US technology sector faces triple threat


Uncertainty over the future of US-China economic relations has derailed the once high-flying global equity market, which rose almost 15 per cent in the January-April period.

Clive McDonnell, head of Equity Strategy at Standard Chartered Bank, looks at the causes behind the decline.

The technology sector, now facing challenges on a number of fronts, is supposedly the main cause behind the decline.

While President Trump’s policies get blamed for a lot of events impacting global equity markets, he is probably less responsible for the upset in the technology sector than many would have you think.

There are three primary challenges facing the US technology sector:

1. The sector’s high overseas revenue share: over 60% of total revenue comes from

abroad.

2. The threat of regulation on accessing and using personal data.

3. Monopoly powers and the risk of an antitrust investigation.

Let’s consider each factor. US economic growth appears resilient in the face of weaker growth prospects in the euro zone and emerging markets.

However, since US technology companies generate more than 60% of their revenue from overseas, they are acutely sensitive to slower growth prospects outside the US. In the past, they have been able to offset slower growth in the euro zone with robust growth in emerging markets led by China.

The next downturn may witness slower growth in both regions, which would leave US technology companies exposed relative to US banks and utilities which have the lowest overseas revenue exposure amongst US companies.

Additionally, there is a risk that China responds in kind to the US President’s targeting of Chinese technology companies. There is also a risk that US dollar strength creates a negative effect on US technology sector earnings once overseas revenue is converted into US dollars.

The threat of regulation on accessing and use of personal data looms large for technology companies, particularly those in the social media space. Europe has been at the forefront of regulating use of personal data via the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

These regulations changed the balance of power between individuals and companies over the use of personal data. The rules give EU citizens more control over their personal data held by companies and the right to have their data removed from databases, the so-called “right to be forgotten” law.

The challenge for US companies is these rules cover their processing of personal data in Europe, regardless of the residential location of the individual generating the data.  

The rules give EU citizens more control over their personal data
held by companies and the right to have their data removed from
databases.

Similar to the long arm of US financial regulators – which impact banks regardless of where they are incorporated once they engage in US dollar transactions – European rules on personal data are impacting US technology companies in ways that are not covered by domestic laws.

The central business challenge for US technology companies, in particular those in the social media sector, is their business models are built on free access to consumer data in exchange for free use of their software, including search, email and productivity tools, such as those available on Google Drive.

If these companies lose unfettered access to personal data, they would likely start charging consumers for use of the same software.

This, in turn, will have a significant impact on their advertising revenues, as the precision they have been able to offer companies targeting customers would decline. No doubt their business models would evolve, but this could be at the cost of lower net margins relative to the near-20% margins they currently enjoy.

Finally, the perceived monopoly power of some of the sector’s leaders and the resultant risk US technology companies face from antitrust investigations is probably the biggest risk to the sector.

The definition of monopoly power in the US, focusing on the short-term price impact on consumers from company actions, has been unchanged for over 40 years.

Specifically, if company actions lead to higher prices, it could be designated as a monopoly (and importantly, the reverse also applies). This is relevant for technology companies as many have helped to lower prices for consumers.

The definition of monopoly power is changing. This is led by Lina Khan, a Legal Fellow at the Federal Trade Commission and an academic Fellow at Columbia Law School.

In a paper, entitled “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox (1)”, she challenged the current interpretation of antitrust law which is designed to curb monopolistic power. She proposed that lower prices were not necessarily good for consumers if prices were used as a tool to choke off competition and eventually restrict consumer choice.

The primary tool available to technology companies to manipulate consumer choices (and some would say restrict competition) is their search algorithm.

Whenever a social media or e-commerce company implements a change to their search algorithm, the ensuing uproar amongst its users and customers is a measure of the importance this tool has to drive sales and choices for consumers.

The search algorithm assumes unique power once a platform becomes dominant in an industry and consumers no longer look at other platforms as they believe that their chosen one offers them all the choice they need.

The risk is: their choices are being determined by companies who pay more to appear higher up the search results than those which pay less, even though the latter companies may offer lower prices.

If regulators’ definition of monopoly power evolves, as Lina Khan suggests, there is a risk of antitrust investigations against US technology sector leaders, with penalties ranging from fines to reversal of prior acquisitions.

The challenges facing the US technology sector have converged at a time when valuations are elevated and earnings growth has weakened.

They are shining a light on their business model, which can undoubtedly evolve, but may require changes that the market is not currently anticipating.

Clive McDonnell is Head of Equity Strategy at Standard Chartered Private Bank.

The views expresssed here are entirely the writer’s own.

 

Read more:

US block spurs tech independence drive by Chinese companies

The latest US blacklisting of the Chinese supercomputing companies will not reduce domestic technology companies’ resolve to pursue innovation and research and development (R&D) as they strive to make up for shortcomings in certain segments to pursue further growth despite “irrational assaults” by Washington, industry insiders said.

 

Innovation is a driving force within China’s economy today. Yet behind that innovation, what’s the role of research and development?

 

US hypocritical in accusing China of tech theft


Photo: IC

https://youtu.be/tGD072hQGP8

 

 

The US has no lack of a “criminal record” in terms of technology theft.

 

The US has repeatedly ignored China’s innovative breakthroughs through self-reliance and hard work but accuses China of “stealing” US technology and intellectual property rights. These arguments do not hold water.

These absurd accusations imply that the US must be the absolute leader in technological innovation – only the US is qualified to make major breakthroughs while others should merely follow its lead and import its technology, otherwise they are “stealing.” Such logic is ridiculous.

A country’s technological innovation capability is closely related to its scientific research resources, such as talents, capital, and scientific experimental devices. Leading scientific research resources have determined the US leading position in various science and technology fields. Nonetheless, economies including the EU, China, Japan, Russia and India have also mastered considerable scientific research resources and developed technological innovation capabilities with their own characteristics and advantages.

It is due to such relatively scattered distribution of global research resources that the US can never be an “all-round champion” of technological innovation. It is natural that other countries will catch up with the US in certain fields.

Historically, the US made a great fortune during WWII, and out-competed the Soviet Union in terms of comprehensive national strength during the Cold War. Even so, the US failed to gain absolute dominance over the Soviet Union in technological innovation.

As a major technological innovator keeping pace with the US, the Soviet Union set multiple world records in its golden age. The world’s first nuclear power plant, artificial earth satellite, manned spacecraft, space station and intercontinental missiles were all built by the Soviet Union. As far as weapons and equipment are concerned, both the Soviet Union and the US had something in which they excelled. Even now, Russia, the successor state to the Soviet Union, surpasses the US in some respects.

The US made its first nuclear power plant, artificial satellite, manned spacecraft, and intercontinental missiles after the Soviet Union’s success. Based on its current logic, should these US cutting-edge technologies be regarded as something stolen from the Soviet Union?

There are more examples. China led the US in the processing power of supercomputers for many years. In June 2018, the US retook the world’s lead thanks to its machine “Summit” which could process 200,000 trillion calculations per second. By following US logic, should we say the US surpassed China by stealing China’s supercomputing technology?

Some have already noted that the US is actually the guilty party that files the suit first. The country has no lack of a “criminal record” in terms of technology theft. In the first decades after its founding, the US tried hard to “steal” advanced industrial technology from the UK to develop its own industries.

During WWII, prior to Germany’s surrender, the US established the Alsos Mission. The team was sent to Germany not to fight, but to capture top German scientists and their technologies ahead of the Soviet Union. It is said that Wernher von Braun, one of the founders of the US space program, was a leading figure in Nazi Germany’s rocket development program.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, the US took the opportunity to obtain advanced military technology that the Soviet Union had accumulated for years and to lure away many top technical talents.

After that, plenty of US weapons benefited from the Soviet Union’s technology to varying degrees, which saved the US time and money. The US technology theft from the Soviet Union has produced generous returns.

However, the US is not ashamed of such records. Many Hollywood blockbusters have molded American spies conducting such theft into the embodiment of justice, and molded theft into a just act. Perhaps it is precisely because of this that the US is now judging others by itself.

In recent years, China has continued to increase investment in science and technology. In 2018, the country’s research and development funds amounted to nearly 2 trillion yuan ($290 billion), second only to the US. The efforts will naturally pay off.

Nevertheless, the US deliberately turned a blind eye to China’s efforts to promote independent innovation and contain China’s development. The past actions and current absurd logic of the US are being seen through.

Source link 

 

Innovation is a driving force within China’s economy today. Yet behind that innovation, what’s the role of research and development?

 

Related posts:

 

The Sino-US trade dispute is not only a game between representatives of the two countries at the negotiating table, but also a cont…
https://youtu.be/7_kKAiHjJyY They say a good conversation could be just like drinking a cup of black coffee and as stimulating as it is…

 

Minds without borders: A coffee with Huawei Ren: We will be reborn by 2021


They say a good conversation could be just like drinking a cup of black coffee and as stimulating as it is hard. Today’s conversation is certainly stimulating intellectually and thought-provoking. The panelists on stage are trailblazers in their respective fields and certainly very outspoken about the challenges that we are facing today. First up, Ren Zhengfei, the founder and CEO of Huawei. Next, Catherine Chen, the senior vice president and director of the board of Huawei. Also on stage are George Gilder, a tech guru and futurist and Prof. Nicholas Negroponte, a tech visionary who’s the co-founder of the MIT Media Lab.

Subscribe to us on YouTube: https://goo.gl/lP12gA

Download our APP on Apple Store (iOS): https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cctvn…

Download APP on Google Play (Android): https://play.google.com/store/apps/de…

Follow us on:

Website: https://www.cgtn.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ChinaGlobalT…
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/cgtn/?hl=zh-cn
Twitter: https://twitter.com/CGTNOfficial
Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/CGTNOfficial/
Tumblr: http://cctvnews.tumblr.com/
Weibo: http://weibo.com/cctvnewsbeijing
Tiktok: https://m.tiktok.com/h5/share/usr/659…
Douyin: https://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=ht…
Category:  News & Politics

Read more:

 Amid debilitating trade war, silent majority key to stabilizing China-US ties

With trade disputes and Huawei row in the forefront of ties, China-US relations have seen unprecedented tensions.

China’s semiconductor industry will come out stronger from US crackdown

Painful lessons have taught us time and again that strength is the only thing that matters.

The US trade war against human rights

If the trade war goes on, it will exert an overwhelming impact on the world industrial chain. The US cannot remain unaffected. Its supply and marketing network, which plays a significant role in American people’s living standards, will be hit hard.

Tariffs to wipe out US profits

Proposed US tariffs on Chinese imports will hurt US companies and consumers more than they might imagine and will damage an industrial chain that connects the world’s two largest economies, industrial representatives from both China and the US said on Tuesday

Huawei founder:We will be reborn by 2021 – Business News

US companies fight against Trump’s tariffs – Business News

Related post:

Why does the West fail to understand China? The West misreads, China is rising, said Cambridge Prof 

 

A phoenix has risen from the ashes – THE RISE OF CHINA

The oppression of a civilization:

The world was turned into an ocean of colonies of subject people during the few centuries of ‘friendly’ European conquest. The Africans were turned into slaves, the natives of both Americas massacred. The ancient civilization of China was crippled and dismantled into pieces. After the Western powers brought down the decadent Qing Dynasty with the might of modern firearms, the Chinese civilization was turned into a pariah race of nothingness by the invaders in their country. The foreigners did not bring anything good but oppression, bullying and raiding China ’s wealth and dignity by all kinds of barbarian and deceptive means, and by the barrel of the gun. The Japanese joined in and even thought of conquering and ruling the whole of China as their colony.

There was a moment of salvation when Japan attacked Pearl Harbour and declared war on the Western power. China and its peasant soldiers were needed to open another front to sap the fighting power and resources of the Japanese. A large part of the Japanese Imperial Army was held down in China by the peasant soldiers. History would not be the same if the Japanese could run through China without resistance and conquer the whole of Asia .

After the war there was a brief moment of equality for China as a key member of the Allied Forces that fought against the Japanese. Chiang Kai Shek was seated with the Allied leaders like Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt in Potsdam and Cairo to divide the world among the victorious Allied Powers. China was lucky to have its lost territories back. But Chiang was more like a flower vase and inconsequen-tail, would not be deserving of any war loot. His presence among the leaders of the big powers was a consolation that gave China a little recognition as a big nation.

This little moment of dignity did not last long when Mao Zedong defeated Chiang and China adopted communism as a state ideology. This turn of event led to a renewed and concerted Western effort to brand and condemn the Chinese civilization as peasants, rogues, dumb, uncivilized, aggressive and the pariahs of the human race, a good for nothing race that was lack of talent, unproduc-tive and unimaginative, and unfit to join the advanced nations of the West.

This was the hopeless China painted by the West. They kept repeating the misinfor-mation daily in all western media, like they are doing to North Korea today, that the whole world simply believed so. Chinese are useless, Chinese are lame, Chinese are bad.

Cold Wars, containment policies, encirclement, depriving China of its rightful seat in the UN, blocking China from joining international organizations like the WTO and the Groupings of rich nations, were history now. In the last 40 odd years, China came storming back on its own despite all the sanctions and barriers and threats against its rise as a nation and the Chinese people as a civilization, old, ancient, but not useless and remote of talents.

Throughout the two hundred years of Western oppression and suppression, the Chinese civilization was not allowed to surface, no opportunity to break out and be the equals of other nations. The Chinese civilization was down and out, the Chinese in despair. Many Chinese had doubts in themselves, and were ashamed to be Chinese. The Westerners reinforced this belief by sneering at them, contributing negative literature furiously to debase the Chinese, discriminated against them in practically every human endeavour and industry. In the USA there were racist laws forbidding the Chinese from higher skill jobs. The image and perception of useless and untalented Chinese became a self fulfilling prophecy. The Chinese civilization was a joke, a condemned race that was lacking in industry and innovation.

On its own, slowly and steadily the Chinese rebuilt their nation and their civilization, with little foreign talents and assistance, China has overtaken Japan and is closing in on the US as the number Two world power, economically and militarily. They have proven that they could match the West in every field of industry. The oppression and suppression of a civilization have failed, and a revitalized China has assumed its rightful place as a proud nation among nations. The Chinese civilization is no longer to be spitted at, to be kicked around by the Western powers or by teeny weeny little Asian states. It is now a force to be reckoned with and to be respected on its own merits.

The tag of being the Sick Man of Asia, a semi colony of the West, a broken country with nothing, no inventions, no modern industries, no talents except poverty and all the trappings of a poor and backward third world country vanished over a few decades. There is renewed pride as a people, a nation and a civilization in the new China. A phoenix has risen from the ashes. There is no turning back. The Chinese have found their way back and will leap frog over the West in science and technology and in all things, while the West are still trying to restrain their advances by hook and by crook.

Today, the overseas Chinese are also starting to rediscover themselves, their pride and dignity as a respectable people. They too find some renewed confidence that they are not rubbish and useless as the West wanted to hole them in, to be bullied by even little third world people, to be told to go home in western countries. They too share the pride of an ancient civilization seeking a second chance in renaissance, to achieve in whatever they seek to do, to be a respectable people and civilization on par with the best in the world. They no longer lower their heads in shame as they go about their lives. They are standing tall, heads and shoulders to the Western civilization with the knowledge that they are just as good if not better. The Chinese civilization is reviving and will no longer be oppressed and suppressed again.

After reading this, you can now benefit from a short history lesson of mankind and their actions on earth and the generations to come….DONT BE DECEIVED ANYMORE BY THE WEST…

Huawei files to trademark mobile OS around the world after US ban


Huawei files to trademark mobile OS around the world after US ban

LIMA/SHANGHAI: China’s Huawei has applied to trademark its “Hongmeng” operating system (OS) in at least nine countries and Europe, data from a U.N. body shows, in a sign it may be deploying a back-up plan in key markets as U.S. sanctions threaten its business model.

The move comes after the Trump administration put Huawei on a blacklist last month that barred it from doing business with U.S. tech companies such as Alphabet Inc, whose Android OS is used in Huawei’s phones.

Since then, Huawei – the world’s biggest maker of telecoms network gear – has filed for a Hongmeng trademark in countries such as Cambodia, Canada, South Korea and New Zealand, data from the U.N. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) shows.

It also filed an application in Peru on May 27, according to the country’s anti-trust agency Indecopi.

Huawei has a back-up OS in case it is cut off from U.S.-made software, Richard Yu, CEO of the firm’s consumer division, told German newspaper Die Welt in an interview earlier this year.

The firm, also the world’s second-largest maker of smartphones, has not yet revealed details about its OS. Advertisement

Its applications to trademark the OS show Huawei wants to use “Hongmeng” for gadgets ranging from smartphones, portable computers to robots and car televisions.

At home, Huawei applied for a Hongmeng trademark in August last year and received a nod last month, according to a filing on China’s intellectual property administration’s website.

Huawei declined to comment.

CONSUMER CONCERNS

According to WIPO data, the earliest Huawei applications to trademark the Hongmeng OS outside China were made on May 14 to the European Union Intellectual Property Office and South Korea, or right after the United States flagged it would stick Huawei on an export blacklist.

Huawei has come under mounting scrutiny for over a year, led by U.S. allegations that “back doors” in its routers, switches and other gear could allow China to spy on U.S. communications.

The company has denied its products pose a security threat.

However, consumers have been spooked by how matters have escalated, with many looking to offload their devices on worries they would be cut off from Android updates in the wake of the U.S. blacklist.

Huawei’s hopes to become the world’s top selling smartphone maker in the fourth quarter this year have now been delayed, a senior Huawei executive said this week.

Peru’s Indecopi has said it needs more information from Huawei before it can register a trademark for Hongmeng in the country, where there are some 5.5 million Huawei phone users.

The agency did not give details on the documents it had sought, but said Huawei had up to nine months to respond.

Huawei representatives in Peru declined to provide immediate comment, while the Chinese embassy in Lima did not respond to requests for comment.

(Reporting by Marco Aquino in Lima and Brenda Goh in Shanghai, Additional Reporting by Sijia Jiang in Hong Kong; Shanghai Newsroom and Mitra Taj in Lima, Editing by Himani Sarkar)

Source: Reuters

Related posts:

Huawei’s Hongmeng will be 60% Faster than Android Huawei OS: A secret OS history, development and future https://youtu.be/i3kl4.

..

https://youtu.be/VaREP75PlSA https://youtu.be/YWdNP2u7voo Global financial markets are facing a stark wake-up call that they need t…

Huawei’s HongMeng OS 60% faster than Android !


Huawei’s Hongmeng will be 60 times Faster than Android

Finally!!!!! Huawei make come back

Huawei is fighting back with the US by introducing their new Operating System Hongmeng which is 60 times faster than Android. Which will release in 2020.

According to Huawei, they had been working on their own OS for the last seven years and further said that the production of the new operating system is far more than ready.

Google has currently lifted the ban on Huawei for 90 days, meaning the current Huawei customers will continue to get updates for the next 90 days, including their Android app and all.

As CTO of Huawei confirms that their OS will be able to run the android apps, this will be the biggest setback for Android. And to achieve that cause, Huawei is in talks with Apptoide which is a standalone alternative for Google play.There are some rumors which are suggesting that not just Android but this new OS will be able to run iOS applications too.

So will Hongmen be really better than Android? We’re still unsure as we didn’t get any UI/UX of their new OS so right now it is not the perfect time to comment on this situation. But after listening to a number of conferences done by Huawei, we’re sure that this new Operating System Hongmeng is indeed that can shake the foundations of Android, and Android may suffer a lot.

But, this is clear that Android will put up a great trouble to come ahead of this Hongmeng. This is surely going to be one hell of a rift between Huawei and Android to get the market lead. If Huawei succeeds in making their new OS better and more reliable than android than the world will soon see a revolution in the field of technology and innovation.

Huawei’s Android replacement is not, apparently, ready to be launched.

After reporting that Huawei was preparing their own new operating system for a possible launch, Huawei has told TechRadar that its home-grown Operating System will not be rolled out next month. Instead, the company plans for the OS to be ready in China later this year, with an international launch in 2020 with a few modifications in it.

Like most manufacturers, Huawei relies on Google’s Android to power its Huawei phones. Earlier this month, Google announced that it would no longer grant an Android license to the Chinese company by following a White House executive order that effectively blocked the company in the US.

The company has been working on its own Operating System since 2012, a report from CNET sister site TechRepublic revealed in 2018.

“Huawei knew this was coming and they were preparing. The OS was ready in January 2018 and this was our ‘Plan B’,” Alaa Elshimy, managing director and vice president of Huawei, told TechRadar.

“We did not want to bring the OS to the market as we had a strong relationship with Google and others and did not want to ruin the relationship.”

According to the report, existing Android applications will work with the new OS, which could mean it is based on the open-source version of Android. Huawei has its own app store on Android, called Huawei AppGallery, which could host the new apps of future world.

Huawei phones in China do not use Google service so there’s a high chance of adoption of its own Hongmeng OS. But how does Huawei plan to deal with not being able to use popular applications like YouTube, Maps, Gmail, etc. on its Hongmeng OS outside China? Will the company develop competing apps for its Operating System or has Huawei done that already?

So many questions are asked now-a-days. But I guess we may never find out until Huawei unveils the supposed “Hongmeng” operating system expected to substitute Android on its own powered devices.

Huawei’s decision to sue the US government comes as they face increasing rift from the US and its allies over the security of its telecoms network equipment. The Shenzhen-based firm has been banned in the US from supplying to federal agencies under the country’s National Defence Authorization Act.

“The US government has long branded Huawei as a threat. It has hacked our servers and stolen emails and source code,” said Guo. “Despite this, the US government has never provided any particular evidence supporting the accusations that Huawei poses a cybersecurity threat. Still, the United States government is sparing no effort to smear the company and mislead the public about Huawei .” May be the reason behind this could be an expected defeat from Huawei in the race of becoming the king of IT world.

Source link 

 

Read More :

Huawei’s HongMeng OS 60% faster than Android: reports

China’s Huawei is reportedly intensively testing its proprietary operating system (OS) HongMeng with internet giants and  domestic smartphone vendors, and the new system will be launched in the  next few months.

Halting tech exchanges will harm US more

 

How much do facts matter in Sino U.S. trade war?

Related posts:

 

The battle over 5G network suppliers is part of a broader push by the Trump  administration to check China’s  rise as a global techn…
https://youtu.be/VaREP75PlSA https://youtu.be/YWdNP2u7voo Global financial markets are facing a stark wake-up call that they need t…

 

TV debate exposes US bias against China on trade and intellectual property


A screen shot of Liu Xin of China Global Television Network appearing on Trish Regan’s show on Fox Business Network on Thursday Beijing time Photo: IC

China won’t accept unequal trade deal

FOX Business’ Trish Regan talks with CGTN’s Liu Xin on trade and intellectual property

A heated online feud between two high-profile news anchors from China and the US ended on Thursday morning in a seemingly friendly manner, but also laid bare the prejudice of some US elites against China.

The highly anticipated debate between Liu Xin of China Global Television Network (CGTN) and Trish Regan of the Fox Business Network, hailed as a first of its kind, also underscored the urgent need for the two countries to conduct better engagement as the trade and technology war has escalated to dangerous levels, Chinese analysts noted Thursday.

After days of hype, Liu appeared on Regan’s primetime show Thursday morning Beijing time, where the two anchors went head-to-head over a wide range of issues, from the ongoing trade war to China’s economic system.

Many in China praised Liu’s performance for pushing back Regan’s questions with clearly biased connotations, despite Liu being at a disadvantage because it was the US anchor’s turf and she was in control of the conversation.

“Liu was very calm and showed great demeanor; in contrast, [Regan] appeared to be fanning the flames, instigating war and judging from an established angle,” one Sina Weibo user wrote.

Clear prejudice

Despite her apparent attempt to appear fair and friendly with occasional smiles, Regan’s prejudice was palpable throughout the showdown lasting around 16 minutes.

She started off the conversation by introducing Liu as a member of the Community Party of China (CPC) and painted Liu as a spokesperson of the CPC, drawing an immediate rebuke from Liu, who said she was not a CPC member.

“Please don’t assume,” Liu said. “I’m here today, only speaking for myself as Liu Xin, a journalist working for CGTN.”

“Right off the bat, [Regan] put a huge label on Liu, saying Liu was representing the CPC… so the American was obviously biased,” another Sina Weibo user wrote. Some online even pointed out that there were about 88 million CPC members and 1.4 billion people in China. “How hard can it be to understand that?” one wrote.

After mumbling about unsupported claims that China steals US technologies, Regan dropped another ideologically biased question, while appearing to be asking about China’s economic system: “How do you define state capitalism?”

As she did throughout the show, Liu responded with sound arguments, educating the US anchor about China’s socialist economy with Chinese characteristics, where market forces play an increasingly bigger role and the private sector is a major force in the economy.

“Such prejudice [against China] has long existed in the US,” said Liang Haiming, dean of Hainan University’s Belt and Road Research Institute, who also focuses on China-US trade relations. “This will not change from one exchange like this.”


Better dialogue

However, Regan, who had fiercely defended the trade war the US government has initiated against China without concrete proof, did show a much softer tone and even appeared to be backing down from some of her earlier comments.

The showdown on Thursday appeared to be friendlier than their earlier fiery exchanges online, drawing praise from some Chinese and even Chinese officials.

Reacting to the debate, Lu Kang, spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry, said that he was happy to see “rational, open and frank” dialogue between Chinese and US people in different areas.

At a time when tensions between the two economic powers are running high, the two countries need more effective dialogue rather than constant finger-pointing and the debate might have set a great example for that, analysts said.

“This is like in 1971, when the US ping-pong team was invited to China. No one remembers who won the matches, but people remember only that the US team went to China,” Feng Da Hsuan, chief adviser of the China Silk Road iValley Research Institute and former vice president for research at the University of Texas at Dallas, told the Global Times, referring to a ping-ping match that has been widely credited as the start of China-US diplomatic relations in the early 1970s.

Anchors’ debate trumps China-US tensions

The debate between Fox Business’ Trish Regan and China Global Television Network (CGTN)’s Liu Xin began around 8:30 on Thursday (Beijing time) and lasted only 16 minutes, much shorter than people had expected. The debate went more like an interview where Regan kept throwing questions and Liu responded.

Before the debate started, other topics and an advertisement were broadcast, including a long talk by Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido. After the event, Michael Pillsbury from Washington DC-based Hudson Institute, who is known for his anti-China stance, appeared to make his comments.

The international community has shown interest in the debate mainly because of the conflict between China and the US, which has gone far beyond being a squabble to do with trade. There is increasingly intense exchange of opinions but both sides barely conceded to each other’s stance.

A straight-out face-to-face talk between the two anchors would have been generally welcomed, although there are some people who just wanted to be bystanders.

Anyway, the debate has made headlines. This shows that there was too little effective communication between Beijing and Washington. The US is a country where the press is largely free but their reports about the trade war and China have been colored with views of the US political elite. The voice that reflects China’s views can hardly spread in the US. American media outlets would censor China’s voices to fit the agenda set by the US administration, thus rendering the message going across almost ineffectual.

There were no big flaws in the anchors’ performance in the debate. Regan was aggressive while talking about China in an earlier broadcast, but this time she was restrained – more like an anchor. In the meantime, Liu was humble and candid. The whole dialogue was cordial.

What they talked about was not surprising – the possibility of zero tariffs between China and the US, disputes about intellectual property, and whether China is a developing or developed country. When the debate began, Regan introduced Liu as a member of the Communist Party of China (CPC), but Liu corrected Regan by saying that she was not, “Please don’t assume that I’m a member. And I don’t speak for the CPC. Here, today, I’m only speaking for myself as Liu Xin, a journalist working for CGTN.”

This has demonstrated that Regan, as well as many other US media staff, don’t understand how the Chinese system led by the CPC works. They have taken many things for granted. Such misunderstanding colors US public opinion about China.

Apparently, the brief dialogue came short on being thorough. It was far from meeting people’s expectation. But it was still regarded as conducive. It is better to make such efforts rather than desisting from trying to have effective communication between China and the US.

We hope the debate could remind people of the importance of China-US talks and help the two countries get rid of political shackles and utilitarianism in consultations and strive to break the estrangement.

Have the anchors set a good example? It depends on what happens in the future. We hope people can say “yes” when they look back someday.

By Shan Renping – a commentator with the Global Times. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn
Newspaper headline: Anchors’ debate trumps China-US tensions

Source link
Read more:  

Huawei row mirrors pernicious American traits

Clear-headed Americans will understand: the mirror shows a different America from the one they take pride i

 

Related posts:

 

https://youtu.be/nzhZGUfaZhI China-U.S. trade tensions | Mideast tensions take turn for worse    https://youtu.be/eQbQbvGBDaM..

https://youtu.be/oiGm2E8BaC4 Martin Jacques Martin Jacques (2012) Born 1945 (age 73–74) Coventry , England, Great Britain, U..

华为不惧美国封杀 美式霸凌失道寡助!Huawei’s goodwill gesture being treated unscrupulously by the US !

 

The TRUTH about Trump HUAWEI BAN ! What is Huawei really guilty of ? Can’t beat them, ban them, tell lies !


https://youtu.be/5zyCapbIFkg

 

Trump Lies About His Trade War with China: A Closer Look

Huawei 5G LIES!

https://youtu.be/IfxfdHJ3k9Y >

Why does the U.S. expect China to accept an unequal treaty?

US relies on deception and is most afraid of protracted trade war

The economic data of China and the US for the month of April was not good. There are divergent views on the reasons for China’s declining retail sales growth rate and especially, its industrial output growth. But amid China’s overall expectations that a trade war could have some impact on the economy this year, one month’s unsatisfactory data is socially and psychologically affordable.

The problem for the US is that the government won’t admit that a trade war would have a negative impact on its own economy. Instead, the Trump administration advocates that tariff revenue is a good option for the US to boost economic growth.

In fact, Chinese society’s understanding of the current situation is very objective, and the official and civil understanding is echoed by each other. Chinese society is confident in the country’s broader economic prospects, based largely on the country’s enormous economic potential and the government’s ability to take strong measures to minimize the negative impact of a trade war and contain possible unexpected risks. In addition, it is believed that as long as China resists the pressure, the US will sign the agreement with China sooner or later, because the US also feels uncomfortable.

Most of those tariffs will be shared by American importers and consumers, and it is against the common sense of international trade for the US government to insist that tariffs are paid only by Chinese export enterprises.

If the White House now publicly acknowledges the negative impact of the trade war on itself and is still able to unite the US society, then the trade war will be even more difficult for China to deal.

The US side has created a false impression that it is strong, but in fact it is weak on the inside. If the US side wants to fight, we may as well do so. China also has modest demands, namely, to safeguard its sovereignty and uphold the principle of equality in China-US relations.

In a worst-case scenario, China would suffer losses which it could still afford. The great leeway of our society can certainly have a considerable damping effect. Under better circumstances, we can quickly build resilience so that China’s economy will once and for all reduce its excessive dependence on the US market, and people’s interests are better protected in the long run.

The US trade war with China will build up into a political bubble as it diverges from reality. We just need hold our breath, and try to do our own thing as much as possible. It will gradually deflate on its own.

Source link

Related post:

Huawei does not need US chips: CEO on Trump export ban

 

Read more:

Supply cut-off cannot stifle Huawei

The pain inflicted on China is temporary. But what the US has to face is growing long-term pain. The so-called decoupling with China is very likely the real beginning of US decline.

China’s strong stand benefits Japan, Europe

While China has a quite different political system and ideology than Europe and Japan, China has given both much more respect than they have received from the US. Multipolarization and multilateralism should be the most important principles of the world. No country’s interests are allowed to override those of others, and no nation should determine the future of the globe in a unilateral way. China, Europe, Japan and other countries share the same interests on this issue

Europe’s scrutiny results prove Huawei “innocent”: China FM spokesperson

The results of Europe’s scrutiny on products by China’s Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. have proven the company’s “innocence,” a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said Monday.

Huawei fully prepared, core tech intact: Ren


Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei said a 90-day temporary license the US granted is not that meaningful for the company, as it is well prepared and has kept its core technologies intact.  

%d bloggers like this: