Professors Thomas M. Hout and Robert A. Rogowsky of the Middlesbury Institute of International Studies seem to be addressing U.S. policymakers in their Working-Paper highlighted today.
It’s a good companion piece for work highlighted last week on the subject of whether or not China’s accession to the WTO has been a policy mistake by the U.S. [It hasn’t].
Both papers, last week’s and this, riff on a common theme i.e. that the U.S. must stop its kvetching about China’s trade behavior and get on the front foot and do something about it. Hint, fresh tariffs are not suggested in either papers.
Both papers agree, central to any fresh policy initiative must be a return to a multilateral approach working with other partners; and the place to start that is at the World Trade Organization (WTO) which the U.S., de facto, abandoned a few years ago.
The authors of this week’s paper then go further to suggest a series of targeted responses to China’s growing heft based on the type of products China is engaged in producing.
For ‘China advantaged’ goods get the WTO back to work and get involved in other global trade organizations.
For ‘Supply-chain Battleground category’ goods (EV batteries, wind turbines, medical devices, etc.) make sure you have a good grip on the critical components in the supply chain. China can make the nuts and bolts, sure, but don’t let them completely control (say) rare earths.
For ‘U.S. advantaged category’ goods (those at the very cutting edge of technology) subject those to the kind of review and oversight that’s now applied to military and other strategic technologies.
The authors conclude that peaceful and prosperous coexistence with China is possible but a tougher line must be taken. Their bottom line; “One might label this [Process] a “new Cold War”, but at its heart it is a hard negotiation that cannot and should not be avoided.”
[As informed as the authors of this piece must be I found parts of the work irritatingly uninformed and unnecessarily jingoistic. In other places it breezed through tired tropes with an alarming absence of academic rigor. But who says war is fair? However, what I think isn’t important, as a document summing up underlying principles that may be applied in new and future U.S. engagement on trade with China its a worthwhile read for those with an interest.]
You can access the work via this link Overdue Negotiation.
Happy Sunday.