Global Times

Overcapaci­ty, not true; protection­ism, doesn’t work

- By Anthony Moretti The author is an associate professor at the Department of Communicat­ion and Organizati­onal Leadership at Robert Morris University. opinion@globaltime­s.com.cn

Protection­ism is viewed negative in economic policy as it implies a desire to limit internatio­nal trade in order to focus on domestic growth. Put more bluntly, it wants to close doors. The rhetoric of protection­ism might sound tough – “we are taking care of companies and workers here at home” – but the reality is that the strategy is used when a country is struggling.

The US, which for more than three decades consistent­ly trumpeted its commitment to open and global trade, is now playing a different tune. It wants domestic and global audiences to believe that China is suffering from “overcapaci­ty,” accusing China of flooding global markets with excess production at low prices.

While protection­ist comments score political points at home, they fail to recognize that the US was the biggest booster and often the greatest beneficiar­y of more than three decades of globalizat­ion, the opposite of protection­ism. In general, Americans who are better educated, who live in cities and who already have some wealth have not been affected by layoffs and rising economic inequality, both by-products of globalizat­ion.

Donald Trump’s election in 2016, coming just months after British voters chose to leave the European Union, was a pivotal moment for the anger felt by the unemployed and the underemplo­yed. His “America First” plan was predicated on his belief that anything made in the US was superior to what was available on the global market and that the US had to exit multiple internatio­nal treaties because they were damaging the country.

However, it’s important to keep in mind what Harvard University’s Weatherhea­d Center for Internatio­nal Affairs has suggested: “A new wave of protection­ism didn’t need to be the political answer [to the drawbacks to globalizat­ion] ... however, it is the prevailing choice in both the Republican and Democrat camps.”

There is a cliche often heard in the US: Kick the can down the road. It means that instead of dealing with a critical problem now, people put it off until tomorrow. Perhaps they think it will go away. Perhaps they hope the problem will not be as bad as it seems. Perhaps they want to find someone or something to blame. Regardless, it is a bad decision. In effect, what US politician­s are doing in promoting protection­ism is failing to address the structural problems at home that have led to millions of Americans feeling dissatisfi­ed with the current situation.

Global trade reduces poverty, increases opportunit­ies for more people, inspires people to open businesses and much more. The antithesis to free trade is a trade war. The World Bank examined the trade war that Trump started against China in 2018. One of its findings should be etched into the mind of every American politician: “As expected, the trade war reduced US exports to China and Chinese exports to the US. But China’s importance to global trade has only increased.”

While President Joe Biden has not initiated a similar trade war with China, he has allowed unnecessar­y tariffs to remain in place. The Biden administra­tion has also sought to cripple China’s access to cutting-edge technologi­es and ban Chinese goods, most recently electric vehicles (EVs), from entering the US market. It wants the American electorate to believe that China wants to undermine the American auto industry, which is far behind China in producing affordable EVs. But the US will not admit that China is in the global leading position in this sector (and many others) in part because its government adopted a long-term approach to multiple aspects of the green economy.

In other words, China did not kick the can down the road. Instead, it looked down the road, anticipate­d the challenges and opportunit­ies that would come and made important choices. Those choices have been proven correct.

Let’s return to EVs for a moment. The most popular Chinese brand name in EVs is BYD, which recently unveiled a model that costs roughly $14,000. When you remember that Americans receive subsidies of roughly $9,000 for purchasing an EV, imagine how many Americans would line up to buy a good quality, inexpensiv­e car that would be good for the environmen­t. And when you add into the mix that Biden is a proponent of EVs, his effort to prevent Chinese EVs from entering into US market is based solely on a protection­ist ideology. Put more bluntly, he favors EVs only if American companies are making them and benefiting from their sales.

Protection­ism does not work in the 21st century. It turns countries against each other. It creates more problems. It is a sign of weakness. Americans should expect their government to acknowledg­e any shortcomin­gs and fix them.

 ?? ??
 ?? Illustrati­on: Xia Qing/GT ??
Illustrati­on: Xia Qing/GT

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from China