主题：【讨论】如果台湾问题被迫在近年内用武力解决，中国美国日本的经济如何变化？ -- 西风陶陶

Kerry on China

Senator Kerry has an extensive background and established voting record on China. He has served previously as Chairman of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, has visited China several times, and knows the country quite well.

As a Senator, John Kerry has been friendly on China regarding trade relations, judged by his voting record:

• In May 1994, he voted NO on the bill that was intended to link China’s human rights condition with grant of the MFN (Most Favorable Nation) trade treatment.

• In Sept. 2000, he voted to kill an amendment that would require sanctions against China or other countries if they were found to be selling illicit weapons of mass destruction.

• Also in Sept. 2000, he voted YES to grant China MFN status during its annual review.

Following a major speech on U.S.-China relations in 2000, Senator Kerry reiterated the importance of the long-standing U.S. “one China” policy to maintaining stability across the Taiwan Strait. While emphasizing the U.S. national interest in preserving democracy in Taiwan, he outlined the dangers of abandoning the strategic ambiguity that serves both to deter a cross-Strait attack by China as well as a precipitous declaration of independence by Taiwan that could provoke a war.

Of course Kerry has used far tougher rhetoric against China during the campaign. His criticism has focused on:

• The bilateral trade deficit. Kerry’s view on this is that the best way to rectify this problem is to take a stronger stand on revaluation of the RMB. Kerry’s economic team has told us that Kerry views China’s currency policy as illegal under article 15 of GATT. They estimate a 15-40% undervaluation. His campaign has indicated that pressuring China to revalue would be a much higher priority than under Bush.

• Job loss due to outsourcing to China. Kerry’s team has indicated that he does not support additional trade barriers, but would want to enforce existing WTO trade regulations. He has suggested that he would engage in a 120 day review of all trading partners, not just China, to see where violations of WTO may be occurring, indicating more of a hard line on this issue than Bush, but not a major swing towards protectionism.

• Lack enforcement of trade agreements with China.

• China’s de facto Dollar-peg currency regime.

• Lack of IPR protection and subsiding momentum for fulfilling WTO commitments.

His campaign has outlined a set of proposed policies on US-China relations:

• Immediate investigation into China’s worker rights abuses.

• More forceful effort to stop currency “manipulation.” Kerry has quoted estimates that the RMB is undervalued by 15 ?C 40%.

• Increased resources for trade enforcement and action at the WTO (for instance, double the USTR’s trade enforcement budget), and aggressive filing of WTO cases with regard to China WTO rule violations; for example, China’s indigenous WAPI wireless encryption standard.

• Providing U.S. manufacturers with more relief through applying special China safeguards, including textiles, more frequently.

• Tougher enforcement on China’s protection of IPR.

It’s worthwhile to point out that almost every U.S. President’s China policy evolves considerably from that of the campaign stage to be more pragmatic. No matter who gets elected in November, with more than US$120 bn bilateral trade surplus over the U.S., China is inevitably going to see its trade relationship with the U.S. become politicized and it’s going to become a source of friction once Chinese exports start to hit key U.S. industries like automobile and computers. But, there won’t be as much antagonism as there was between the U.S. and Japan in the past simply because Chinese “Toyota” and “Sony” have yet to emerge. A substantial trade attack by the U.S. on Chinese trade policies or currency policy is unlikely, because (1) protectionism isn’t in U.S. economic interests, (2) the U.S. government wants Beijing’s cooperation in the war on terrorism and N. Korea nuke crisis, and (3) the business community as a whole won’t support, because they all invest there.