The IHT reports on vitrolic EU trade commissioner Mandelson, lashing out at the China juggernaut. The "EU trade chief calls for aggressive action against China".
Which is fine so long as he bears in mind Goldman Sach's "Globalization and Disinflation: can anyone else do a China" - which ostensibly argued Chinese cheap manufacturing and trade surplus is helping contain inflation in credit over-stretched developed Western markets.
www2.goldmansachs.com/insight/research/reports/docs/gepaper.pdf
China itself would much rather focus inwards, by all accounts of the recently held communist party congress, where Hu Jintao's 'scientific development' was much in vogue.
So, what is the best 'China line' in such a context? How might Western trade partners and policymakers respond to inevitable Chinese transformation (read inward orientation)?
This could be an important test case for the objectivity and parsimony of the WTO. Anti dumping measures against China are already a fertile area. China's response has been and is likely to be 'technocratic' at best. Its reach in third country markets (e.g. Africa) which are accorded priviliged access to developed markets, has already met with the chagrin of development economists and free-traders alike. Has the WTO been easy on China? Or is it simply that its core principles (national treatment, MFN) lack the bite to match their bark?
This is a fruitful area of future collaboration and I welcome insight on this multifacted issue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment