technology in a massive scale from America. What is China’s argument?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: It’s the subsidies. Not the program.WANG HUIYAO: Well, I think that China actually is accustomed to plans. There’s always a plan. There is a four modernization plan. There’s a five-year plan. There is a ten-year talent plan, and 2025 manufacturing plan. So I think this is probably characteristic of China, and they are accustomed to working with these kinds of plan. I think this plan is a little overexaggerated because this is still at a ministry level, and I think State Council has transmitted that document, but it was not really a hard-printed plan already. So I think there are still discussions. It’s really important for China to have a plan. I mean China wants to develop. But I think we seem to have a misunderstanding problem with that. And we probably could have more dialogue, should have more discussion, should have more communication.ZOU YUE: I think what Americans have a problem with is not that Chinese have plans, but the national government’s role in those plans. They say the state is basically subsidizing all the industries they cherry-picked. What’s the problem with that?WANG HUIYAO: For that, I think the world has got to realize that China of course was for the last 70, you know, even the last 40 years, the government does play a very important role, and that’s why you see the efficiency, the effectiveness. The tallest building outside this window we can build in a year and a half, which is probably world speed. The government has put a lot of effort in that.ZOU YUE: So Mr. Pillsbury we have our system. You have your system. Our system works this way. What’s wrong?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: What’s wrong is the Chinese government promised when you joined the WTO that you would move toward a free market country.ZOU YUE: But free market doesn’t necessary mean government has no role at all.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: That’s right. All governments play a role in all economies. The question is the degree. And so many countries as you know last fall voted against China being given free market status. This is a correct decision. The role of state-owned enterprises, the role of these national plans is in violation of China’s agreement to join the WTO back in 2001. At that time, China could have said we will keep our state-controlled system forever, we are never going to have a free market.ZOU YUE: I think nobody could say that.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: But China promised to go toward a free market.ZOU YUE: You don’t think China has kept the promise?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: No. Not just me, the vote in the WTO was overwhelming against China.ZOU YUE: Yes, China is reforming its state-owned enterprises, but on its own agenda with its own pace. Is that the problem? With the speed of reform or about the direction?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I think it’s neither the speed nor direction. I think it’s the illegal conduct. When you joined the WTO, your companies have to be free market companies that make their own decisions according to profit for the company. They’re not supposed to be agents of the central government trying to obtain minerals or oil or do things for the central government. Our companies don’t do this, but that’s what China was doing. That’s what’s in these reports. So if you want to pull out of the WTO, then you are free to do this.ZOU YUE: Yes, I know, but you have to show proof of which enterprise decided on which director from the state government to make which kind of decisions. And you don’t have it.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: That’s what’s in these reports. There is evidence, but I don’t know if it’s perfect evidence. But even in the past week, another round of hearings has begun in Washington with 80 more witnesses coming to talk about these violations. So all I’m saying is the Chinese side should not ignore the evidence in our joint research. I think we are going to take a look at the quality of evidence in these White House reports, and in the new one, and then try to make some recommendations. Could China in fact make progress in China’s own national interest to stop this kind of bad conduct?ZOU YUE: I think it is in China’s own interest to reform those state-owned enterprises and maybe correct some of their behaviors, which are not in the interest of their companies and not in the interest of this nation. What needs to happen?WANG HUIYAO: I think China has realized that. I mean President Xi has actually emphasized China is continuing to open and the reform is continuing. Premier Li has actually had state council meetings, and Vice Premier Liu He has had recent meetings with state asset administrations as well. That’s China’s progress. At the Third Plenum of the 18th Party Congress, there were 60 reform measures. China has realized that. So I think now it’s important to analyze, to show the evidence, how to reform. Of course if we don’t have done enough, if that has been a problem, we can check that. We can see if that has happened. But the key is to respond, to communicate, and to do research and also to really address that issue.ZOU YUE: And that finally comes down to whether we have faith in each other’s intentions.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Yes, that’s true.ZOU YUE: Strategic trust. Whether we believe it is a partner, not opponent, let us say enemy. Do you think we can have that faith in each other?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I do. So far, we’ve never said enemy. We don’t say adversary. President Trump’s National Security Strategy used the word ‘competitor.’ He didn’t say enemy. References to rivalry. But even Liu Mingfu in his hundred-year marathon, he says to me one time, that the marathon is not killing people, it’s running. So I am still optimistic about the two countries being able to cooperate and not getting into a war. But, I don’t want to be complacent. Some Chinese officials have told me they are not going to read this evidence. They think it’s completely false, and they deny everything without even reading what the White House has released.ZOU YUE: I believe many people in the Commerce Ministry are reading the report.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Really? That’s very good news for me.ZOU YUE: And another thing many analysts here in China worry about is that actually President Trump is connecting many things. He is playing a big game against China. He is connecting trade issues, with North Korea issues, with Taiwan, or even the South China Sea. He is juggling all these things as leverages. Is that what Trump is doing?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: He says he has a visionary approach to the future. So I think if he is only looking at each issue in isolation by itself, this would not be the brilliant genius Trump that I know.ZOU YUE: And Mr. Wang?WANG HUIYAO: Well, I think you are right. It’s all connected. But I think President Trump has made progress on North Korea because of China’s support. So that actually shows that China and the US can work together on some issues. So I think now President Trump is a businessman, and he knows business, so we hope that now given that China and the US are the two biggest economies in the world, that China and the US should find a way to work out those issues. And now I’m even noticing more that President Trump is a free trader, and he is getting an agreement in the EU of zero tariffs, so it means he is now turning around, and he is having something on TTIP, even bigger. So then, if he comes back for free trade, then China and the US can talk about it-we can talk about free trade and we can talk about BIT.ZOU YUE: But what worries many people, at least here in China, is that if President Trump doesn’t get what he wants on trade, he will use the Taiwan card, the South China Sea card, to force China to make concessions on those issues.WANG HUIYAO: I think that China has many other cards, too. So that’s not...ZOU YUE: But do you think he will play that card?WANG HUIYAO: No, I think still the economy is the bedrock. I mean it’s really the cornerstone of Sino-US relations. It’s so important, and then, let’s solve that, and let’s make a dialogue, communicate, and negotiate on that. And it’s in China’s own interest to open up further. China never says it’s going to close the door. America seems to be closing the door, but now I can see it is opening the door to Europe. So if they can open the door to Europe, why can’t they open the door to China? We can have a dialogue. We can solve these problems peacefully. So we don’t have to play the other cards. I think the economy is still the most important glue for these two countries.ZOU YUE: Let’s hope so. But also look at the scenarios that make…MICHAEL PILLSBURY: To your point, President Trump already tweeted that if President Xi helps him on North Korea, he will have an easier approach on trade. So President Trump himself acknowledges linking different issues together.ZOU YUE: But let’s look at the likelihood of where this trade dispute will go. Do you think Trump will place 10% tariffs on all Chinese imports? Because there are no talks right now about what kind of terms, what kind of agreements we can have.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I think it’s possible. It’s one reason I volunteered to join Henry, to try to do this joint research by the think tanks. In addition to think tanks on the Chinese side, some other American think tanks are trying to understand the origins of the trade issues and then some solutions. But to measure the consequences quantitatively is also needed. It’s not clear, to me at least, the effect of 100% tariffs on both sides-10%. Some people play this down. They say it won’t have too much effect. Others say, no, it’s already influencing decisions. For example, Chinese investors have already cancelled a lot of deals in the US.ZOU YUE: And Americans don’t know whether to double down on their investment, recruit more people, or should be on hold. Uncertainty is what businessmen hate.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: That’s right. Uncertainty is the enemy of economic growth. So that’s why, I am sorry to repeat it, but that’s why the Chinese side is taking a look at this specific American evidence of wrongdoing, and then thinking constructively. Could we stop this? Is it in our own national interest to stop this bad practice? If that happens, then there is no fear of a trade war.ZOU YUE: Is it possible to really have correct quantitative analysis of the impact, or probably the consequences will be unimaginably bad for both sides that we can’t cope with it at last?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I don’t know if you know that American joke about economists and quantitative predictions. We often say economists say on the one hand, on the other hand, sometimes they even have a third hand. So economists debate the quantitative measurements of economic activities. It is kind of a grey area. I personally hope we don’t go into this grey area.ZOU YUE: Is China doing the same math as Americans? What will be the consequences?WANG HUIYAO: I think it is useful to go through some calculations, like CCG does calculate the services trade. Actually, the US has enjoyed a big surplus. So that kind of message should be brought out as well. Also I agree with the sentiment that confidence is so important to avoid uncertainty, extremely important. Now we have in China situations like these. We have Tesla that opened a new factory in Shanghai. We have a lot of new, still opening measures to other countries and companies as well. So I think it’s in business communities’ huge interests to have these two largest markets in the world unaffected so that we can solve this peacefully, and so that we can have a continued next 40 years of prosperity and peace and cooperation.ZOU YUE: Because Trump has been enjoying popular support because of his economic policies, for example, tax cuts, deregulations.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: And 4% growth.ZOU YUE: But the trade tariffs will probably cancel out all those gains these policies have produced. Steve Mnuchin said that the American economy can enjoy 3% growth for three years at least, and those trade policies could derail everything.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I brought you a copy of the report so you can pay attention to the words that are used in the title. China’s economic aggression. So some advisors to President Trump use very strong language. Steve Mnuchin, apparently, is in a different camp, has a different point of view. But I think that economic aggression by China appearing in a White House document-this is online. This is very important. I have never seen such a deterioration of our relationship in 40 years.ZOU YUE: But do you think economic aggression is the correct description of what is happening between China and the US economically?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: It’s very scary.ZOU YUE: Yes, I know it is scary, but is it correct?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Some of these activities I didn’t know about. There is a chart in here with more than 50 examples of violations of WTO, international norms, violations of China’s own rules and statements. So it looks a little bit like Chinese economic aggression is not conducted by President Xi Jinping or the Politburo. Somehow, it is happening below that level, and President Trump seems to maintain excellent relations in these phone calls with President Xi.ZOU YUE: That is why I said President Trump should listen to moderate voices. It is not the whole picture. China also helped to keep the inflation in America low. China also invited a lot of companies to make money in China. This is not the whole picture.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Very true.WANG HUIYAO: So that is exactly why I think that the communication, the research, and also the analysis of those Chinese voices should also be heard in the US. The White House has a report, but I think we from China, scholars in particular, think tanks, should have more analysis and also more accurate reflection, and also discussions with the US counterpart to solve those issues.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: If our evidence is wrong, the Chinese side should point out this case is not accurate or this didn’t happen. That would be very constructive.ZOU YUE: I think China has basically been reading this document and self soul-searching on what might be improved. But the problem is this shouldn’t be the whole picture. This has been framed as an economic aggression against the United States, and this is not something the Chinese can accept.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: You have some Chinese officials who say there is absolutely nothing correct in these White House reports. This to me is very frightening.ZOU YUE: You are pointing to only a bunch of people.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I don’t want to say their names. But, other Chinese officials take this seriously, and they realize if China improves reforms, improves opening up, implements President Xi’s promises over the last few years about technology, intellectual property theft, then this can have a good outcome. But you mentioned a kind of debate in the White House. Maybe there is. But it looks like there is also a debate in Beijing about this evidence.ZOU YUE: Let’s talk about the debate, because it comes back to what China will do about its own economy. All those things China has been mentioning as its own national strategy. Whether we should reform state-owned enterprises, better protect intellectual property rights, what is the role of the government in the economy. But it seems the world is anxious about the speed of China’s reform and the deliverables.WANG HUIYAO: I think China is speeding up. As a matter of fact, even talking about intellectual property. China has a big interest now. Like ZTE, like Huawei, like Xiaomi or Lenovo, when they go to foreign countries, they are facing the IPR issues also. So the services industry now in China’s GDP is soon going to be 60%, more than manufacturing now. So that means China has to protect its own interests. And then China is also doing the Belt and Road Initiative, and also going to different countries. It is important that China catch up on this issue as well. So if we turn this into a positive effect, I think it will strengthen China’s companies’ competitiveness, and also you increase the dialogue and communication with American counterparts. I also think American companies will feel much more, will be much more effective in China, making more money. The business community can really make the policy together, and then hopefully, we solve this issue. So it’s important that those things China is also doing are good things at work.ZOU YUE: I have another question. Why are those complaints about transfer of technology and stealth of copyrights not coming from businesses, but coming from the government? Why GE, Microsoft, Apple, GM-they don’t complain to the Chinese government about those things, or at least they don’t apply their complaints in an open, in an official way?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: I have asked that question to our business people. They have a very clear answer. They say if they approach China together like a united front, through the Chamber of Commerce or through the US government, then the chances to make progress are better. If they go only one company at time, they are afraid that company will stick out and be punished.ZOU YUE: Either way, they haven’t been doing anything.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: That’s one of our topics in the last 40 years. That’s a very good question. We are asking ourselves, Henry and me, why did this intellectual property technology transfer issue not get solved five years ago, ten years ago? Maybe one of the reasons is what you are referring to-the companies were too frightened or too timid to bring the violations forward.ZOU YUE: I think businessmen are the smartest people in the world. If they think they been bullied, they can leave.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: They lose market share, and they could be afraid of losing market share to other companies.ZOU YUE: Then they are making money! Then they are running at a profit.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Another related issue is Belt and Road. Henry mentioned to you Belt and Road. President Trump did not go himself to the Belt and Road Summit last year. Fifty-nine heads of state. He only sent NSC staff person Matt Pottinger to be present. A concern about Belt and Road is that some of the misconduct and bad practices in these reports will be fostered and increased by the Belt and Road loan program. So we have some reservations. Doesn’t mean some day, the US might endorse Belt and Road and join it. But first, there is a kind of investigation going on: how is Belt and Road really going to operate in practice? So I think Henry agrees that there are at least 20 issues to look at in our joint research project with other think tanks. How to not only avoid a trade war but have even better US-China coordination and cooperation.ZOU YUE: And so you still believe in joining hands between the two largest economies rather than parting ways?MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Yes, it’s possible.ZOU YUE: It’s more than possible.WANG HUIYAO: Yes, absolutely. I think China and the US are really so intertwined, interconnected. If the number one and number two economy can’t get along well, it will be a disaster for the world. I think it may also put the world into a dangerous position, even a recession. So it’s absolutely important for the moral ground that the US and China work together. I think that is also to the benefit of mankind.MICHAEL PILLSBURY: Yes, but how to get the attention of Xi Jinping himself to study all this evidence?ZOU YUE: Yes, that’s a major problem, and I hope the decision makers have heard what we’ve been talking about. Thank you very much, Mr. Wang. Thank you, Mr. Pillsbury.
2018年8月3日 -
刘永好:没有改革开放 就没有新希望
理事简介刘永好,全球化智库(CCG)资深副主席,新希望集团董事长。四兄弟齐心创业上世纪80年代初,刘永好四兄弟在四川省新津县是出了名的人物。老大刘永言,毕业于成都电讯工程学院,在成都906厂计算机所工作;老二刘永行,毕业于成都师范学院,在县教育局工作;老三刘永美,毕业于四川农学院,在县农业局当农技员;刘永好是老四,毕业于四川职业技术学院并留校任教。当时,兄弟四人都有令人艳羡的“铁饭碗”。然而,1982年底,兄弟4人相继辞去公职“下海”创业,这无疑是非常勇敢的举动,要知道真正的“下海潮”在上世纪90年代初才出现。“下海”后,他们变卖手表、自行车等家产,筹集了1000元人民币,作为创业初期的投入。他们的第一个创业方向是养殖鹌鹑。每天,刘永好和刘永行沿街叫卖鹌鹑,偶尔碰到自己的学生,难免面子上有些挂不住,但钱包毕竟鼓了起来。后来,兄弟4人办起了良种场,其主营业务是孵小鸡、养鹌鹑。到了1986年,良种场已经年产鹌鹑15万只,他们不仅将鹌鹑蛋贩卖到国内各个城市,而且还卖到了国外,成为名副其实的“鹌鹑大王”。同年,刘氏四兄弟决定用一个充满美好前景的词来命名自己的养殖场——“希望”。在别人大举进军鹌鹑养殖业时,他们意识到这个市场可能存在过度竞争的风险,开始谋划新的发展方向。1987年夏,刘永好去广东顺德出差,他看到农贸市场排着长龙买国外饲料。刘永好说服哥几个进军猪饲料行业,“老外能做,我们也能做”。资金不够?卖鹌鹑挣的10多万元全砸进去;技术水平不够高?联合农学院建成了西南地区最大的饲料研究所;人才缺乏?引进来,走出去!刘永好一口气聘请了30多名专家,同时派科技骨干到美国、澳大利亚、德国和东南亚等国家和地区学习。1989年,希望牌1号乳猪饲料被推向市场,此时的兄弟四人凭借过人的营销手段、产品质量以及价格优势,很快便追上了当时成都界的饲料一哥“正大”。当时的“正大”在成都市投资了1亿元建饲料厂,然而在希望牌饲料上市后,原有垄断格局一下被改变了。希望牌饲料每吨价格比正大要便宜60块。可不要小看这60块钱,它相当于农民养的半头猪的价格。所以在短短3个月内,希望牌饲料的销量就追上了正大。经过一番较量之后,“正大”主动找到“希望”,双方达成了协议——“希望”以成都市场为主,“正大”以成都之外的市场为主。这实际上宣告“正大”退出了成都市场。经此一役,确立了希望牌饲料在中国猪饲料市场上的霸主地位。1990年10月,中央电视台在周末黄金时段播出了名为《希望之路》的专题报道;1991年4月,新华社发表了题为《四兄弟创造“希望”,敢竞争超过“正大”》的长篇通讯;就连中国香港地区的《资本家》杂志以及英国BBC电台也对希望饲料进行了跟踪报道。进入全国布局阶段伴随着中国改革开放的逐渐深化,刘永好四兄弟的事业越做越大。到了1990年,公司已经拥有近千名员工,资产上千万元,一年的销售额将近1亿元。但也正是在这一年,中国再次出现“姓社还是姓资”的争论,致使公司经营受到了很大影响。刘永好回忆说:“当时,我们生产饲料的粮食需要有指标才能买到,以前可以用鹌鹑蛋去换鸡蛋票去买,但之后就有人说我们是投机倒把,不让做了。”当时的形势曾一度让刘永好萌生退意。“我们一商量,决定干脆把公司交给国家算了。”刘永好回忆,“我们找到当时的县委书记,对书记说:‘我们不想当资本家,只是想做点事。我们把资产交给政府,政府聘我们来当管理者,行不行?’书记当时沉思了半天,说他也不知道究竟该怎么办,叫我们低调,慢慢地干,悄悄地干。于是我们就回去,悄悄地、低调地坚持了下来”。1992年邓小平的南巡讲话,让新希望迎来了新生。1992年1月18日~2月21日,当时已经88岁高龄的邓小平在中国的深圳、珠海、广州、上海等地展开巡回视察,发表了一系列重要讲话,回答了长期困扰和束缚人们思想的重大认识问题,让此前一度陷入进退两难境地的改革开放路线被再次确认,中国自此正式驶入发展与崛起的快车道。刘永好向网易财经记者表示,正是小平同志的南巡讲话,让“发展才是硬道理”成为了共识,一大批“九二派”企业家走上创业之路,新希望也因此获得了新生。“我们进入了全国布局的阶段,兼并收购了30多家企业”。也是在1992年,中国第一个经国家工商局批准的私营企业集团——希望集团——在希望饲料公司的基础上成立了。“1992年,当时的国家工商局评选了中国私营企业百强,我们是第一位。”刘永好回忆说。1995年4月,刘氏四兄弟按照“资产平均分配”原则,进行了“分家”。1997年,刘永好剥离南方希望集团中的部分资产并追加投资,成立了新希望集团公司。新希望农业股份公司于1998年挂牌上市,成为内地民营企业第一家上市公司,也是当时内地唯一以农业为主体的上市公司。入股民生银行涉足金融业1993年3月,刘永好作为非公有制经济界推选出的政协委员,出席了全国政协八届一次会议。他第一次站在北京人民大会堂讲台上发言,“私营企业有希望”的标题刚念出口,台下就爆发出一阵热烈掌声。同年10月,作为来自企业界的唯一代表,刘永好当选全国工商联副主席,开始和全国的企业家成为朋友。11月,刘永好赴香港参加第二届世界华商大会,作为内地首次派往这个国际盛会的代表,刘永好又开始和来自全球的企业家们交起了朋友。身份的变化,使刘永好的人生舞台一下子扩大了不知多少倍。这对于一向擅长外交的刘永好来说,真的是如鱼得水。在很短的时间内,他的身边便汇集了大量的人脉资源。早在创业初期,刘永好曾向银行申请1000元贷款,却被银行拒绝,“我以后也要办家银行”。那时的刘永好就有了这样的想法,“当选全国工商联副主席之后,我一直在思考,应该如何为民营企业的发展服务?通过自己的经营实践和外部调研发现,在那个阶段,民营企业最需要的就是贷款,否则发展会受到制约”。1993年,刘永好与41名政协委员共同提案,希望成立一家主要由民营企业家投资、为民营企业服务的银行。1996年,中国民生银行在北京正式挂牌,经叔平任董事长,刘永好为副董事长。刘永好回忆说:“这家商业银行做了两件事,第一解决民营企业贷款难的问题,第二为中国的金融体制改革、银行业的变革创新做实验田。”20多年来,民生银行从注册资本13.8亿元、净利润1.5亿元的小银行,一跃成为总资产近6万亿元、净利润近500亿元的全国性商业银行。刘永好家族一直是民生银行坚定的投资者,同时也分享着民生银行的高增长率带来的丰厚回报。入股民生银行的优厚回报也极大地激发了刘永好对金融的兴趣。1997年,他在集团公司成立金融部,做了几笔颇为大胆的投资:他和二哥刘永行投资民生保险;出资2.1亿元进入联华信托,成为第一家进入信托行业的民营企业;随后,刘永好成立新希望投资公司,投资了双鹤药业、深圳燃气以及科伦药业等具有成长性的优质公司。刘永好还试图变革传统银行服务,“传统银行有个‘二八定律’,服务好20%的大企业就会带来80%的利润,但是剩下80%的群体,特别是小微企业、创新企业以及普通人群,他们往往得不到金融服务。”刘永好对媒体表示,他希望能服务于被遗忘的“80%的群体”。2014年后,刘永好与小米合作成立新网银行,这是继腾讯微众银行、阿里网商银行之后全国第三家、也是中西部首家互联网银行。一直以来,在大众印象中,刘永好的“实业家”身份大于“金融家”身份,但近年来,刘永好的“金融家”身份凸显。新希望集团更是染指多个金融板块,从银行、保险、信托、券商到垂直产业基金,其金融版图变得日益庞大。迈向“新时代的新方向”中国的民营企业一直在谋求海外布局。刘永好告诉记者,过去20年,新希望集团是中国企业界走出去最早的民营企业,从1999年建第一个越南工厂算起,到今天新希望集团已在40个国家投资建厂,从最初的在发展中国家买地建厂,到今天收购、兼并一些发达国家的企业,并在新加坡、美国、澳大利亚以及欧洲都设立了海外总部。在“一带一路”战略提出后,新希望集团更是加快了海外投资发展的步伐。2014年,新希望集团牵头发起制订《中澳农业及食品安全百年合作计划》,促进中澳两国在农业基础设施建设、农产品贸易、食品安全、现代农业产业链建设等方面的互利互补;2015年,该集团又与Moxey家族、Perich集团及澳大利亚自由食品集团合资成立公司,打造澳大利亚最具竞争力和影响力的奶牛养殖企业。2016年,新希望借助旗下的草根知本全资收购了澳大利亚保健品企业NaturalCare。2016年,新希望集团海外生产产品的销售额已经占到集团总销售额的10%。2017年,其国外业务贡献主营收入为67.76亿元。刘永好表示,希望能够通过最多10年的努力,将公司海外销售额的占比提高至40%,借助国际化布局,了解海外市场、竞争对手以及国际行业发展的格局,使公司更具全球化思维。刘永好认为,目前国人的消费能力正在提高,在新的市场格局下,消费升级和供给侧改革会产生一批优秀企业。未来10年,中国会涌现一批有话语权、影响力和定价权的世界级的农业和食品企业。今年3月,在《人民日报》“大咖有话”直播间,针对乡村振兴的话题,刘永好首次提出了“绿领”阶层这一概念,“从事现代农业、绿色产业的这些新型农民,可以叫做‘绿领’”,并称从中将诞生“新一代的刘永好”。党的十九大提出实施乡村振兴战略,刘永好认为,这些目标的实现,需要有一大批有知识、有技术的新农民,扎根农村、深耕现代农业。国家应该通过政策帮扶和企业参与,培养出一个既年富力强又高知高能、热爱农业的新型职业农民群体。刘永好准备用5年时间,无偿为农村培养10万名新型农民和农技员。在此基础上,从中选拔优秀人才进行表彰,规模为5年1万人,再从中培养至少100名创业合伙人,给予资金、技术、渠道等方面的创投扶持。刘永好对“绿领”群体的发展充满信心,还大胆预测,只要有政府主导,以及众多企业和全社会的参与,未来将有超过总人口10%的中国人成为“绿领”。刘永好介绍,目前已经确定在四川、山东、广东等省设立培训基地,今年大约能培养2万名“绿领一族”,帮助他们成为新型农场主,成为从事新型现代农业的佼佼者,由此与“建设世界级农牧企业与乡村振兴的大战略结合起来,这就是我们新时代的新方向”。破解家族传承难题刘永好小时候家境贫寒,“家里5个兄妹,只有父亲一人挣钱,20岁以前我几乎没穿过鞋”。童年、少年时期的吃苦经历,成为他人生中宝贵的财富。“吃苦磨炼了我的意志,使我了解了中国的农民……这段艰苦的岁月影响了我的一生”。到了今天身价已有几百亿元,刘永好依然过着朴素的生活,“和我出差的人都知道,我一般就点麻婆豆腐、回锅肉、蚂蚁上树3样菜”。但是,刘永好对扶贫活动却很大方。作为中国光彩会的创始人之一,刘永好组织了20多次“光彩行”投资考察活动,共邀请4700多位企业家参与“光彩行”,其中仅公益捐赠就超过3.8亿元。1995年,刘永好投资1.8亿元在四川大凉山地区成立西昌希望饲料公司,一举为当地带来3万个就业岗位,20年来帮助10万名农民走向了致富道路。他透露,未来几年,新希望集团还将在大凉山及其周边地区投资20亿元,至少饲养超过60万头猪。刘永好称,家族企业占全球企业的绝大多数,它并不是“落后”的代名词,关键是如何让它实现可持续发展。像很多早年创业的企业家一样,刘永好的企业也到了要传承的阶段。让刘永好和夫人李巍感到欣慰的是,他们的一对儿女不仅有爱心,而且生活很独立,从来不炫富,这让他们很放心。刘永好一家人坐飞机,别人可以坐头等舱,他的儿子只能坐经济舱,李巍说:“因为家里有一个规定,就是在孩子没有自立之前,只能坐经济舱。目的就是为了让孩子明白,在开始享受物质生活之前,必须通过自己的努力去争取。”刘永好说,他的女儿刘畅早在大学期间就和同学们一起参加“光明行”活动,出资帮助贫困地区人群做白内障手术。而刘永好的儿子在热衷社会公益事业方面也不输姐姐。刘永好说,儿子拿出自己的压岁钱和几个同龄朋友到凉山州去买金盏花种子,分发给贫困的农民种植。这种花种出来以后,可以提炼出一种可供食用的有机色素,从而帮助当地的农民脱贫致富。2013年5月22日,刘永好宣布女儿刘畅接棒成为新希望集团下属上市公司新希望六和的董事长。出生于1980年的刘畅,留过学,拥有MBA学历,也有过创业经历。在接手公司两年后,刘永好对刘畅的工作很赞赏:“她的状态非常好。她对企业的热爱、对事业的认同以及自身的综合管理能力都有提高。她的英文水平比我高,与人沟通的能力很强,情商特别高。”-结语-“我刚创业的时候,从事个体经济是被人瞧不起的事。说我为什么放着好好的教师不做,非要做些‘不三不四’的事。”刘永好回忆说。刘永好表示,40年过去了,民营经济在从业人数和纳税规模上都取得巨大进步,出现了诸多世界领先的企业。数据显示,目前民营企业对中国新增就业的贡献率达90%以上。近年来,随着科技创新的突飞猛进以及政府加大支持力度,民营企业得到快速发展。“民营企业取得今天的成就,一方面是民营企业家勤奋能干,另一方面也说明国家关于民营经济的政策正在逐步深入。”刘永好说。截至目前,刘永好已连续26年作为人大代表或政协委员参加全国两会。作为两会上的“老面孔”,刘永好至今已经提出约160多项议案,多数都涉及民营企业的发展。他说:“我的不少建议、提案变成了可供实施的政策,这对我鼓励极大。”刘永好表示,每一届履职都能感受到民营企业地位的提高,感受到政府对民营企业的重视程度越来越高,“我与第一批民营企业家是一样的,都对这个时代怀有感激,没有改革开放就不会有我们的今天”。文章选自中国民航网,2018年7月25日
2018年8月2日 -
【凤凰网】CGTN 《对话栏目》中美贸易磨擦问题
[在线视频] 2018年7月31日,全球化智库(CCG)理事长王辉耀应邀参加CGTN《对话栏目》直播,同中国太平洋经济合作全国委员会会长、中国驻冰岛原大使苏格及美国加州州立大学教授James Rae谈中美贸易磨擦问题。 全球化是不可阻挡的历史潮流,贸易自由化是国际社会普遍共识。中美贸易不平衡的主要原因不在中国,顺差和逆差不应是判断是非的标准。在中美服务贸易领域,中国每年对美逆差就超过500亿美元。美方实际在华利益巨大,美资企业每年在华产销的商品额更达到6000亿美元以上。美方根据其国内法处理对外贸易摩擦,背离了世贸组织原则。 改革开放是中国的既定国策,通过对话而非对抗来处理贸易摩擦,是中方的一贯立场,也是解决问题的正确途径。中方对话谈判的大门始终敞开,但对话必须相互平等和尊重,并建立在规则的基础之上,单方面施压只会适得其反。文章选自凤凰网,2018年8月1日
2018年8月2日