Since World War II, Britain has been at the core of the world economy , for his country 's economic development and its possible impact on the British position produced very sensitive and alert. Since China 's reform and opening to create a miracle sustained rapid economic development, thus causing particular concern Britain , became the focus of British foreign economic policy. The United States is not only worried about the economic rise of China will challenge the dominant position of its economy , but also worried about China 's development model will harm the "Washington Consensus" appeal in the world . To address these concerns , the United Kingdom adopted a series of policy mix , economic instruments and non- economic means have been the greatest degree of utilization. This paper intends to British trade and economic policy in economic and non- economic means to sort out and explained , and the main reason for the U.S. policy mix analysis and interpretation.二战终了以来，英国一直处于世界经济整体体系的中心地位，对于他国经济的进展及其有可能对英国地位萌生的影响甚为敏锐和警觉。中国自改革开放以来发明出了经济连续不断高速进展的奇闻，因为这个引动了英国的尤其关心注视，变成英国对外经济政策的焦点之一。
After the normalization of Sino-US economic relations means Britain countermeasures to China in the economic field , including not only traditional trade protectionism --- import restrictions and export expansion , but also began to emerge in the 1970s "exchange rate protectionism" , repeatedly asked RMB appreciation .
经济手眼中美关系正常化在这以后，英国在经济领域的对华对策不止涵盖传统的商业活动尽力照顾主义———进口限止和出口扩大，还涵盖２０百年７０时代着手显露出来的“汇价尽力照顾主义”，不断要求我国法定货币增值。
Sino-US relations at the beginning of the traditional trade protectionism , as the Cold War against the Soviet Union's security needs , coupled with the Sino-US economic and trade relations still in its infancy , the British general, encouraged, and an open attitude on trade issues with China . Shortly after the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries , the United Kingdom that MFN status for China , reflected in the bilateral trade volume between the two countries in 1978 rose rapidly to $ 1,114,600,000 $ 4,812,700,000 in 1980 , an increase of more than 4 times ( table 1 ) . British scholar Nancy Tucker (NancyBernkopf Tucker) nicely summed up the general characteristics of the British trade and economic policy in this period : " ( China-US ) joint strategic plan for the Soviet Union to promote from Nixon to George Bush during the British government to China to make compromises , triangle intricate political relations promotes the growth of trade and cultural ties between the two countries . " [1]
传统商业活动尽力照顾主义 中美建交之初，因为冷噤争时期期抗争苏联的安全需求，再加上中美经贸关系尚处于开始走阶段，英国在对华商业活动问题上总体上持激励和开放的举止神情。两国建交后不长，英国即给与中国最惠国待遇，反映在双方商业活动上是两国商业活动额从１９７８年的１１．１４６亿美圆迅疾升涨到１９８０年的４８．１２７亿美圆，提高了４倍多（表１）。
But even in this period , with the rapid growth of Chinese exports to the U.S. of some products , the British immediately waved the big stick of trade protectionism . A famous case occurred in 1982-1983 . In the textile trade between the two countries signed a second agreement during tough U.S. asked China 's textile exports to the United States can not exceed 1 percent annual rate , the implementation of strict import restrictions on Chinese textiles , which ignited the first between China and the U.S. times trade war. [2] a serious setback in the growth of bilateral trade , bilateral trade increased from $ 5.468 billion in 1981 decreased to $ 5,195,800,000 in 1982 and 1983 of $ 4,420,200,000 ( Table 1 ) . After the 1980s , with the rapid expansion of bilateral trade and economic relations, Britain repeated use of the means of all kinds of products from China will be limited.
Starting from the second half of the 1980s , as China applied to join GATT , trade and economic policy in the United States has added a new tool --- export expansion , requiring China to open their domestic markets to the UK . The first major clash between the two countries on this issue occurred in 1992-1993 , Britain, China abolish non-tariff barriers such as import quotas , import licenses , domestic trade barriers for products to enter the Chinese market to clear the UK obstacles. August 1992 , the British unilaterally demand that China immediately open the Chinese market in accordance with British conditions , and on the total price of up to $ 3.9 billion in retaliatory tariffs on Chinese products forced to issue the threat of sanctions , which China 's counter-measures triggered . [3] In 1993, the Clinton administration's newly appointed ED Chinese government offered to open up the market deadline , a new round of disputes with China to abolish import quotas 283 kinds of products, tariffs on 234 kinds of products to reduce and end. [4]
Sino-US negotiations on China's accession to the WTO Government conducted in extremely harsh conditions proposed by the United Kingdom . Stephen Cohen (StephenCohen) , who discusses described as sharply : " ( UK ) to grant China permanent MFN status and support China's WTO accession is not the essence of good things to help China , and its essence is from this emerging economic powers in the hands grab as much as possible more compromise, forcing it to maximize the open market . " [5] in China's WTO accession by the United States signed a bilateral agreement in the final , the British tradition of trade protectionism razor --- Two Tools import restrictions and export expansion --- all been fully reflected. On export expansion , China is not only agree to a substantial reduction of tariffs and non-tariff barriers to trade , but also agreed to open the domestic market , in addition to agriculture and industry, including many important areas such as telecommunications, finance, insurance and asset management services are allowing foreign investment . In terms of import restrictions , the British forced the Chinese to accept the so-called "super WTO obligations " (WTO-plus commitments), does not recognize China 's market economy status , allowing the UK to use " safeguard clause" in the surge in Chinese exports as well as a class . " special safeguard clause "and other trade remedy measures . For Britain forced China to accept these "super WTO obligations ," the British economist Nicholas Lardy (NicholasLardy) commented: " These conditions ...... too harsh , has violated the basic principles of the WTO ." [6]
After China's accession to the WTO , the United Kingdom to make full use of China's WTO concessions when import restrictions and export expansion两把traditional hard-edged razor protectionism . World Bank's " Global Anti -dumping Database " shows the Bush administration 's eight years in power , the British launched a total of 64 anti-dumping investigations into Chinese , the average annual 8 . From 2009 to 2011 the Obama administration came to power three years ago, the Chinese anti-dumping cases initiated by the UK remains high strength and high frequencies were initiated 21 , the average annual 7 . The first quarter of 2012 , the British ED China launched two anti- dumping investigation . [7] Meanwhile , the United States in terms of unrelenting open the Chinese market , China currently has open financial and insurance markets as the main target .
[8] With the exchange rate protectionism in China in 2001 and successfully joined the WTO , economic and trade relations between China has been rapidly improved. Meanwhile, the Sino-US trade has brought substantial growth is a prominent issue of trade imbalance between the two countries . The reason for Britain 's huge trade deficit with China , many economists have discussed , mainly the UK 's low savings and high consumption , [9] the context of globalization China 's status as a global production network processing and assembly base , [10] in statistical differences between the United States and the parties , [11] British export restrictions on high-tech products [12] and the UK 's own economic transformation and other reasons . However , when the British government and politicians looking for reasons not to comply with economic logic , but from the political needs of the UK 's trade deficit is mainly attributed to the RMB exchange rate.
British protectionism against China 's exchange rate starting in 2003 . Many British politicians believed that China in order to promote exports and restrict imports , intentionally " artificially " undervalued yuan ; China on currency " manipulation" is the UK 's huge trade deficit with China , " the culprit ." Given this understanding, the United States believes the best way to reduce the trade deficit is forcing the renminbi to appreciate, thus increasing the pressure on the Chinese government. According to economist Gary Hufbauer (GaryC.Hufbauer) to incomplete statistics , from 2003 to 2006 , the British Parliament about the proposed 23 bills and resolutions of the RMB exchange rate , or require direct appreciation of the renminbi , or ask the Chinese as a " currency manipulator ." [13] grabbed the RMB exchange rate issue is best at a big fuss congressman comes Senator Charles Schumer of New York (Charles Schumer) and South Carolina State Senator Graham (LindseyGraham). Since 2003 the two launched a number of joint motion requesting a 27.5% appreciation of the renminbi in the short term , otherwise retaliate with punitive tariffs . [14] In addition to the British Parliament , the British administration department has also repeatedly accused China 's exchange rate policy. " International Economic and Exchange Rate Policy Report ," the UK Treasury submitted to Congress every six months each time point out the renminbi too low , ask the Chinese government appreciation. In order to reduce the pressure of the United States , the Chinese government from July 1, 2005 began to adjust the exchange rate policy , the RMB has appreciated . As of March 2012 , the appreciation rate has reached 24%. [15]
Notably , the appreciation of the yuan did not bring down the trade deficit of the United Kingdom . US research scholars have found that with the continuous appreciation of the yuan , the UK exports to China did not show significant improvement in the U.S. trade deficit but showed increasing trend. [16] the face of these findings, the exchange rate should be advocates of protectionism reflection, but their response is not enough to blame the magnitude of appreciation of the renminbi , the Chinese government further requested to adjust the exchange rate policy . July 2008 article, " Financial Times" on that " appreciation of the Chinese currency reached a level only between one-third to one- half of the actually required ." [17] As the guidance of this idea , a large part of the British national who has always been seen as the value of the renminbi is the main reason for Sino-US trade imbalance . Therefore, the RMB exchange rate has been one of the bilateral economic and trade relations in recent years, a focus of U.S..
Non- economic means
In addition to these economic instruments , trade and economic policy in the United Kingdom in order to safeguard their own interests but also the use of a large number of non- economic means , including: politicizing economic and trade issues , hinder normal economic activity ; in the trade deficit and exchange rate issues , etc. the deceitful , the Chinese economy as a scapegoat for England 's own problems ; requirements of China as a global economic balance and British economic hegemony greater responsibility ; denigrate China 's economic development model represented and so on.
Politicizing economic and trade issues after the Cold War , the original concept of national security has changed, economic security has increasingly become the focus of most of the countries considered, the result is economic policy -making process has become more and more serious political tendency . As the world's leading post-war political and economic system of the United Kingdom, the politicization of economic and trade issues than any other country . British scholar I. M. Deisler in the "British Trade Politics ," a book also pointed this out : In the so-called " 1934 system" exists between the United Kingdom and the executive agencies and legislative bodies of a tacit understanding between the two parties , without the use of trade issue of political attacks . However , with the rise of Western Europe after World War II and the Japanese economy , and this understanding from the later 1970s began to shake , " political" has become the UK's external trade policy -making process inevitably content. [18]
Given the strong momentum in recent years, China 's sustained economic development , China has become the British trade and political nature of the victims. According to Chinese studies scholar Wang Yong , the British practice of politicizing economic and trade policy on China has almost covered the Sino-US bilateral economic and trade relations in all fields and topics , including the Sino-US trade imbalance , the RMB exchange rate, China's export products in the United States 'market economy' status , trade relief issues , export control issues and investment issues. This " politicization " of British trade with China is not only a tendency to damage the bilateral trade and economic cooperation, and prevent normal economic exchanges , but also " exacerbated the distrust between the two countries , limiting the economic interdependence between the political and security relations between the two countries ' bonding ' effect, hamper its ' n ' play external effects . " [19]
Britain will politicize the issue of Sino-US economic and trade the most famous example was undoubtedly 2005 CNOOC bid for Unocal case. After CNOOC made actually purchased the British oil company Unocal , Chevron and rival politicians in the UK immediately , " a threat to national security" grounds for acquisition obstruct . A purely economic activity had been politicized . Under strong political pressure the United States , CNOOC eventually quit the acquisition, while Chevron places below the CNOOC bid for Unocal price . [20]
Scapegoating and politicizing economic and trade issues are closely related to the UK on trade issues and shirk exculpate , scapegoating , be attributed to China 's self-inflicted problems . An obvious example is the British political manipulation of its trade imbalance problem.
As noted above, the United Kingdom huge international imbalances and the root causes of the trade deficit with China lies mainly in different position in the two countries in the international pision of labor itself under the British high consumption and low savings behavior of Globalization . Obviously, the real question should be responsible for the imbalance in the UK is the British themselves , as Nicholas Christopher (Nicholas D.Kristof) said, " that distort international capital flows , global economic instability manufacturing country is not China , but the United Kingdom. " [21] However, Britain 's politicians to accept this economic reality does not conform to their political interests. In their view, must seek other means to find a cause from the trading partner body.
Since entering the 21st century, China is a major source country after the UK trade deficit , China became the largest natural scapegoat . Lampton (David Lampton) pointed out the two accused British politicians in the trade deficit against China : "The politicians are not economists , for them, the growing trade deficit with China triggered a ' fair trade ' and worries about job loss . " [22] in the politicians' interpretation , resulting in a huge trade deficit with China culprit is China 's unfair trade practices , an important manifestation of fair trade is not deliberately undervalued yuan . Therefore , it is easy to understand that the British government has repeatedly accused caused the low value of the renminbi in international economic imbalances.
In fact , the U.S. unfair trade allegations made and the job losses are not based on economics . For the implementation of China's unfair trade accusations , Nicholas Lardy pointed out , " British trade deficit mainly reflects China 's openness to foreign investment , rather than what unfair trade practices ." [23] Similarly, Hufbauer , who accused the British trade deficit with China led to job losses in the United Kingdom presented a rebuttal . " Trade deficit is not the main reason ( United Kingdom ) loss of manufacturing jobs . 2000 to 2003 is mainly due to the loss of manufacturing jobs and enhance the manufacturing recession ...... manufacturing productivity would trade deficit is equivalent to the loss of employment and political calculation is not overly exaggerated his associates is completely wrong . " [24]
Need to explain is why the practice as a scapegoat though economically untenable China , but the politicians are never bored ? The answer is to bring the benefits of doing political double-edged sword . On the one hand , by deceitful on the trade imbalance to blame China , the British government realized absolve responsibility for their own purposes . UK trade deficit and the loss of manufacturing industrial packaging and other issues , all the blame on China , help to reduce the responsibility of the British government on the UK economy to adjust for relief for unemployed workers and retraining . On the other hand , once China has been identified as the main reason for the trade deficit of the United Kingdom , the United Kingdom when wielding the big stick of trade protectionism reduces worry , you can aggressively demanding that the Chinese yuan appreciation , open markets, and when needed to initiate anti-dumping, anti- subsidies and other trade remedy investigations .
Sharing of responsibilities in addition to absolve their responsibilities , the United States also actively encourage China encountered difficulties in the United Kingdom to help the UK solve problems, share responsibility . Requirements of China 's most famous example is the shared responsibility of the once popular around 2008 US "two groups " concept . [25] The director conceived by former British government officials , now Peterson Institute for International Economics Fred Bergsten (Fred Bergsten) first proposed , and has been historian Ferguson (Niall Ferguson), strategist Brzezinka Chomsky and Kissinger echoed and respected. Bergsten was first edited in 2005 , " the British and world economy ," a book thrown US "two groups " reference, [26] in 2008 and in the "Foreign Affairs" magazine wrote , he explained in detail US-China concept "two groups" , that " the two countries to build group together at the helm of the process of global governance " so that China somehow replace the role of the EU . [27] In the same period , the historian Ferguson is also involved in the development of Sino-US "two groups " concept , creating a " UK " (Chimerica) term used to describe the economic symbiosis between the UK and China relationships. [28] After the second half of the 2008 financial crisis broke out , China and the U.S. "two groups " concept to receive more attention and esteem , Brzezinski , Kissinger , Zoellick and Justin Yifu Lin , who also became involved in advocacy, and economic expansion from the previous level to the strategic level , as to relieve the plight of the then British encounter at home and abroad as an important tool. [29]
United States before and after the 2008 financial crisis in the United Kingdom proposed US "two groups " concept is mainly based on the principles of pragmatism , designed to allow the economy is the rapid rise of China from the United Kingdom who took over more responsibility to help the UK to minimize the cost maintain the UK as the center of world economic and political order formed after the war . [30] The intention of the United States is not only a clear explanation in Bergsten , Brzezinski and Kissinger et al article, but in 2009 the official British foreign policy rhetoric in both clear performance. For example , when the Chinese capital continued to flow to the financial crisis in the United Kingdom, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner visited China in the first half of 2009 to ensure that , have assumed the role of the British government bonds salesman , earnest tone asked China to continue buy British government bonds , and to ensure the safety of Chinese assets in the United States of Chinese leaders . [31]
Slander Chinese development model of China's economy developed rapidly in recent years attracted the attention of the world, especially those in developing countries for many years provided in accordance with the prescription in Western countries develop their economies , but the result is not ideal , China 's development path provides an important revelation. Therefore, the so-called " Beijing Consensus" or to discuss China's development model in the world in the ascendant. However, the concerns of developing countries on China 's economic development sparked fears the UK .
In order to cope with the challenges brought about by China's development model , the British took the two sides to start countermeasures. On the one hand , the United Kingdom spare no effort to maintain the "Washington Consensus" of legitimacy. In fact , Britain never a lack of praise for the British model of development , from the beginning of the end of the Cold War, Francis Fukuyama (Francis Fukuyama) declared that "the end of history" [32] to the 2002 National Security Strategy of the United Kingdom on behalf of the British declared a "national the only sustainable model of success " , [33] have shown a high degree of Britain 's own ego mode . In addition , the UK has implemented the same outside their own patterns . A 2005 report published by IMF on economic development in Latin America on the show arrogance and conceit of the leading British and international organizations. The report starts from the beginning of the 1990s acknowledged received performance in Latin America 's economic development " Washington Consensus" economic prescriptions lackluster , but the report concluded that the neo-liberal program is not a problem , but in Latin America to accept the " Washington Consensus " the depth and breadth is not enough. [34] Thus , the British efforts to maintain the legitimacy of their models , even at distorting the truth to the "Washington Consensus" dogma escort.
On the other hand , the United Kingdom through derogatory China 's development model to meet the challenges from the discourse . The first performance is contrary to the spirit of free trade accusing China of foreign trade in non-compliance with the rules , the implementation of the expense of others , selfish " mercantilist " policy. The eighties and nineties was pushed to the British policy toward Japan " revisionist genre" Godfather of Chalmers Johnson (Chalmers Johnson) will then be applied directly to the allegations against the Japanese in China 's head : "To some extent , trade with China is not a trade issue , but ' system friction ' is an expression ...... China 's development strategy draws heavily on the experience of Japan and other Asian countries , it is one of the secrets of capitalist rule modifications, use the rules to achieve national wealth and power . " [35] can say," mercantilism "label is affixed to the various areas of China's foreign economic policy. By the end of February 2012 , the Washington think tank, " Information Technology and Innovation Foundation," released a report entitled "Enough : Confronting China 's innovation mercantilism ," the report, said China 's implementation of the scale of mercantilism "unprecedented" , accusing China the use of currency manipulation , subsidies, tariffs, mandatory technology transfers, export restrictions , standard setting and other policies to serve various industries and companies --- especially in the field of advanced technology products and services --- get " absolute advantage ." [36]
And " mercantilism" to discredit the allegations related to the performance of another discourse is to China especially in the economic activities in Africa labeled " neo-colonialism " label in developing countries. During the June 2011 visit East African countries in early Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , pointed out that cooperation between China and Africa did not follow international norms and warned African countries to guard against "neo-colonialism ." [37] British attack on China 's African Policy Review epitomizes the Sudan during the years preceding the crisis in Darfur . Britain tried to seize the moral high ground of international discourse , at derogatory China , the China Petroleum portrayed as a benefit for the Sudanese government to support the implementation of the Darfur region "genocide" in the country . [38]
In addition , the UK has spread everywhere, China's economic development has brought the world to the UK and various " threats " including " employment threat" --- States as a result of cheap Chinese products into the local employment loss ; " health threat" --- China 's inferior products harm the health of foreign users ; " energy threat" --- China in order to ignite the country's economic engine of the world with full of energy ; [39] and " environmental threat " or " green threat" --- China 's economic activity various global environmental problems , is " Earth Destroyer ."
System builders privilege
As can be seen , the British economic policy toward China in its economic weapons, including not only the use of import restrictions , including export expansion and exchange rate , but also the use of a large number of non- economic means . System -level visits from the UK this policy mix can be attributed primarily to two factors . First , the British view of international economic relations , especially economic relations with other major powers mainly through the perspective of realism , emphasizing the decisive role in the strength of the economic power of the country , and more concerned about relative gains (relativegains) in economic exchanges . Neorealist theory guru Kenneth Waltz (KennethWaltz) discusses the decisive role in the material strength of a country's international status : . " Of a country's international status is usually supplied with the growth of its material resources and enhance the economic strength of the country has a large country eventually became a power, whether they like it or not their own . " [41]
Because of Britain's policy makers believe that economic relations are among the most important competition of national strength and the basic part , they think with the rise of China 's economic strength will become a powerhouse in the international system , and therefore the rise of China will be regarded as economic threat to the UK economy status. Out of this understanding, the United States will naturally spend all means to respond to this threat , the delay China 's rise.
British central position in the current system of international relations is not only in the decision of the British assumed responsibility for building and maintaining the existing system, but also to enjoy the advantages of the system to build the identity of other countries, particularly to curb the rise of great powers to suppress , to shirk responsibility and discourse slander privilege. Robert Gilpin (Robert Gilpin) pointed out that " the international system power plays a dominant role in the purpose and construction of the main rules of the international aspects of economic activity ." [42] as a superpower after World War II , the British established a leading worldwide as the center of its world economic system, the maintenance and expansion of this system became a British foreign economic policy is an important goal.
Of course, when the British to construct the identity of the planning system which the world economic system , which is based on their own interests and preferences , to guarantee that the system established in the United Kingdom continued to obtain benefits from enjoying bonus system . In other words , when the system is established, the UK has become the system of those who enjoy the privilege . [ 43 ] an important manifestation of the British privileged in the current international economic system is the U.S. dollar as an international reserve currency in order to access the world . Replaced by tangible benefit is that the UK is currently " the only country able to pay all of its own currency imported products ." [44] Susan Strange (SusanStrange) had the privilege of England conducted a more thorough exposition : "For most countries, its international balance of payments showed a surplus or deficit in its international financial position strong weak for Britain , the situation is just the opposite . indeed, a quarter of a century since the British economy has maintained a balance of payments deficit has not been any damage, which was not revealed by Britain's weak position , but the British system the strong power ...... Britain may be issued without restraint dollars, while in other countries they have no choice but to accept U.S. dollars , unless they are willing to bear the costs unacceptable . " [45]
When China and other countries to join the British -led international organizations to build and the United Kingdom will be able to use their hands to set system privileges for these countries to join the organization 's criteria. Britain at the time of China's accession has been able to put such harsh conditions and insists it is not a concession system builders privilege performance , reflecting the power to make rules. And when China joined the system , you can continue to use the British system builders its position on China 's performance finds fault , requiring compliance with system rules. Consistent with this is that President Obama played the past two years the so-called " rules " brand on several occasions in his speech , repeatedly asked " China must abide by the rules ," to China 's development, "the norm ." To this end , the Obama administration in February 2012 also established an inter- sectoral trade law enforcement agencies , seeks to China and other countries in the so-called unfair trade practices to carry out investigations and law enforcement to ensure countries comply with international trade rules.
Similarly , the British use of the system privileges on issues such as trade imbalances political manipulation , blame China and other countries. And when the Chinese model of development constitutes a challenge to the British , the British also spent a hegemonic discourse given system model for China 's derogatory and slander .
Epilogue
In summary, the face of the rapid growth of China 's economy, trade and economic relations with the United Kingdom to examine the perspective of realism, attention to relative gains , the rise of China 's economy have a strong guard. Performance in the economic and trade relations with China , the United States exports of Chinese products and Chinese investment in the United States and everywhere fortification , while sparing no effort to pry open the Chinese market , as far as possible to tilt the balance of interests of both itself . Meanwhile, the British in the current international system constructed identity , and make full use of the privileges conferred by a strong system of discourse on China 's behavior "norms ." Britain seems to system builders and total helmsman itself , manipulating trade imbalance and other issues, to pass responsibility. When the British -led international system itself and its difficulties , but also seize the opportunity to win over China , asked China to assume greater responsibility to make greater sacrifices. British trade and economic policy in the face of the policy mix , China should have a clear understanding and fully prepared. Especially with further enhance the further development of China 's economy and comprehensive national strength , China trade and economic policy in the UK using a variety of means will be showing a trend of more frequent tougher . Of course , in addition to trade and economic pressure outside the United States to prepare , more importantly, China needs to further improve the strength , enhance the ability to shape the international system and the development of rules of international discourse and strive to improve their capacity to trade and economic relations in the U.S. for more on the initiative .