Everything You Need to Know About the Trade War
In a bid to shed some low-cal on the increasingly confusing stoush between Australia and China, nosotros asked you to put your burning questions to iii of the ABC's Prc experts — international analyst Stan Grant, foreign affairs reporter Stephen Dziedzic and bilingual reporter Blindside Xiao.
"Australians are clearly concerned about the state of relations with China," says Grant. "So many of you are looking long term and asking how we engage with China which clearly presents a disharmonism between our interests and our values."
Here's some of your superlative questions (and y'all can read the total Q&A hither).
Why aren't we enforcing our own trade restrictions?
Why is the trade spat a i way street? Reciprocal tariffs on Chinese imports would help our local manufacturers — Anonymous
Foreign affairs reporterStephen Dziedzic has been following the relationship between Canberra and Beijing closely. Here'southward what he had to say:
I asked someone in the Government the very same question a few days ago. They said "we don't want to get in the sandpit with China and showtime flinging stuff virtually".
In other words: nosotros don't desire to play muddied. If we were to hitting Chinese imports with tariffs for no valid reason then our moral potency would be shredded. Our appeals to Prc to play by the rules would ring very hollow and any global support nosotros've gathered would fade away.
Plus information technology would likely just depict further economic punishment from the Chinese Government. And this is probably a good time to repeat an obvious point: Mainland china's chapters to inflict economic pain on us is *much* greater than our capacity to inflict economical pain on Communist china.
Can we just stop trading iron ore?
Can the Chinese economy do without Australia? Without merchandise with China, Commonwealth of australia would exist dealt a pretty hefty accident--but is the contrary as bad for China? It merely seems like they're playing a risky game, particularly during a global pandemic. — Kas
Here'due southStephen Dziedzic:
There is really just i Australian consign which Mainland china really needs, and that's iron ore.* More than 60 per cent of China's iron ore imports come from Australia and its other major supplier — Brazil — is in a world of trouble because of COVID-19 in its mines and a tailing dam plummet. And then if we suddenly stopped sending them iron ore, many of their larger steel mills would probably cease operating. That would deliver a substantial blow to China's economy.
But at that place's no style Commonwealth of australia would do that because we'd lose a marketplace worth tens of billions of dollars. That would be a hammer blow to our economic system, which is only just starting to sally from the coronavirus crisis.
Earlier this year the Nationals leader Michael McCormack declared "we need China as much equally Communist china needs us" but unfortunately that's probably not true. The brutal reality is nosotros simply do demand China, more than they need us. This doesn't mean we should just fold to Beijing'due south demands of grade. But they agree more cards than we do.
*Australian coal is too quite of import and in that location are another one or two which are quite crucial to supply chains only that's a more complicated story.
Are both sides just trying to save face?
Has the concept of "saving face" been affecting Chinese-Australian diplomatic relationships and if so, how? — Z
Here's international analystStan Grant:
Saving face is a disquisitional issue. The West does not capeesh the sensitivities of China. Western society has been built on ideas of progress and to a big degree leaving history behind.
Western philosophers talk nigh a linear movement of history and in 1989 American political scientist Francis Fukuyama wrote an influential essay that saw the the autumn of the Berlin Wall as "the end of history", that Western liberal republic had triumphed over Soviet communism.
The Chinese were lectured that they were on the incorrect side of history.
We get into tricky h2o when we imagine that Western values are universal, China rejects that. Information technology believes its model of authoritarian commercialism is superior.
Red china also has long memories of the humiliation and domination past foreign powers. It portrays criticism by countries like Australia of Communist china'due south human rights tape, for instance, as another example of Western humiliation.
How exercise we legitimately criticise China or challenge China on bug of man rights and values without antagonising? That is the disquisitional question.
Why have Cathay and the CCP become interchangeable?
Why exercise Western democracies, and their institutions, continue to refer to Prc and the CCP equally 1 and the aforementioned? Red china'south people and civilisation, including the Chinese diaspora, are not the CCP, yet nosotros keep to equate China to the CCP. Why don't we driblet the use of "China" and put the party first? China is not the CCP, and the CCP is not China!
Here's bilingual reporter Bang Xiao:
I could totally understand this! Information technology has been ane of my biggest concerns around the rising of China on the globe stage. Mixing China, Chinese Communist Party, and Chinese people is unwise, but a common practice in the West. It is common sense that delicious Chinese food isn't part of Beijing'south regime. When information technology comes to Chinese citizens and people of Chinese heritage, the distinctions are oft ignored. Fortunately, we have seen a growing number of our politicians trying to tell differences betwixt these concepts.
Nonetheless, the confusion comes from the CCP's narrative too. The political party has been making a conceptual shift between these terms in its nationalism propaganda. By doing this, some Chinese people may believe criticisms about the party are besides targeting Chinese citizens and diaspora.
1 of the great examples is that People's republic of china's deputy caput of mission, Wang Xining, describes Canberra's focus on determining the origins of the coronavirus "hurts the feelings of the Chinese people". There is no doubt that some Chinese citizens experience hostility, but the diversity of Chinese people means Canberra's telephone call can gain some support as well. We just didn't detect it beingness represented.
Will young Australians be left to deal with the fallout?
Will young Australian's have to pay in the time to come the economic costs of a bad relationship with Prc? — Cameron
Hither'sStan Grant:
I fear for the world our young people are going to alive in. Every bit Scott Morrison pointed out recently we live in a world that is poorer, more disorderly and more than dangerous. I retrieve our age is equivalent to the lead-up to World War I. Not that we will echo it, but similar forces are at play.
There is a rising ability in China and a relatively waning power the US just as and then at that place was a rising Germany and waning U.k.. The world is deeply interconnected as it was then. Federal republic of germany and United kingdom were each other'due south biggest trade partners.
The weights on the calibration tipped the balance to war then and the weights are piling upwards again today: trade disputes, diplomatic freeze, territorial disputes, rapid militarisation.
Between 1915 and 1945 the world saw war, a flu pandemic, economic plummet, rise of fascism, communism, revolution and war once again.
Today nosotros accept terrorism, state of war in many parts of the world, a global financial crisis in 2008, a virus pandemic, a resurgence of authoritarianism and a weakening of democracy.
China sits at the hinge point of this history. How the globe responds will determine the fate of our children.
How is the rest of the world responding?
How are other countries reacting to the electric current tensions betwixt Australia and China? Are at that place sides being taken at international levels, particularly inside the Pacific nations?
Here'sStephen Dziedzic:
Australia has received public support mainly from Western nations so far. Unsurprisingly, the United States has been the virtually vocal critic of China's actions — although the public response from the incoming Biden assistants was less forceful than some in Canberra expected.
Several other countries, including New Zealand, French republic, Germany and Britain, take too criticised China's behaviour — specially the inflammatory tweet posted past the Chinese foreign affairs Zhao Lijian which kickstarted the most contempo Australia-China dispute.
When Japan's new Prime Minister met Scott Morrison in Tokyo final month the two nations issued a joint statement which tin can be read as a pretty clear condemnation of China'south trade punishments, maxim "trade should never be used as a tool to apply political pressure".
But most other countries (including Pacific Island nations) take remained silent.
Infinite to play or pause, Grand to mute, left and right arrows to seek, upwards and down arrows for volume.
Does Australia need to tone downward its response?
I believe Australia has made some unnecessary comments about Cathay which accept insulted a very sensitive big ability. There are issues which we should be gratis to determine but how we exercise that is important and nosotros have non e'er handled that well. Do you agree and is information technology inevitable that Commonwealth of australia will ultimately have to retract some of its diplomatic gaffs. — Martyn Brown
Here'due southStephen Dziedzic:
This is a common criticism. Critics argue that some of the linguistic communication used by Coalition politicians (for example Malcolm Turnbull'due south quoting of Mao to say "the Australian people have stood up!") and the violent attacks on the CCP from some government backbenchers have made a bad state of affairs worse.
The same critics say the Prime Minister's conclusion to publicly denounce the inflammatory tweet from Zhao Lijian was likewise a misstep.
The Coalition tends to scoff at these arguments. They see this contest equally ideological and structural. And they think it's a fantasy to argue that a few nice words from Canberra would change anything.
Will the Government actually retract any of its public statements on China? It'due south difficult to predict, but I recollect it's unlikely. The public mood towards Beijing is quite hostile, so there'south no political imperative to practise so.
The Government may deliberately soften its linguistic communication on China from this indicate on in an attempt to dial downwards the temperature (we've already seen some show of this) simply of course that's not the same matter as a retraction.
What's the bargain with the CCP?
Can you tell us more than about the CCP? What factions exist are there left, right and centre? How does information technology function? —David McCormack
Here'sBlindside Xiao:
The ideology of the CCP is very different from the conventional Western left-correct spectrum. At that place is no doubt that the CCP has internal revival systems, simply the lack of transparency of the party means we cannot give a clear answer with solid show.
Generally speaking, the fence is between the state control of both economic and personal lives on one end, and private control of personal life and regime non-intervention at the other. But this is only i of measures that analysts may utilize to look at the party.
The CCP has over 92 million members, who not only walk the halls of power in Beijing, but also supervise China's institutions and major companies. Political party and Regime staff only covered 8 per cent of the CCP'due south membership, while the rest are made up by students, professionals, farmers and industrial workers.
Fortunately nosotros have got some electric current and former CCP members who explained the party with us this year.
Where does the US fit into all of this?
You lot cannot have a sensible discussion about China without taking into account the American empire. — Bev Coates
Hither'sBang Xiao:
Information technology's a great question Bev! Both Beijing and Washington consider each other as a political threat. In the CCP's propaganda, the US has been described as a bully on Communist china's internal stability, and a blackhand behind the conflict in Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Taiwan.
But bringing the US to the give-and-take can be a double-edged sword. It gives contexts for the debate betwixt two global superpowers in our times, but helps Beijing'south narrative to legitimise its suppressive handling of its own people and raise nationalism. It is i of the most difficult parts of the discussion almost China.
Stan Grant also weighed in:
America has been the dominant ability since World War Ii albeit locked in a Cold War with the Soviet Marriage. It wrote the rules of a global order that assisted China'southward rise. It was an American president Richard Nixon who travelled to Beijing in 1972 to meet chairman Mao Zedong and assist a rapprochement that in fourth dimension brought Mainland china back into the globe.
For much of the past 50 years at that place has been an attitude of cooperation. That era is over.
The rivalry betwixt the United states and China will ascertain this century and handled poorly could lead to greater disharmonize. America is no longer the sole global ability. But we don't yet live in a post-American world either — it is nevertheless the biggest economic system and well-nigh powerful military simply information technology has been drained by decades of crisis and conflict.
It is a deeply divided club that no longer carries the same global prestige. We are all readjusting to this new global reality.
What's the end game?
What does China want? What is their preferred effect from this spat? — Tom Ho
Here'sStan Grant:
China wants respect. For much of the last three,000 years Cathay was the great power of the world and the largest economy. The past 200 years are an aberration. The fall of the Qing empire was the commencement of what People's republic of china sees as the corking humiliation by foreign powers.
At present it wants to exist seen as an indispensable nation.
Mainland china has a point: the so-called global club was created by the Westward and the major global institutions are dominated by the West. For case but a European can head the International Monetary Fund and only an American can exist president of the World Bank.
China is setting up rival institutions like the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Belt and Road initiative to counter what information technology sees equally a Western institutional bias.
The problem is Prc does not share liberal values and that creates a crisis in the gild.
Does China believe its own propaganda?
Why practise Chinese officials tell then many lies? Do they really believe their own propaganda? —Gary
Hither'sBlindside Xiao:
These are my favourite questions so far! Just to exist fair, lies and politics can be a natural fit in many countries. Just the disciplinarian political system and the massive censorship and self-censorship in media and academia made the toll of a lie from Chinese officials far less than others in a democratic land.
Do they believe their ain propaganda? Yes or no. There are sure nuances in the system where some members don't concur with Xi Jinping's propaganda.
However, speaking out the doubts may result in harsh punishment on dissidents and their families. That might be why we oasis't seen many officials make the choice.
How do Chinese immigrants feel?
I'k a new immigrant from China. It's sad to run into the state of affairs between China and Australia now. Many of my friends in China just concern about me whether some discrimination could happen to me. I personally don't worry nigh information technology as I know Commonwealth of australia is an immigrating country with integrated international cultures. My question is if Commonwealth of australia can learn from Japan, Korea or United kingdom and Germany to plant mayhap not so good relationship but at least harmonious with its neighbour? Pray for both countries.
Here'southwardBlindside Xiao:
Hey in that location, I for one repeat your concerns nigh the discrimination against Chinese diaspora in Australia. I believe the deterioration of the Commonwealth of australia-China relations has go a worrying consequence for many migrants from mainland Mainland china. I ever remind myself of the fact that information technology takes two to tango, which means you tin't solve the problem past but blaming ane side or the other.
It is a hard year for many Chinese-Australians who felt caught upwardly in the crossfire. The customs that used to exist very quiet has shown unprecedented interest in conversations against racism this twelvemonth, not only almost the diplomatic relations, but also private cases related to COVID-19.
Please always remember to protect yourself and study information technology to the police if y'all were subject to any racist incident.
Posted , updated
Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-10/china-australia-trade-war-your-questions-answered/12971434
0 Response to "Everything You Need to Know About the Trade War"
Post a Comment