PAST EVENT April27 2023
The Brookings Institution, Washington DC
1:00 pm - 2:00 pm EDT
區分美國和中國的經濟政策對於贏得民心很重要
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/distinguishing-us-economic-policy-from-chinas-is-important-to-win-hearts-and-minds/?
約書亞·梅爾策 2023 年 5 月 8 日
2023 年 4 月 20 日,美國財政部長珍妮特·耶倫在美國華盛頓尼茨大廈約翰·霍普金斯大學主辦的論壇上討論“美中經濟關係”。 REUTERS/Sarah Silbiger
@約書亞PMeltzer
億晶中國
隨著美國製定一套與中國相關的更加強有力的國際經濟政策,美國政府麵臨的一個關鍵挑戰將是如何令人信服地將美國政府對經濟的更多參與及其國際經濟政策的新方針與中國區分開來。
可以說這是贏得人心,但如果美國要讓其他國家政府相信,美國的做法不僅僅是披著國家安全外衣的自身利益,那麽創造真正且可以理解的差異就很重要。 美國需要向盟友保證,美國政府在經濟中的作用存在符合民主價值觀的原則性限製,讓市場發揮關鍵作用,並帶來有利於美國及其盟友的結果。
美國對中國的態度
財政部長珍妮特·耶倫 (Janet Yellen) 4 月 20 日的講話和國家安全顧問傑克·沙利文 (Jake Sullivan) 一周後的講話闡述了美國對華政策。 他們談到了美國將如何應對經濟政策與國家安全日益交織的問題,以及沙利文所說的“現代美國產業戰略”將與中國的經濟政策有何不同。
首先,耶倫對美國和中國經濟的未來發展軌跡做出了預期,闡述了美國經濟的實力,並概述了中國經濟麵臨的挑戰和日益疲軟的情況。 當政府和企業根據對未來十年或更長時間各國市場規模(以及延伸的國家實力)的預期來評估如何應對中美緊張局勢時,這一點很重要。 耶倫認為,美國經濟強勁,而中國經濟可能會步履蹣跚。 在這方麵,印度人口規模現已超過中國的說法以及聯合國最近對中國本世紀人口急劇下降的估計都是重要標誌。
其次,耶倫概述了美國對華經濟方針的目標,即確保美國及其盟國的國家安全利益和保護人權、與中國公平競爭、互利共贏、合作應對氣候變化等全球挑戰。
美國及其盟國的國家安全
耶倫強調經濟政策的國家安全目標,例如出口管製、投資審查以及即將出台的對外投資行政命令,試圖表明這些措施首先是為了安全,而不是為了獲得經濟優勢。 鑒於有人指責中國政府幹預其經濟是為了獲得相對於外國競爭對手的不公平經濟優勢,這一點至關重要。 正如耶倫明確表示的那樣,“這些國家安全行動並不是為了我們獲得競爭性經濟優勢或扼殺中國的經濟和技術現代化。 盡管這些政策可能會產生經濟影響,但它們是出於直接的國家安全考慮。” 沙利文在演講中更加簡潔地重申了這一點,並指出“我們的專家控製將繼續集中於可能傾斜軍事平衡的技術。”
公平競爭
耶倫還用她的演講勾勒出美中之間公平競爭的願景。 然而,這需要中國進行重大的經濟改革才能實現。 特別是,中國需要放棄旨在傾斜競爭環境的經濟政策,以犧牲外國競爭為代價來支持中國企業。 耶倫表示,美國非常反感的中國經濟政策是對國有企業和國內私營企業的大規模補貼和支持,旨在消除外國競爭,加上市場準入壁壘、盜竊知識產權和專有技術以及強製技術轉讓。
美國新產業戰略
耶倫和沙利文強調國家安全是美國對華經濟政策的關鍵驅動力,因此闡述了所謂的美國新產業戰略的針對性和合理性。 耶倫認為,在解決特定的市場失靈問題時,政府對工業的補貼是合理的。 沙利文對此進行了擴展,指出當私營部門無法自行進行所需投資以確保美國國家雄心時,就需要美國的產業戰略——這是比糾正特定市場失靈更廣泛的類別。 沙利文接著表示,這一戰略的關鍵要素是公共投資,以釋放市場和私營部門投資人群,而不是挑選贏家或輸家。 沙利文還強調了與國際夥伴合作建設能力的重要性。
拜登政府能否成功地在國內和全球範圍內為美國新產業戰略贏得支持,對於與中國的長期戰略競爭而言至關重要。
拜登政府能否成功地在國內和全球範圍內為美國新產業戰略贏得支持,對於與中國的長期戰略競爭而言至關重要。 中國政府不會按照耶倫概述的路線進行改革並成為美國的公平競爭對手。 那麽,當世界第二大經濟體做出在經濟和安全方麵代價高昂的行為時,美國應該如何應對? 應對這一挑戰需要調整經濟政策以考慮對國家安全的影響,以及美國與其盟友在一係列經濟政策問題上的持續合作。 耶倫和沙利文的講話為此類合作奠定了基礎。 盡管如此,為了確保美國與中國競爭的方式(包括新的美國產業戰略)仍然受到限製並專注於核心國家安全優先事項,在言辭和實踐上仍有許多工作要做。 同樣重要的是找到方法最大限度地減少盟友和合作夥伴的經濟成本,並找到與其他政府溝通和合作的方法,以便美國政府的政策在全球範圍內擴大機會。 在此方麵的成功將表明,以國家安全為驅動力的美國經濟政策不一定是零和博弈,並將與中國日益加強的保護主義措施和對經濟的廣泛控製形成鮮明對比。
Distinguishing US economic policy from China’s is important to win hearts and minds
Joshua P. Meltzer May 8, 2023
As the U.S. develops a more robust and muscular set of international economic policies related to China, a key challenge for the U.S. government will be to convincingly distinguish greater U.S. government involvement in the economy and its new approach to international economic policy from that of China.
Call it winning hearts and minds, but creating a real and understandable difference is important if the U.S. is going to convince other governments that the U.S. approach is not just self-interest wrapped up in national security garb. The U.S. needs to reassure allies that there are principled limits to the role of the U.S. government in the economy that are consistent with democratic values, leave a key role for markets, and deliver outcomes that benefit both the U.S. and its allies.
A speech by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on April 20 and one by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan a week later laid out the U.S. approach to China. They touched on how the U.S. will navigate the increasing intertwining of economic policy and national security and how the “modern American industrial strategy” as dubbed by Sullivan will be different from China’s economic policy.
To begin with, Yellen set future expectations about the trajectories of the U.S. and Chinese economies, making the case for the strength of the U.S. economy and outlining the challenges and growing weakness in the Chinese economy. This matters as governments and businesses assess how to navigate U.S.-China tensions based on expectations about the size of each country’s market (and by extension national power) over the coming decade or more. Yellen argued that the U.S. economy is strong, and China’s is likely to falter. In this regard, the claim that India has now surpassed China in terms of population size and recent U.N. estimates about China’s rapid population decline this century are important markers.
Second, Yellen outlined the objectives of the U.S. economic approach to China, namely, securing the U.S. and allies’ national security interests and protecting human rights, fair competition with China so that each side benefits, and cooperation on global challenges such as climate change.
Yellen’s emphasis on the national security objectives of economic policies such as export controls, investment screening, and a forthcoming executive order on outbound investment sought to make clear that these measures are about security first and foremost and not about obtaining an economic advantage. This is critical given the accusation that Chinese government intervention in its economy is about obtaining unfair economic advantage over foreign competitors. As Yellen made clear, “these national security actions are not designed for us to gain a competitive economic advantage or stifle China’s economic and technological modernization. Even though these policies may have economic impacts, they are driven by straightforward national security considerations.” Sullivan in his speech reiterated this point even more succinctly, noting that “our expert controls will remain narrowly focused on technology that could tilt the military balance.”
Yellen also used her speech to outline a vision of fair competition between the U.S. and China. However, this would take significant Chinese economic reform to achieve. In particular, China would need to abandon economic policies aimed at tilting the playing field in support of Chinese companies at the expense of foreign competition. According to Yellen, the Chinese economic policies the U.S. finds so objectionable are the large-scale subsidies and support for state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and domestic private firms aimed at eliminating foreign competition, combined with barriers to market access, theft of intellectual property (IP) and know-how, and forced technology transfer.
With the emphasis on national security as the key driver of U.S. economic policy toward China, Yellen and Sullivan made the case for how the so-called new American industrial strategy will be targeted and justified. According to Yellen, government subsidies for industry are justified when addressing a specific market failure. Sullivan expanded on this, stating that American industrial strategy is needed where the private sector can’t on its own make the investments needed to secure U.S. national ambitions—a somewhat broader set of categories than correcting for a specific market failure. Sullivan went on to say that the key element of such a strategy is public investment that unlocks markets and crowds in private sector investment, and not picking winners or losers. Sullivan also emphasized the importance of working with international partners to build capacity.
The success of the Biden administration in building support domestically and globally for the new American industrial strategy will be key when it comes to what will undoubtedly be long-term strategic competition with China.
The success of the Biden administration in building support domestically and globally for the new American industrial strategy will be key when it comes to what will undoubtedly be long-term strategic competition with China. The Chinese government is not going to reform and become a fair competitor to the U.S. along the lines outlined by Yellen. So, how should the U.S. respond when the world’s second largest economy is engaged in behavior that is costly in both economic and security terms? Meeting this challenge will require adjusting economic policies to account for the national security implications as well as sustained cooperation between the U.S. and its allies on a range of economic policy issues. The speeches by Yellen and Sullivan lay the foundation for this type of cooperation. That said, much remains to be done rhetorically as well as in practice to ensure that the way the U.S. competes with China, including the new American industrial strategy, remains bounded and focused on core national security priorities. As important will be finding ways to minimize the economic costs for allies and partners and finding ways to channel and cooperate with other governments so that these U.S. government policies expand opportunities globally. Success here will show that U.S. economic policies, which are driven by national security, need not be zero sum, and will clearly contrast with China’s increasingly protectionist measures and expansive control over its economy.
RELATED CONTENT
PAST EVENT April27 2023
The Brookings Institution, Washington DC
1:00 pm - 2:00 pm EDT
Reactions to National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s Brookings speech
May 2, 2023
USMCA Forward 2023: Building more integrated, resilient, and secure supply chains in North America
February 28, 2023
AUTHORS