 |
6月14日，中国驻捷克大使馆举办“平等互利 合作共赢” ——中美经贸关系专题研讨会，邀请来自捷克政府、工商界、智库和媒体人士就当前中美经贸问题进行讨论，张建敏大使做主旨发言，指出中美贸易符合双方利益，美方所做所为损人不利己，当前经贸摩擦完全由美方造成，美国必须停止贸易霸凌行径。
张建敏大使谈中美贸易争端（译文）
2019年6月14日
大家早上好！欢迎来到中美经贸关系主题研讨会。
当前中美贸易争端引起了全世界越来越多的关注。世界上两个最大经济体之间的关系好坏不仅影响两国自身利益，也影响整个世界的福祉，因此，每个人都是利益攸关方。
不幸的是，特朗普政府上台以来不断采取单边和保护主义措施，推行经济霸权，频繁使用或威胁使用关税作为针对他国的武器。
中国是美国贸易霸凌行径的受害者之一。为了维护国家利益，中国不得不采取有力措施。中方立场已在摆在各位面前的两份文件中阐明——一是《关于中美经贸磋商的中方立场》白皮书，二是中国商务部最新发布的《关于美国在中美经贸合作中获益情况的研究报告》。这两份文件包含详细分析和权威统计数据，旨在阐释中国对中美经贸真相的看法。我和我的同事们也愿在讨论过程中同各位交换意见。
我想首先谈以下几点：
第一，贸易是互利共赢的。
中国从贸易中受益，这也是为什么我们坚持对外开放。美国显然也从贸易中受益。仅以贸易不平衡来定性贸易关系未免过于简单化，这种做法既不客观也不负责任。
去年11月，世贸组织总干事罗伯托·阿泽维多先生在首届进口博览会开幕式上曾说：“贸易不是出口有益、进口有害的零和游戏。事实上，进口意味着以更低的价格为消费者提供更多选择。进口可使一国专注生产具有竞争优势的产品，提升经济竞争力和效率。越来越多的进口被用于在国内生产自己的产品，而这些产品然后又会出口——这就是全球贸易的现实。全球约三分之二的出口产品都含有进口零部件。”
马丁·沃尔夫在《金融时报》撰文指出，美国抓住双边贸易不平衡问题不放是经济上的无知。美国对华贸易逆差被夸大了，其实这个问题由来已久。目前，中国对美贸易顺差近53％来自加工贸易，20年前这一比重则为70％。
我仍清楚地记得，时任国务院总理朱镕基曾于1999年4月访问美国，那时候中国尚未加入世贸组织。朱总理在麻省理工学院发表演讲，在谈到加工贸易时他举了运动鞋的例子。他派秘书去美国商场了解中国出口到美国的运动鞋价格，结果发现，一双耐克或阿迪达斯运动鞋在美国的零售价是120美元，中国出厂价是20美元，而中国工人只赚2美元。
这种贸易活动对中国的好处是创造就业，而绝大部分利润是被负责品牌、设计和营销的美国企业拿走。但在美国统计数据中，这一切都算作中国对美国的出口。
第二，贸易争端损人不利己。
《经济学人》杂志最近刊登的题为《大规模破坏性武器》的封面报道指出，美国正在积极部署一个新的经济武器库以维护其霸权，这种做法将适得其反且很危险。
美国针对中国采取的行动有损其自身利益，提高美国企业生产成本，抬升美国国内物价，影响美国经济增长和民生，并阻碍美国对华出口。
就在今天早上，有报道称沃尔玛等600多家美国企业联名致函特朗普，敦促其解决同中国的贸易争端。信中引用国际咨询公司贸易伙伴关系的数据发出警告：如对3000亿美元中国输美产品加征25％关税，美国将失去逾200万个就业岗位，每个四口之家每年生活成本将增加2000多美元，美国国内生产总值将减少1％。
各位面前还有美中贸易全国委员会发布的2019年《国家出口报告》的摘要。我必须承认自己非常爱读他们的报告。十年前我在中国驻美使馆常驻时，曾多次出席美国国家和地区州长协会组织的会议。我先后与几十位美国州长见面，几乎每次我都要向他们展示美中贸易全国委员会的年度报告。因为这份报告充分表明中美经济高度相互依存，这一互利关系必须保持在正常轨道上。
最新报告指出，“中国支持超过110万个美国就业岗位，对美国经济增长依然重要”，“且美国各州都受到贸易争端影响。”
但令我更担心的是经贸关系紧张对世界其他地区造成的不利影响，所有人都面临遭受美国贸易霸凌的危险。
美国单边主义和保护主义损害以规则为基础的多边贸易体制。多年前，是美国坚持要求中国遵守WTO规则，中国为满足入世要求做出了巨大努力，并积极参与世界贸易。而现在美国却常常违反甚至背弃多边规则，每当规则不合特朗普之意时，他就倾向于退出国际协议或组织。
美国单边主义和保护主义威胁全球经济增长。世界银行已将世界经济增长预期下调至2.9％。国际货币基金组织则将增长预期从3.6％下调至3.3％，拉加德表示，美中关税战将使全球经济增长减少0.5％，约为4550亿美元，“规模超过南非经济总量”。
美国单边主义和保护主义破坏全球工业和供应链。蒂姆·库克近期接受哥伦比亚广播公司新闻采访时表示，“苹果手机制造商遍布全球，对苹果手机加征关税会导致所有相关国家受损，但损失最大的还是美国。”
世贸组织总干事的观点再一次得到验证，即所有出口产品中约有三分之二含有进口零部件。美国的霸凌行径带来巨大的不确定性，越来越多的企业担心其供应链的稳定性和安全性受损，只得考虑调整供应链布局。
第三，中美经贸磋商受挫的责任在美方。
德国总理默克尔5月30日在哈佛大学发表讲话时强调，保护主义和贸易冲突危及全球自由贸易，并因此危及繁荣之根本。虽然她没有点名，但我们都知道她指的是哪个国家。
我们只需要读读特朗普的推文就足以了解美国的可信度，确切的说，了解美国的不可信度。
2月21日，特朗普在推特上写道：“我希望美国通过竞争而非封锁目前更先进的技术获得胜利。”
言行是否一致，有目共睹。在华为问题上他是这样，在贸易谈判上也是如此。
美方没有带着诚意和相互尊重的态度开展谈判，而是不顾中国的主权权利不断提高要求。美国打着国家安全的幌子打击中国企业，破坏正常合作，损害市场竞争，造成关系紧张升级，贸易谈判遭遇严重挫折。
而中方在会谈过程中一直表现出诚意和耐心。我们没有特殊要求，我们要的只是公平、公正、非歧视性的待遇。就像体育比赛总会有赢有输，但最重要的是公平竞争。如果有人企图通过禁止他人参赛，甚至在场外伤害对手而获胜，那就是不道德的可耻行径。
越来越多的政治家、评论家、经济学家和各界人士公开反对美国这种行为。例如，马来西亚总理马哈蒂尔承诺将尽可能多地使用华为技术。他说，美西方必须接受亚洲国家现在有能力生产有竞争力的产品这一现实，不应“威胁”商业竞争对手。
伦敦商学院的迈克尔·雅可比得斯教授在英国《金融时报》撰文指出，特朗普的华为禁令可能会适得其反，奉行“美国优先”政策最终可能意味着美国垫底。
正如捷克谚语所说，为别人挖坑的人自己反而会掉进去。让我们拭目以待，看看滥用权力会带来什么苦果。
第四，美国的贸易霸凌行径必须停止。
中美经贸磋商过程中，中方始终秉持相互尊重、平等互利的原则，一份好的协议必须是双赢的协议。中国不惹事，也不怕事，重大原则问题上没有妥协余地。
中国将继续坚持改革开放。前不久的“一带一路”国际合作高峰论坛上，习近平主席宣布了一系列重大举措，包括扩大外资在更多领域的市场准入，加强知识产权保护方面的国际合作，在更大范围内增加商品和服务的进口规模，更有效地参与国际宏观经济政策协调，进一步确保开放政策的实施。
现在球在美方一边。谈，我们大门敞开；打，我们奉陪到底。
话虽如此，我仍然希望美方及时醒悟，采取理智行为。正如马丁·沃尔夫警告的那样，“今天对中国的打击是在错误的领域以错误的方式进行的错误的战争。”
世界人民和世界经济不应受到这般对待。为此，我们必须共同努力，采取行动，仗义执言，呼吁采取更负责任的合理行为。
在这方面，我们赞赏捷克的立场。在两国关于建立战略伙伴关系的联合声明中，中捷双方均承诺倡导自由贸易，反对贸易保护主义，主张通过对话协商解决贸易争端。
这一立场同样适用于中美贸易争端，事实上，这不是一个普通意义上的争端，而是多边主义和单边主义之争，是自由贸易和保护主义之争。其结果关乎所有人。要让所有人拥有更美好的未来，合作是唯一选择，必须成功。
捷克人相信耐心会带来玫瑰。中国有5000多年的历史，我们不仅有足够的耐心，还有坚定的决心和强大的能力应对好这一挑战。
希望在座各位继续给予中国理解和支持。
谢谢。
Ambassador Zhang Jianmin on China-US Trade Dispute
14 June 2019
Good morning. Welcome to today’s discussion.
The ongoing China-US trade dispute is causing growing concern in the world. The health of relations between the two biggest economies affect not just the interests of the two countries themselves, but also the well-being of the entire world. Everybody is, therefore, a stakeholder.
Unfortunately, since the Trump administration came to office, it has kept taking unilateral and protectionist measures and practiced economic hegemony. In particular, it has frequently resorted to the use or threat of tariff as a weapon against other countries.
Like others, China has been a victim of US trade bullying. To safeguard our national interests, we cannot but respond with forceful measures. Our positions have been laid out very clearly in the two documents before you. One is the white paper on China-US trade talks, the other is the latest research paper from the Chinese Ministry of Commerce on how the US has benefited from its trade with China.
They are intended to give you China’s perspective about the real picture of China-US trade relations. You can find detailed analysis and authoritative statistics in both papers. My colleagues and I are also prepared to exchange views with you about them in the course of our discussion.
To start our discussion, I wish to share with you several observations:
First, trade is mutually beneficial.
China has benefited from trade. That is why we are so committed to opening up. The United States has also obviously benefited from trade.
It would be too simplistic to define trade relations solely by trade imbalance. Such an approach is neither objective nor responsible.
Here I am reminded of what Mr. Roberto Azevedo, WTO Director General said in his speech at the opening ceremony of the first Import Expo in Shanghai last November:
“trade is not a zero sum game, where exports are good and imports are bad. In fact, imports mean greater choice for consumers at lower prices. They mean you can focus on producing those goods where you have a competitive advantage and they mean having a more competitive and more efficient economy. And increasingly imports mean inputs for your own products which will themselves then be exported. This is the reality of global trade. Today, around two thirds of all exports around the world contain imported components.”
Martin Wolf has also pointed out in the Financial Times that “the US focus on bilateral imbalances is economically illiterate.”
Moreover, the US trade deficit has been exaggerated. In fact, this problem has been there for decades.
At present, nearly 53% of China’s trade surplus with the United States has come from processing trade. Twenty years ago, it was 70%.
I remember very well that in April 1999, and that was still before China’s accession to the WTO, then Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji visited the United States and gave a speech at MIT. He talked about processing trade and cited sports shoes as an example. He had sent his secretary to department stores to find out the price of sports shoes made in China. One pair of Nike or Adidas shoes was sold at 120 dollars in the United States. The Chinese factory that made the shoes sold it at 20 dollars in China. And the Chinese worker earned only 2 dollars.
China benefited from this trade activity because it produced jobs, but the larger share of profits actually went to the US businesses who were responsible for the brand, design and marketing. However, in their statistics, everything was counted as China’s export to the US.
Second, trade dispute hurts the United States itself and harms the whole world.
Economist magazine has recently published a cover story entitled Weapons of Mass Disruption. It says that “America is aggressively deploying a new economic arsenal to assert its power. That is counterproductive---and dangerous.”
What the US is doing now toward China hurts its own interests. It raises the cost of production for US enterprises. It increases the prices of goods from China for US consumers. It affects US economic growth and people’s living standards. And it impedes US export to China.
Just this morning, it is reported that over 600 US companies including Walmart have urged Trump to resolve trade dispute with China. In their appeal letter, they cite estimates from international consultancy the Trade Partnership and caution that additional 25% tariffs on 300 billion dollars in imports would wipe out more than 2 million US jobs. They would also add more than 2,000 dollars in costs for the average American family of four and reduce the US GDP by 1%.
I have also distributed to you the executive summary of 2019 State Export Report released by the US-China Business Council.
I have to admit that I like their report very much. Ten years ago when I was posted in the Chinese Embassy in Washington, I attended many meetings organized by national and regional governors associations. In almost every meeting I had with dozens of US Governors, I always showed them a copy of this annual report from the business council. Because it captures so well the interdependence of the Chinese and American economies and the importance of keeping this mutually beneficial relationship on the right track.
As the latest report points out, “China continues to be important to US economic growth, supporting more than 1.1 million jobs.” It also says that “States across the country feel the effects of the trade dispute”.
But what worries me even more is the adverse impacts the trade tension has on the rest of the world. Everyone could be at the risk of US trade bullying.
US unilateralism and protectionism compromises the rules-based multilateral trading regime. Years ago, it was the United States who insisted that China should abide by WTO rules. China made big efforts to meet the WTO accession requirements. China has become very active in world trade. And now the United States is often seen to be violating or rejecting multilateral rules. Whenever the rules do not fit Trump’s own purposes, he tends to favor withdrawing from the international treaty or organization.
US unilateralism and protectionism threatens global economic growth. The World Bank has lowered its forecast of world economic growth to 2.9%. The IMF has reduced its forecast from 3.6% to 3.3%. According to Lagarde, US-China tariff war will knock 0.5% off global growth, which is about 455 billion dollars, “larger than the size of South Africa’s economy”.
US unilateralism and protectionism disrupts global industrial and supply chains. In a recent interview with CBS news, Tim Cook said that “the iPhone is made everywhere. And so a tariff on the iPhone would hurt all of those countries, but the one that would be hurt the most is (America).”
Once again, it proves the view of WTO Director General that around two-thirds of all exports contain imported components. The US bullying has caused tremendous uncertainty. More and more businesses are concerned about the stability and safety of their supply chains and have to consider relocation of their respective supply chains.
Third, the US side is to blame.
Chancellor Merkel, when speaking at Harvard on May 30, stressed that protectionism and trade conflicts jeopardize free international trade and thus the very foundation of our prosperity. Though she did not mention any specific name, we all know which country she was referring to.
We only need to have a look at Trump’s tweets to get a feel of US credibility or to be exact, its lack of credibility.
Let me just read one of them for you. On February 21, he tweeted: “I want the United States to win through competition, not by blocking out currently more advanced technologies.”
Everyone has seen how his words are matched by his deeds. This is his style with Huawei, this is also his style with trade talks.
Instead of coming to the negotiation table with good faith and mutual respect, the US side has kept raising demands in disregard of China’s sovereign rights. It abuses national security as a pretext to bring down Chinese companies, disrupt normal cooperation and undermine market competition. Tension has thus escalated. Trade talks have suffered severe setbacks.
On the contrary, the Chinese side has shown sincerity and patience throughout the talks. We are not asking for anything special. We want nothing more than just, fair and non-discriminatory treatment. It is like in sports, one may win a match, one may lose a match, but the most important thing is the level playing field. If one attempts to win by banning other competitors from entering the match or even worse by hurting them outside the arena, it is immoral and disgraceful.
More and more statesmen, commentators, economists and people from all sectors have spoken out against such behavior by the US side.
Dr. Mahathir, Prime Minister of Malaysia, for example, has pledged to use Huawei technology as much as possible. He said, the United States and the “West” must accept that Asian nations now produce competitive products and should not “threaten” business rivals.
Professor Michael Jacobides of London Business School wrote in Financial Times that Trump’s Huawei ban could backfire badly and that putting “America first” could ultimately mean the US finishes last.
Let us wait and see what such abuse of power would bring. As one Czech saying goes, kdo jinému jámu kopá, sám do ní padá, meaning he who digs a hole for others will fall in it himself.
Fourth, US trade bullying must be stopped.
Throughout the trade talks, China has followed the principle of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefits. A good agreement has to be a win-win agreement. There is no room for compromise on matters of major principle. We in China don’t look for trouble, but if trouble comes our way, we are not afraid of it.
China will continue to follow its path of reform and opening-up. At the recent Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, President Xi Jinping announced a series of major steps including expanding market access for foreign investment in more areas, enhancing international cooperation in intellectual property protection, increasing the import of goods and services on an even larger scale, more effectively engaging in international macro-economic policy coordination, and working harder to ensure the implementation of opening-up related policies.
The ball is in the US court. If they are ready to talk, we’ll talk; if they choose to fight, we’ll keep them company.
Having said that, I still hope the US side will come back to its senses before it is too late. As Martin Wolf has warned, “Today’s attack on China is the wrong war, fought in the wrong way, on the wrong terrain.”
The world people and the world economy deserve something better.
For this to happen, we have to work together. We all need to act, to speak up and to call for more responsible and reasonable behavior.
In this connection, we appreciate the Czech position. In our joint statement on establishing strategic partnership, both China and the Czech Republic have made the commitment to advocate free trade, oppose trade protectionism and stand for resolution of trade disputes through dialogue and consultation.
This also applies to the China-US trade dispute, which is not just an ordinary dispute. It is, in fact, a major question of multilateralism vs unilateralism, and a major question of free trade vs protectionism.
Everyone has a stake in its outcome, and cooperation must prevail as the only viable route to a better future for all.
Czech people believes that trpělivost růže přináší, or in English, patience brings roses.
China has over 5,000 years of history. We have not only sufficient patience, but also the firm commitment and strong capability to meet this challenge.
Hope we could have your understanding and support.
Thank you.