Same Man, Different Story
Compare and contrast these two reports, one from the Financial Times, the other from the China Daily:
Financial Times:
Franklin Lavin, undersecretary for international trade at the US Department of Commerce, highlighted the “good news” of rapidly expanding US exports to China but struck a cautionary note on Beijing's approach to investment and standards.
“There is also ... potential for policy drift, which we would not view as helpful, a policy drift towards the direction of economic nationalism and interventionism,” Mr Lavin told a briefing.
China Daily:
Referring to counterfeiting in China, Lavin told reporters in the motor shop on Saturday that the Chinese Government is taking many effective measures on intellectual property rights (IPR) this year and "we are working closely" to resolve the issue.
Almost as if there were two different visits. Even better, take a look at an earlier story from China Daily:
Lavin will be discussing limits to U.S. businesses and services in China, among the barriers he said that help create the damaging perception in America that China doesn't play fair...
"If the Chinese market is perceived as unfair, if it's perceived as closed and we have a substantial trade deficit, these two factors together can feed an anti-Chinese sentiment in the United States, which I feel is unhealthy for both countries," Lavin said.
I'm saying nothing new about media manipulation in China here, and it may well be that edgier Chinese-language publications such as Cai Jing have a more objective view that the government-issue toilet paper.
It's just that the nationalistic tone of the China Daily highlights the precise concerns of the Financial Times that China is indeed not playing fair. And with no WTO legitimacy to enforce true liberalisation, what can we expect?
Financial Times story below.
US official takes aim at China standards
By Mure Dickie in Beijing
China risks drifting towards economic nationalism and interventionism amid calls for restrictions on foreign investment and the use of technology standards to promote local innovation, a senior US trade official said on Monday.
Franklin Lavin, undersecretary for international trade at the US Department of Commerce, highlighted the “good news” of rapidly expanding US exports to China but struck a cautionary note on Beijing's approach to investment and standards.
“There is also ... potential for policy drift, which we would not view as helpful, a policy drift towards the direction of economic nationalism and interventionism,” Mr Lavin told a briefing.
His remarks reflected concern that China's sustained economic growth along with the country's looming completion of market-opening measures required under the terms of its 2001 accession to the World Trade Organisation could lessen Beijing's appetite for reform.
“Thought should be given to how we should keep the reform process energised,” the undersecretary said.
Chinese liberal economists have also expressed concern in recent months about the threat to market-opening reforms posed by a nationalist and conservative backlash against the growing economic clout of foreign and private investors and businesses in China.
Some international trade partners are also worried about Beijing's efforts to promote domestic innovation by imposing technology standards designed to give local companies an edge over international rivals.
Mr Lavin cited in particular China's plans for the introduction of “third-generation” mobile telephone services as an area of concern.
China’s 3G plans remain unclear but regulators are widely believed to want to force at least one of the big four state-controlled operators to adopt the government-backed TD-SCDMA standard instead of rival WCDMA and CDMA2000 technologies favoured by Europe and the US.
Mr Lavin said operators and customers should be left to choose the technology they preferred and that China could lose its chance of leadership if it chose a standard used by no other country.
“State intervention is likely to be perceived as unfair by those who lose out and can frequently lead one away from the best decision when it comes to setting a technology standard,” he said.
“If there is state intervention and a picking of winners and losers, then naturally the people who aren't picked are going to feel a grievance.”
Mr Lavin struck a relatively upbeat note on intellectual property rights in China - a longstanding source of Sino-US friction, saying Beijing had made progress in recent years.
However, he noted that Washington might move to file a complaint against Beijing at the WTO over IPR issues even without the overt support of US companies.
US officials say a WTO suit could be a useful way to push for stronger IPR protection in China, but many companies appear reluctant to offer public backing for fear of offending Beijing.
