On May 5, Professor Laurence J. Lau, Ralph and Claire Landau Professor of Economics of the Chinese University of Hong Kong delivered a lecture with the same title during an online session hosted by the China Center of the Jesus College of Cambridge University. Professor Lau has kindly provided China-US Focus with an edited text of the lecture in which he addresses the role of public goods - education, public health, elderly care, basic research, infrastructure, social safety net, and alleviation of poverty - in China’s social and economic development over the past seven decades. Professor Lau argues that increasing provision of public goods is consistent with China’s strategy of “dual circulation development as well as its “common prosperity” policy, and could be a significant source of growth in demand in both consumption and investment that is essential to China’s continued prosperity. The following is part one of the lecture.

U.S. announcements and actions show some new approaches. In short, trade plays second fiddle to the White House’s strategic objectives — meaning that commercial interests will be sacrificed whenever Washington has need. Trade with China is viewed through a geopolitical lens.

Russia vs. the world seems to be the story of 2022, and so far the retaliation of the West against Russia has been economic and financial. China has observed how the global finance infrastructure has been weaponized, and now must consider how to secure itself from the potential wrath of Western powers it is at odds with.

The Russia-Ukraine conflict has provided new impetus to the centennial change in global order. Combined with the impact of global pandemic, this conflict has accelerated the transformation of international economic order from a US-dominated globalization process to the globalization driven by coexistence of multiple parallel systems.

Six factors suggest that the IPEF will not succeed: meager benefits for developing economies, new and unpopular commitments, disproportionate benefits for the U.S., vague negotiating plans, uncertainty of the framework’s survival under a new American administration and skepticism by U.S. allies.

U.S. President Joe Biden formally launched the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework in June, but the initiative falls short of providing an actual trade agreement. In order for the IPEF to work long term, the Biden administration must include interlocking development initiatives that are multilateral and backed by public-private partnership agreements.

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is an essential component of Beijing and Islamabad’s economic relationship, but the CPEC has faced extensive pressures internally and externally, including strong criticism from the U.S. and India.

Thirteen countries in the Indo-Pacific region have joined the initiative, which indicates interest. But there are problems with the framework as presented that raise questions about its ability to succeed and endure.

Geopolitical risk, sanctions, and covid in China are redefining how we think about the future of global supply chains. Nations must start considering how to better secure their supply chains through regional trade partnerships, reshoring essential manufacturing capabilities, and sourcing goods from multiple nations and regions.

India and Pakistan share a deeply intertwined and embattled history. And now that India sees China entering the picture to back Pakistani development, the thought of two neighboring rivals growing closer has put India on notice.