Washington Post Global posted a piece today by John Pomfret that seems to mirror recent China pandering.  Rather than berate China for its ongoing protectionism (which distorts the free market), or address the brutality used against its own people, he’s chosen to lecture Hillary Clinton for criticizing Beijing.  Unfortunately, his editorial takes a rather convoluted approach to the facts.

THEREFORE: ManufactureThis wishes to set the record straight and offers the following rebuttal to Pomfret’s missive:

John Pomfret seems to undercut his own arguments when he freely acknowledges the “tainted imports” that come from “sleazy” Chinese companies and the Chinese government.  He also recognizes a “massive trade imbalance” with China.  And yet, inexplicably, he finds this “close relationship with China” to still be “crucial to American interests,” no matter the unfavorable terms.

Pomfret seems willing to ignore what even children understand– namely, that rules matter.  Beijing is cheating on not only currency issues, but also, dumping, subsidies, intellectual property theft, labor rights, and environmental standards.  While these may collectively produce the “low-cost imports” that he celebrates, it’s worth considering the serious net losses that come from closing U.S. factories and sending jobs overseas.

Pomfret praises the Chinese for revaluing their currency, the Yuan, by roughly 18% over the past three years.  In doing so he’s still implicitly recognizing China’s ongoing, illegal currency manipulation.  And at a time when the dollar is falling worldwide, Beijing has only marginally altered is position, leaving the Yuan still grossly undervalued by approximatey 40%.

Currency manipulation is considered one of the more serious transgressions of world trade law, and it’s hard to see why Pomfret makes apologies for Beijing’s regime.  A further irony, though, is that, while Pomfret points to a 300% increase in U.S. exports to China since 2000, he neglects to mention that the U.S. trade deficit with China has also jumped 300% in the same period.  His selective use of the facts overlooks the cost of this increasing deficit– more than 1 million manufacturing jobs lost in “Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, North Carolina, and Michigan,” the states that he specifically points to as benefiting from “rapidly growing exports to China.”

Facts are stubborn things, and an objective appraisal shows the United States being taken advantage of by a repressive regime with only its own stark interests at heart.  This should be unacceptable no matter the criteria, be it sound business practice or simple humanitarianism.

##

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 7th, 2008 at 8:46 am and is filed under Holding China Accountable, Enforcing Trade Laws. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.