Zhu Ying: Why cant the Sino -US trade negotiations be negotiated?

In 2018, the Sino -US trade war has attracted much attention, and negotiations between governments between the two countries are the only way to resolve the trade war.However, the Sino -US trade negotiations have repeatedly failed, and the trade war has become more and more intense. The US tariff measures for US $ 200 billion are in front of them.

The Government of China and the United States has held several rounds of negotiations so far. On February 27, Liu He, a member of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and director of the Central Finance and Economics Leading Group, visited the United States to start a negotiation journey. On May 3rdOn the negotiation of China, Liu He went to the United States for a second negotiations on May 15th, and the US Minister of Commerce Ross went to China on June 2nd. On August 22, the deputy minister of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce Wang was negotiated in the United States.

These five rounds of negotiations do not include Wang Chen, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China, visited the United States on June 13 to lobby Sino -US trade friction.

Where is the key to the Sino -US trade negotiations?The "Wall Street Journal" reported in the recent Sino -US trade negotiations that the United States put forward more than 140 specific requirements to China, and China divided the US requirements into three parts.One is that China has increased imports to the United States and eliminates trade deficit. This can be done immediately.

The second is to further open the Chinese market, which China believes that it will be done in several years.The third is that China cannot coerce American companies to transfer technology and open market access.China believes that one -third of the last third cannot be negotiated because of national security and political reasons.

The essence of this and "one -third of Andrdquo; Andrdquo.Become the core demand for the United States to launch a trade war in China.

The Chinese government has been promoted from trade frictions to the trade war, and has always avoided the negative impact of China's industrial policy on Sino -US trade and investment.The United States is the challenge of the trade war, and the core demands of China avoided the challenges. How can such negotiations have good results.

Starting in early August, the Chinese official media launched a round of public opinion offensive, confirming the Chinese government's position on Sino -US trade negotiations, and also clarified the Chinese government's judgment of the concentration of Sino -US trade war.

On August 8th, the "People's Daily" article pointed out: And "No matter what kind of storms, it is impossible to stop the Chinese people's footsteps to the beautiful life. Anandrdquo;The essence of the war is to curb China. On August 11th, the "People's Daily" pointed out with a eye -catching title: The key to the United States' provoking the trade war is the rules of destruction. On August 29th, the "People's Daily" pointed out that it rationally understands China and the United States.Trade friction.

The core idea of these articles is: first, tell the Chinese people that and "Sino -US economic and trade friction on China's economy has a limited impact on Andrdquo; Second, tell the world that the United States engage in trade protectionism, and China holds up the banner of free trade in China;Third, tell the United States, do not deprive China's development rights.

In other words, China's high point of the moral system to occupy the trade war should counterattack the globalization side by side with China; if the United States wants to curb China's development, China cannot concession. And "The conditions of the United States, if the Chinese government agrees, it isIn the 21st century Andlsquo; Twenty -one Andrsquo; Andrdquo;.

Such a public opinion offensive removes the key demands of the United States to challenge the trade war, and directly lead the Sino -US trade war to the containment and countermeasures between China and the United States.

Showing such a qualitative judgment must not be deeply worried about the prospects of Sino -US economic and trade relations, especially for China's further reform and opening up.How can the Chinese government ignore the US demands at all?

The U.S. government has indeed put on the posture of curbing China, but should China ask itself: What did China do to the United States?The Gao Maxist banner of China is to eliminate capitalism. This is the unforgettable original intention of the Communist Party.China dilutes the opposition with the United States in international occasions, but China's political system determines that China's internal and foreign policies must curb the United States.

China's strategic goal is to curb the United States. Can the current tactics of the United States be curbing China. Can each other with such thinking, can they solve trade disputes?The problem of curbing cannot be negotiated. To solve the current problems in China and the United States, it is still necessary to return to the US government for the core of China.

The Chinese government and the media have regarded the words of the United States as And "" Undepentically accusing Andrdquo; and then explaining the benefits of free trade to present the phenomenon of chickens and ducks.The European Union's view is exactly the same as that of the United States "accusing Andrdquo; without any.

If China does not want to develop trade and investment with developed countries in the West, it will be resisted with Andrdquo; another way to develop trade with African countries, and self -confidence and "Africa will replace the United States's largest export market Andrdquo; in the next five years.

If China continues to integrate into the road of economic globalization, it should solve the problem against the core demands of the United States.If the Sino -US trade war continues, the global supply chain is undergoing changes that are not conducive to China.China should have its own development right, but the method adopted should allow the other party of economic cooperation to accept.

The author is a professor of economics at the Business School of Shanghai Normal University in China