U.S. Businesses Look To De-Risk, Not Decouple, Their China Ties

What a difference two months makes. Hopes were high in January that U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s scheduled travel to China, the first such visit by America’s top diplomat in years, would give a boost to strained ties between the two countries. China’s economy had started to rev up from the end of its ‘zero-Covid’ policies, giving a lift to its stocks and fortunes.

Then, the appearance of a suspected sky balloon over the U.S. heartland, deepening speculation about possible Beijing arms sales to Russia, and the start of high-profile Congressional hearings this month critical of China have changed the tone. “In the United States, you have a very deep fear about China,” Albright Stonebridge Group Senior Advisor Ken Jarrett said in an interview. “It’s still a relationship defined by rivalry, mistrust, and suspicion,” said the former president American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai, U.S. Consul General in Shanghai, and U.S. Deputy Consul General in Hong Kong. His government roles in Washington, D.C. include director of Asian Affairs at the White House National Security Council.

“Certainly in the United States, it feels like the American public doesn’t see much benefit of having a relationship with China. And in China, you have a sense of resentment toward the United States, because of the notion that the United States is trying to hold China back,” Jarrett said. In both countries, the tone is shaped in part by domestic politics, ideological differences and technology competition, he noted. “Nobody talks about the bridges that we should be building.”

And yet business ties between the two countries remain deep and, ironically, may be poised to grow faster this year. “The one thing that hasn’t changed (after the pandemic) is that the level of economic interdependence between the United States and China is still quite deep,” Jarrett said. “Now that China is exiting Covid, you’re going to see this year a real uptick of executive travel to China from headquarters of U.S. companies. This might lead to an increase in investment. Particularly for the larger U.S. multinationals, the view of the importance of the Chinese market hasn’t changed.”

Business interest will be heightened by China’s potential economic growth this year. After its GDP grew by a government-reported 3% in 2022, China is aiming for one of the world’s economic growth rates this year of “around 5%,” according to a report this month by then Premier Li Keqiang. That’s more than three times the growth rate of 1.4% for the American economy projected by the International Monetary Fund.

Just this past week back in the U.S., for instance, President Biden’s clean energy czar John Podesta said Chinese companies will be big players in future U.S. energy production, according to Fox News. At the Nasdaq, Xiao-I, a “leading cognitive artificial intelligence enterprise” backed by Chinese auto billionaire Li Shufu, began trading after amid expectations of a recovery in China listings in the U.S. this year. (See related post here.) Michigan this year has welcomed a hook-up on a $3.5 billion battery plant between Ford and China’s Contemporary Amperex Technology, or CATL, the world’s largest maker of EV batteries. Virginia earlier turned down the project and not everyone else is onboard: U.S. Senator Marco Rubio introduced legislation on Thursday that would block tax credits for EV batteries made with Chinese technology, Reuters reported. Rubio has also called for the Biden administration to review the Ford-CATL agreement, it said. Former U.S. ambassador to China Jon Huntsman is a member of Ford’s board of directors.

So what’s next for businesses? “Long term, much about China also hasn’t changed. For most, China is still among the top three investment destinations. Its ranking has fallen a bit, yet it is still ranked by multinational companies as an important investment destination,” Jarrett said. Rather than a decoupling, “there is a reappraisal that’s under way.”

More specifically, Jarrett said, there is “de-risking.” “U.S. companies are thinking of ways to rebalance their exposure in China. The one word that you hear a lot about from executives in China is a need to de-risk. This follows specifically from the Russian-Ukraine situation and a mindfulness of the experience of many U.S. companies in Russia” which abandoned the market after the start of Russia invasion of the Ukraine. “They don’t want to face the same kind of situation in China” vis-à-vis Taiwan, “which would be many multiples more painful for them.”

For some companies, Jarrett said, de-risking “is about how to protect yourself, and how to look more local, such as through (having) more partners or investing in Chinese companies,” he said. “Where do you list? Where do you register your intellectual property rights? Where are the vulnerabilities in your supply chain? Do you need backups? Do you need a more of a regional approach to your supply chain?”

“I would argue that we’re not going to have an across-the-board decoupling. There will be selective decoupling. We’ve been seeing that already in areas of sensitive technology, and some shifting around of supply chains that is inevitable.”

U.S. companies will force themselves to grapple with those complexities vis-a-vis China because large parts of its economy still hold business promise: healthcare, pharmaceuticals, the financial industry, food and the consumer, Jarrett noted. Among high-profile American businesses looking to grow, Starbucks in September said in aimed to increase its number of stores in the country from 6,000 to 9,000 by 2025, opening a new shop every nine hours.

Back at home, the U.S. itself won’t succeed vis-à-vis China only by criticizing it, and needs to find its own competitiveness. “We need to be mindful that it’s about the U.S. running faster, as opposed to just trying to trip-up China.” Jarrett said. Though the U.S. discussion of national security is important, there is also a question that needs to be asked: “What do you do to protect pure, legitimate business interests?”

“We continue to be in a very difficult place,” Jarrett said. “It’s hard to be too optimistic, but hopefully, sensible leadership on both sides will help to manage which way this moves.”

See related posts:

Asian IPOs Poised To Increase As Region’s Economics Recover, Nasdaq Vice Chairman Says

U.S. Tops New Asia Power Ranking “Due Largely To China’s Setbacks”

@rflannerychina

Source link

#Businesses #DeRisk #Decouple #China #Ties

Secretary Mayor Pete Not Having Any Of Marco Rubio’s Sh*t

As part of the rightwing attempt to blame Democrats for the Norfolk Southern train derailment and chemical spill in East Palestine, Ohio, GOP Sen. Marco Rubio has been calling for Transportation Secretary Mayor Pete Buttigieg to resign, because … well why, exactly? Mostly for being a Democrat in a Cabinet post, because Buttigieg didn’t keep a commercially owned train from derailing, and also didn’t keep its toxic cargo from spilling, and also something something woke distractions incompetence. Oh, and Buttigieg didn’t fix the computer SNAFU that snarled air traffic in January, and he failed to make Southwest Airlines not suck following a huge snowstorm, either.

Tuesday, Buttigieg called on the railroad industry to improve safety, telling Norfolk Southern and the rest of the industry to take immediate steps to improve safety. Among other steps, Buttigieg called for higher fines for safety violations, for freight railroads to protect workers who report safety issues from reprisals, and for the industry to

Deploy new inspection technologies without seeking permission to abandon human inspections. The removal of human inspections has been a top priority for the rail lobbyists. Recent waiver requests around technology like Automated Track Inspection (ATI) have been framed by industry to set up a false choice between technology and human oversight. We need both to keep our nation’s railroads safe.

Wouldn’t you know it, Rubio was one of 23 Republican senators who signed a 2021 letter to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) calling for expanded use of the automatic inspections, but also insisting that the automated tech, mounted on freight cars or locomotives, are so much better that visual track inspections by human beings are “redundant.”

A switch to automated inspections would also save having to pay those human inspectors, which the letter didn’t mention.

(We’ll also note that while track safety is absolutely vital, the East Palestine derailment appears to have resulted from a failed wheel bearing on one of the train cars, not a flaw in the track.)


During a press call Monday night, Buttigieg previewed the safety reform proposals, and noted that the aftermath of the derailment represents

“a moment of potential bipartisan cooperation,” he said, emphasizing the word “potential.”

Buttigieg also took the opportunity to call attention to that 2021 letter Rubio had signed:

We heard from Sen. Rubio last week, who had some pretty strong words about this incident. […] I can’t help but notice the last time this agency heard from him on rail regulation was his signature being on a letter that was pretty obviously drafted by industry, calling on us to weaken our practices around track inspection.

Buttigieg also said — again — that he plans to visit East Palestine once the recovery efforts are farther along, but doesn’t want to go when he might be in the way of cleanup efforts.

Tuesday, Rubio did that pissy little thing that Republicans do, complaining on Twitter that he had been most viciously maligned, and by a lazy good-for-nothing who needs to be fired, no less!

First @SecretaryPete was m.i.a. on the derailment

Then he lies to media claiming my 2021 letter calling for more track inspections was a letter calling for deregulation

He is an incompetent who is focused solely on his fantasies about his political future & needs to be fired

We like the part where Rubio doesn’t say that “more track inspections” in this case referred to more automated inspections, and that the letter explicitly called for the FRA to issue waivers to railroads that would allow “an increase in the frequency of automated track inspections in place of visual inspections” — for efficiency and safety, of course, not for higher railroad profit margins.

Buttigieg replied by stuffing Rubio into his locker, only metaphorically, tweeting

The facts don’t lie. The 2021 letter you signed was obviously drafted by railroad industry lobbyists.

It supports waivers that would reduce visual track inspections.

Now: will you vote to help us toughen rail safety accountability and fines, or not?

Buttigieg followed that by linking to the package of proposed reforms, adding,

Here are some examples of what Congress can do to help (along with immediate steps we’ve been taking and what we demand rail companies do). If you’re serious, I’ll work with you on this.

Rubio replied by calling again for Buttigieg to resign, and didn’t say a single word about rail safety, so he wins we guess.

As for the claim that automated track inspection is far better than visual inspection, you’ll be astonished to hear that that too is one of the issues on which the industry and the railroad unions have disagreed. Railroad giant BNSF sued the FRA last year to demand an extension of a pilot program, while union representatives said the new technology is just fine, but that it’s not yet ready to entirely replace visual inspections by human inspectors, who can see problems the automated systems miss. Buttigieg’s proposal, you’ll recall, calls for more use of ATI, but not at the expense of human inspectors.

Also too, Florida’s other senator, Rick Scott (R), griped on Tuesday that Buttigieg needs to go to East Palestine immediately, never mind whether he’d be in the way of the recovery work, because leaders show up, get in the way, and do photo ops, and that’s how problems get solved.

“When leaders show up, things get done—enough with the excuses,” Scott tweeted. “Show up, do your job and stop playing politics with every crisis you find.”

It sure is good of Sen. Scott to be so non-political about this! In reply, Buttigieg re-Twitterated that he’ll go when it’s appropriate to have a bunch of bureaucrats like him there:

During the initial response phase, I’ve followed the norm of staying out of the way of the independent NTSB.
Now that we’re into the policy phase, I’ll be visiting – and I need your help.

Will you work with us to toughen accountability standards on freight railroads?

Buttigieg again followed that with a link to his proposals, as if passing laws and regulations would make as much difference as showing up for a photo op.

In conclusion, we’re fairly sure a Republican response to the crisis is on the way, and that it will involve tax cuts and deregulating railroads even further.

[Department of Transportation / Politico / HuffPo / Image created using StableDiffusion 2.1 AI]

Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. If you can, please give $5 or $10 a month so we can keep this little mommyblog on the right track.

Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons.



Source link

#Secretary #Mayor #Pete #Marco #Rubios #Sht