BEIJING, April 2 --The new trade row Washington
initiated with Beijing is a sign of increasing U.S. anxiety over its huge trade
deficit. Such a combative mood will not help solve its problems.
On Friday the U.S. Department of Commerce announced
that a preliminary decision had been made to apply the anti-subsidy law on some
China imports, which means a penalty duty will be slapped on specific items.
The department said the move is being made to offset
the subsidies the Chinese government has granted to some manufacturers.
The decision alters a 23-year old U.S. practice of
not applying its duty law to non-market economy countries, including China,
according to Washington's standards.
The rare move, understandably, comes from increasing
U.S. concerns over its huge trade deficit. It is not surprising given the
intensifying pressure on the Bush administration from the Democrats, who require
bolder moves to narrow the U.S. trade deficit.
The United States often resort to anti-dumping
charges to protect industries battered by the global economy. When business
interests have their say, the U.S. has not hesitated to change established
precedents.
With the latest move, Washington has gone against the
consensus reached by leaders of both countries, which advocates resolving
differences through dialogue.
Labeling China a non-market economy, the United
States has quickly and wrongly labeled all Chinese sectors as non-market-based.
It claims they are supported by government grants, bailouts or low-interest
loans.
As China is improving its market economy, an
increasing number of industries have become market-oriented. They have grown out
of competition, not government subsidy.
The anti-subsidy measures will increase the cost of
Chinese products sold in the U.S., but will not increase the competitiveness of
U.S. manufacturers. They will continue to operate at a disadvantage in
competition with low-cost Asian rivals.
The higher cost of U.S. manufacturing, together with
the country's block on exports of its high-tech products, with their high
value-added prices, is a fundamental cause of the trade imbalance.
The differential reflects the reality of the division
of labor as the world economy develops, not the so-called unfair subsidy by the
Chinese, or whatever, government.
(Source: China Daily)