The New China Shock
Mar 31, 2021MARK LEONARD
Like China's accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001, the
country's new strategy for achieving economic self-reliance and geopolitical
dominance poses an unprecedented challenge to the West. The difference this
time is that Western leaders are no longer committed to a fanciful vision of
"reciprocal engagement."
BERLIN – Some months ago, the Chinese authorities approached some of the
biggest foreign companies in the country and asked them to tap a representative
to participate in a small closed-door gathering on China’s new economic
strategy. The meeting was to be with a senior official at an undisclosed time
and location, and, according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter
who insisted on anonymity to discuss it, companies were asked to send only
ethnic Chinese representatives. In both content and form, the episode captured
China’s eagerness to make its economy more recognizably Chinese, developing its
own technologies and energy sources while relying on domestic consumption
rather than on foreign demand.
Chinese President Xi Jinping’s new strategy centers on the concept of “dual circulation.” Behind the
technical-sounding phrase lies an idea that could change the global economic
order. Instead of operating as a single economy that is linked to the world
through trade and investment, China is fashioning itself into a bifurcated
economy. One realm (“external circulation”) will remain in contact with the
rest of the world, but it will gradually be overshadowed by another one
(“internal circulation”) that will cultivate domestic demand, capital, and
ideas.
The purpose of dual circulation is to make China more self-reliant. After
previously basing China’s development on export-led growth, policymakers are
trying to diversify the country’s supply chains so that it can access
technology and know-how without being bullied by the United States. In doing
so, China will also seek to make other countries more dependent on it, thereby
converting its external economic links into global political power.
The shift to a dual-circulation strategy raises the specter of a new “China
shock” that could dwarf the impact of the first one, which struck Western
economies after China’s accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001.
Although China’s inclusion in the WTO generated a huge amount of wealth and
lifted millions of Chinese out of poverty, it also created losers in places like the
American Rust Belt and the United Kingdom’s “red wall” districts, setting the
stage for the UK’s Brexit referendum and
former US President Donald Trump’s election in 2016.
The West’s political class took a long time to wake up to the China shock,
because it had committed to a strategy of “reciprocal engagement,” whereby
Western consumers would benefit from low-cost Chinese imports, and Western
companies would profit from China’s economic growth by tapping its massive
market. These dynamics, it was assumed, would pressure China into opening up
its market and society even more. But this assumption has not been borne out.
The new China shock’s impact on the West will differ fundamentally from the
first one. For starters, the dual-circulation strategy will affect different
parts of the economy and society. Rather than endangering legacy industries,
the goal is to dominate cutting-edge sectors and compete with legal and
financial firms in the City of London, automakers in Baden-Württemberg, and
biotech firms in Sweden.
Specifically, Xi’s 2015 “Made in China 2025” plan emphasizes sectors such
as artificial intelligence, semiconductors, batteries, and electric vehicles,
and aims to increase the domestic content of
core technological components to 40% by 2020, and to 70% by 2025. The goal is
to use state subsidies, export controls, and controls on data to allow Chinese
firms to replace foreign ones – or to make the foreign firms more Chinese. If
Xi’s plan succeeds, the new China shock could hollow out as many high-paid jobs
in tech and services as the first one did in heavy industry and textiles.4
The shock will not end there. Today’s main geopolitical contest is not just
about enforcing global rules; it is about who makes them. Whereas the West
previously struggled to secure Chinese compliance with the trade, investment,
and intellectual property (IP) frameworks it had crafted, China is now also
seeking to make and enforce the rules. There are already or have been Chinese
heads at the International Telecommunication Union, the International
Organization for Standardization, and the International Electrotechnical
Commission, and Chinese companies are increasingly trying to define the future
of technology. Huawei alone holds more than 100,000 active
patents, particularly in 5G technology, where it is competing with Western
companies like Ericsson and Nokia to set global standards.
Moreover, today’s competitive tensions are no longer contained within a
bilateral Western-Chinese relationship. With its Belt and Road Initiative,
China has already established a network of economic ties with more than 100
countries, and it will not hesitate to use these channels to export Chinese
standards along with its model of state capitalism and state subsidies. Soon
(if not already), Western companies will face the same uneven playing field in
third markets as they do in China itself.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter, PS on Sunday
One implication of the new China shock is that the new rules on data,
research and development, and standards will force prominent Western companies
to acquire Chinese characteristics, unless they withdraw from China altogether.
As one well-placed private-sector observer put it to me, “China’s idea is that
if companies like Daimler or Volkswagen want to work in China, they will have
to move services, R&D, and new products there. Beijing hopes that dual
circulation will transform them into Chinese companies.”
Needless to say, the new China shock demands a different set of responses
than the old one did. Rather than trying to transform China or make inroads
into the Chinese market, the West’s priority must be to transform itself, not
least by developing industrial and investment policies to spur innovation and
protect its IP. And to ensure that their economic “champions” have access to
economies of scale, Western countries must establish shared standards for
privacy, data protection, carbon pricing, and other issues. Ideally, this
cooperation would formalize new trade agreements, investment packages,
financing, and regulations to expand the share of the global economy that is
open to non-Chinese technologies and frameworks.
Europeans, for their part, will need to enact domestic reforms to protect
themselves from economic coercion in a world of gated globalization and
weaponized interdependence. While much of the attention now is on China’s
crackdown in Hong Kong and repression of the Uighur minority in Xinjiang, there
is an even bigger shockwave approaching. Western leaders must not be caught off
balance again.
FEATURED
Mar 31, 2021 MARK LEONARD
Apr 6, 2021 BRAHMA CHELLANEY
Apr 6, 2021 DANIEL GROS
Apr 5, 2021 JOSEPH S. NYE, JR.
5. The West’s Crisis of Academic Freedom
Mar 29, 2021 LIVIU MATEI
Writing for PS since 2004
65 Commentaries
Follow
Mark Leonard
is Co-Founder and Director of the European Council on Foreign Relations.
No comments:
Post a Comment