Language : English 简体 繁體
Go

Search

简体 繁體

Foreign Policy Economy Environment Security Society & Culture Pacific Dialogue Magazine Videos
Media Report
August 30 , 2017
  • CNBC：Trump wants China to fix North Korea, but it isn't going to happen
    CNBC reports: "In yet another move resisting President Donald Trump's repeated demands to rein in North Korea, China not only refused to immediately condemn the rogue nation for its missile launch over Japan on Tuesday, but again called for the removal of the only viable projectile defense in the region. Although Trump has blamed China for not taking a harsh stance toward the consistently belligerent North Korea, the Asian giant may have already lost its ability to influence the rogue state. So instead of making Kim Jong Un's regime back down, Beijing is actually pushing for Seoul to remove its best defense. That is, the U.S.-supplied Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system in South Korea is the only asset in the region that could bring down a missile coming out of North Korea, but China seems determined to see it removed. A day after the missile traveled over Japan, China called for an immediate halt to THAAD deployment and for the removal of related facilities in comments from its United Nations ambassador. In the statement, China blamed THAAD deployment for jeopardizing geopolitical balance and 'undermining the strategic security interest of all regional countries, including China.'"
  • The Washington Post：Who Blinked In the China-India Standoff?
    The Washington Post reports: "For weeks, China's Foreign Ministry had been vehement in its denunciations of India and insistence that New Delhi unconditionally withdraw troops that had trespassed into Chinese territory... Yet on Monday, it appeared as though Beijing, not New Delhi, had blinked. Both sides withdrew troops to end the stand-off. Crucially, military sources told Indian newspapers that China has also withdrawn the bulldozers that were constructing a road on the plateau... Some experts said it was premature to start declaring victory and China continued to be cagey in its official remarks... China's Foreign Ministry spokesman said Tuesday that the country would make plans for road construction 'in accordance with the situation on the ground.' Then, on Wednesday, China's Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, appeared to chide India, saying  'We of course hope that India could learn some lessons from this, and [hope] events similar to this one would not happen again.' There is precedence for China not sticking to agreements. In 2012, China and the Philippines agreed to withdraw naval vessels around Scarborough Shoal in a deal brokered by the United States. The Chinese ships never left, and have controlled it since."
  • New York Magazine：Trump Seems to Genuinely Want a Trade War With China
    New York Magazine comments: "Donald Trump is not known for putting substance over spectacle. Throughout his first seven months in office, the president has evinced far more interest in declaring political victories than achieving any particular policy goal... Give President Trump a chance to license his name to a policy "win" — no matter how superficial — and he'll take it. Or so the Chinese government (reasonably) thought. Last month, Beijing offered the Trump administration a commitment to reduce its steel production.. Throughout 2016, Trump vowed to curb Chinese steel "dumping." Beijing gave Trump the chance to walk out of high-level economic meetings last month with a "breakthrough deal" on one of his core campaign promises. And China's concession was actually significant enough to win the hearty approval of the administration's trade hawks, including Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. All assumed the boss would be thrilled. But they assumed wrong, as the Financial Times reports: 'Donald Trump last month rejected a Chinese proposal to cut steel overcapacity despite it being endorsed by some of his top advisers, as he urged them instead to find ways to impose tariffs on imports from China.' It's probably not quite right to describe this as a commitment to substance over symbolism, given the clear superiority of Beijing's offer to tariffs as a matter of policy. For one thing, a cut in Chinese production would raise the price of steel worldwide, and, thus, would not put American importers of steel at a special disadvantage — but tariffs would. For another, accepting China's offer would, obviously, not put the U.S. at risk of retaliatory actions by Beijing — but imposing tariffs would... It's possible that the president's fear of disrupting the relatively favorable economic conditions he inherited will restrain him. But this week's reporting paints a new nightmare scenario for congressional Republicans — one in which a renegade president compounds the political costs of their legislative failures by sabotaging the economy, just before the midterm elections."
Calendar
News
Commentary
Back to Top
2024 China-United States Exchange Foundation. All rights reserved.