古風短評：中國已成拉動全球貿易增長的火車頭

【古風按】隨著中國國力的進一步增強，中國在進口的能力上也開始大幅超越美歐日的總合，這使得西方列強企圖把中國排除在外的任何新的國際貿易保護主義的努力全都成為了無用功：一則、美國苦心經營的TPP（跨太平洋夥伴關係協議）幾乎肯定要泡湯了，二來、TTIP（跨大西洋貿易與投資夥伴協議）也順便跟著懸了。國際政治的現實的確是很殘酷的喲，一個失去了購買力的美國一旦不能給其貿易夥伴們繼續提供大的消費市場，就會很快被下麵的小弟兄們所唾棄，美國黑老大離退位的日子也就不遠了。

---

http://opinion.m4.cn/2014-04/1228846.shtml

中國已成拉動全球貿易增長的火車頭
羅思義  四月網  2014-04-18

中國已超越美國成為世界最大商品貿易國。事實上，自國際金融危機爆發以來，中國貿易總額增速就一直高於美國、歐盟和日本貿易總額增速之和。

即使歐美日去年從“大衰退”的低穀中有所恢複，中國貿易總額增速也高於其他經濟中心。特別是，中國的進口總額增速仍然高於美國、歐盟和日本進口總額增速的總和——這對於其他經濟體而言具有重要意義。

中國成為拉動全球貿易增長的最大火車頭這一變化，對其他國家的貿易戰略和正在進行的諸如《區域全麵經濟夥伴關係協定》（RCEP）和《跨太平洋夥伴關係協議》（TPP）等貿易談判，將帶來重大影響。

下圖所示的是自國際金融危機爆發以來發生的全球貿易規模變化情況，反映了中國、美國、歐盟和日本自金融危機爆發之前一年即2007年至2013年年底間的貿易總額增長變化。

自2007-2013年間，中國商品貿易總額增長1.986萬億美元，其中出口總額增長9920億美元，進口總額增長9940億美元。相比之下，同期美國商品貿易總額增長7410億美元，歐盟為1.024萬億美元，日本則為2140億美元。

因而，中國貿易總額增速不僅比其他主要經濟中心快近兩倍，而且比美國、歐盟和日本貿易總額之和的1.979萬億美元還要高。

僅將中國與美國作雙邊比較，對正在進行的貿易談判非常重要。中國2007年商品貿易總額為2.2萬億美元，僅相當於美國商品貿易總額的69%；到2013年，中國商品貿易總額則高出美國商品貿易總額7%：中國為4.2萬億美元，美國為3.9萬億美元。在這六年間，中國貿易總額增長近2.0萬億美元，相比之下，美國貿易總額則僅增長0.7萬億美元——中國貿易總額增速是美國的近三倍。

進口貿易的變化則更大。中國2013年商品進口總額較2007年水平增長9930億美元，同期美國進口總額增長3110億美元，歐盟為3290億美元，日本則為2120億美元。中國商品進口總額增速是美國的3倍多，高於美國、歐盟和日本商品進口總額之和。因而，對其他國家來說，中國是他們增長最快的出口市場。

這一進口形勢自大衰退以來沒有發生變化。如下圖所示，經合組織數據表明，中國去年進口總額增長1320億美元，相比之下，歐盟進口總額增長300億美元，美國和日本的進口總額則分別下降80億美元和530億美元。中國去年進口總額增速是歐盟的4倍，與此同時美國和日本的進口市場則下滑了。

這種趨勢顯然會對全球貿易和正在進行的貿易談判產生深遠影響。

首先，美國最近又拿人民幣匯率問題說事顯然是毫無道理的。4月8日，《金融時報》在其發表的題為“美國就人民幣貶值對中國發出警告”的文章中，報道了美國財政部一位高級官員的內部吹風。據報道，人民幣已較今年早前峰值水平貶值2.5%——這輪相對小的調整，很明顯旨在防範繼續押注人民幣單邊升值的投機分子，而且人民幣已較2005年水平升值33.5%。盡管如此，這名未具姓名的美國官員仍聲稱，如果人民幣沒有“調整”的跡象會引發“嚴重關切”。所謂“調整”很明顯是要人民幣升值的代名詞。但貿易數據顯示，中國是其他國家最具活力的出口市場，美國去年則幾乎無所貢獻。

中國已是其他國家擴張最快的出口市場，與此同時，美國進口市場還未恢複至危機前水平，這顯然會影響中國和印度、日本、韓國、澳大利亞及東盟正推進的亞洲《區域全麵經濟夥伴關係協定》與美國正推進的將中國排除在外的《跨太平洋夥伴關係協議》的進度。

遺憾的是，美國目前的政策已違背了其此前支持全球貿易多邊開放的承諾。相反，正如《金融時報》專欄作者菲利普·斯蒂芬斯指出的：“中國已成為開放全球經濟的最大贏家……美國新提出的每項協議則是想把中國撇在一邊。排除世界第二大經濟體絕不僅僅是一個巧合。”

美國承認，重啟類似於1929年後那樣的國家規模貿易保護主義，將會引發災難性後果，包括傷及其自身，但在開放、竟爭的世界經濟環境下，正在輸給中國。因而，美國正試圖創建能限製中國的、由美國主導的大貿易集團，而非真正的全球多邊經濟體製。

但這將會麵臨許多困難。首先，美國不敢冒致全球貿易體係解體的巨大風險——因而，貿易保護主義必須要控製在有限的範圍內；其次，美國並不是具有活力的進口市場。

任何國家想進入由美國主導的貿易集團，就會不利自身與中國的關係，因而等於是進入了一個發展相對停滯不前的全球貿易區域。盡管美國會政治施壓一些國家加入，但參與國家的數量一定會是有限的。畢竟有多少國家會願意與一個相對停滯不前的貿易夥伴如美國合作，而冒與更具活力的中國關係不利的代價呢？

國際貿易現狀是與國內政治考慮密切相關的。因為製成品的全球關稅已普遍較低，美國的目的是在其經濟優勢特別強，但全球關稅和其他障礙仍相當高的領域進行談判以獲益。其最重要的兩個行業就是農業和服務業。然而，這兩個行業在許多國家都是特別敏感的領域。例如，日本的農村地區是自民黨的關鍵票倉，這也是日本農業貿易政策貿易保護主義色彩依舊很濃的關鍵原因。因此，日本與澳大利亞新簽訂的貿易協定在廢除農業貿易壁壘方麵並沒有達到美國所希冀的程度。

美國自身也存在顯著的阻力，尤其是民主黨內，反對在製造業和發展中經濟體保持競爭優勢的其他行業作出貿易讓步。因而，美國很難提出有價值的建議讓其他國家值得向美國進一步開放其經濟，尤其是農業和服務業，並承受由此帶來的國內政治問題。

鑒於實際的世界貿易動態，中國提議的廣泛的貿易自由化協議，例如《區域全麵經濟夥伴關係協定》，比美國目前提議的貿易保護主義協議《跨太平洋夥伴關係協議》更有利於其他國家的經濟發展。

---

http://ablog.typepad.com/keytrendsinglobalisation/2014/04/china-is-now-the-worlds-trade-locomotive.html

China is now the world's main trade locomotive
by John Ross,  12 April 2014

China has overtaken the United States to become the world's largest goods trading nation. Indeed, since the beginning of the international financial crisis, increases in China's merchandise trade have been larger than those of the United States, EU and Japan combined.

Even last year, well after recovery from the trough of the "Great Recession," China's trade increase was bigger than that of any other economic centre. In particular China's increase in imports remained larger than the combined total of the United States, EU and Japan - a key issue for other economies.

This change in global trade has major implications for other countries' trade strategies and for ongoing trade negotiations such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

The scale of the changes in global trade that have taken place since the beginning of the international financial crisis is shown in Figure 1. This illustrates the increases in the total trade of China, the United States, the EU and Japan between 2007, the last year before the crisis, and the end of 2013.

China's total merchandise trade in 2013 was $1,986 billion larger than in 2007 - China's exports having increased by $992 billion and imports by $994 billion. In comparison, the increase in the US goods trade was $741 billion, the EU $1,024 billion, and Japan $214 billion.

Therefore, not only was the expansion of China's trade almost twice that of any other major economic centre, but it was larger than the $1,979 billion for the United States, the EU and Japan put together.

Figure 1

Taking just a bilateral comparison with the United States, which is important for ongoing trade negotiations, in 2007 China's $2.2 trillion total merchandise trade was only 69 per cent of the United States. By 2013 China's merchandise trade, at $4.2 trillion, was 7 per cent bigger than the United States' $3.9 trillion. In six years China's trade increased by almost $2.0 trillion, compared to a US increase of $0.7 trillion - China's trade grew almost three times as much as the United States.

The change was even more dramatic for imports. In 2013 China's goods imports were $993 billion above their 2007 level, whereas US imports were up by $311 billion, the EU's by $329 billion, and Japan's by $212 billion. China's imports rose by more than three times as much as the United States - and by more than the United States, EU and Japan combined. China was therefore, by a huge margin, the most rapidly expanding market for other countries' exports.

Nor has this import situation altered since the Great Recession. Figure 2 shows that OECD data confirm that last year China's imports rose by $132 billion, compared to a rise of $30 billion for the EU - and falls of $8 billion for the US and $53 billion for Japan. China's imports rose four times as much as the EU, while the United States and Japan were declining import markets.

Figure 2

Such trends clearly have major implications for world commerce and ongoing trade negotiations.

First, the attempt by the United States to re-raise the question of the RMB's exchange rate was unfounded. On April 8, under a headline "US warns China after renminbi depreciation," the Financial Times carried an off-the-record briefing by a "senior [US] Treasury official." This reported a 2.5 per cent depreciation of the RMB since its peak earlier this year - a relatively small adjustment, clearly primarily aimed at preventing speculators having a continuous one way bet, and leaving the RMB 33.5 per cent above its 2005 level. Despite this, the unnamed US official declared "serious concerns" if the RMB did not show "adjustment" - apparent code for allowing its exchange rate to go up. But the trade data show China has been the world's most dynamic market for other countries' exports, while last year the United States made no contribution.

That China is the world's most rapidly expanding market for other countries exports, while US import markets have not regained pre-crisis levels, clearly affects China's promotion of an Asian RCEP, including India, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and ASEAN, and the United States promoting a TPP excluding China.

Regrettably, current US policy has moved away from supporting a multilateral opening of the world economy. Instead, as Philip Stephens of the Financial Times noted accurately:

"China has been the big winner from the open global economy… each of the proposed new [US] agreements would leave China on the sidelines. The exclusion of the world's second-biggest economy is more than a coincidence."

The United States recognizes that a relapse into national scale protectionism, of the post-1929 type, would have dangerous consequences, including for itself, but it has been losing to China’s competition in an open world economy. A way to attempt to limit China is, therefore, to create large trade blocs including the United States rather than a truly multilateral global economy.

But this faces many difficulties. First, US policy dares not risk serious disintegration of world trade - therefore protectionism must be limited in scope. Second, the US is not today a dynamic import market.

Any country tying itself into a trade bloc with the US, to the disadvantage of relations with China, is therefore entering a grouping the centre of which is relatively stagnant in trade terms. Despite political pressure to join, there are definite limits to how much other economies are willing to enter blocs with relatively stagnant trading partners, such as the United States, at the expense of more dynamic ones such as China.

These international trade realities interrelate with domestic political considerations. As global tariffs on manufactured goods are in general already low, the necessary aim of the US is to negotiate advantages in areas where its economy is particularly strong but where international tariffs and other barriers are still significant. Two of the most important of such sectors are agriculture and services. But these are areas of particular sensitivity in numerous countries. For example, in Japan rural areas are the key electoral base of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and this is a key reason protectionism has been maintained in Japan's agricultural trade policy. As the Financial Times noted, Japan's newly signed trade agreement with Australia therefore did not dismantle agricultural trade barriers to the extent the United States wants.

In the United States itself there is significant resistance, particularly in the Democratic Party, to trade concessions in manufacturing and other sectors where developing economies hold competitive advantages. It is therefore difficult for the US to offer proposals making it worthwhile for other countries to accept the domestic political problems that would be created by further opening their economies to the United States in agriculture and services.

Given actual world trade dynamics, China's proposals for widespread trade liberalisation, such as the RCEP, will be more beneficial for other countries' economies than current US protectionist proposals for the TPP. This will undoubtedly influence the course of trade negotiations.

【相關資訊】

古風短評：金磚國家將建立自己的IMF和世行
http://blog.wenxuecity.com/myblog/46947/201404/13717.html

BRICS Consider Creating IMF-Alternative As US Loses Credibility
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-16/brics-consider-creating-imf-alternative-us-loses-credibility

人民幣美元中原逐鹿的最新戰況
http://blog.wenxuecity.com/myblog/46947/201404/8137.html

2012年9月6日人民幣對美元的總攻開始了！
http://blog.wenxuecity.com/myblog/46947/201209/10158.html

40 Central Banks Are Betting This Will Be The Next Reserve Currency
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-08/40-central-banks-are-betting-will-be-next-reserve-currency