backtop


Print 35 comment(s) - last by Dan Banana.. on Mar 18 at 12:38 AM

China is making a killing off its resources, but it says it's all to "protect the environment"

The economic leadership of China is either brilliant or diabolical, depending on your perspective.  The world's fastest growing economy is accelerating its high-tech efforts at a breakneck pace, thanks to heavy government subsidizing and a favorable regulatory atmosphere that gives domestic competitors advantages over their foreign peers.  The nation has been accused of resorting to currency and regulatory manipulation to "stack the deck" in its favor.

But that's far from the only way China is reportedly being, to borrow the phrasing of former Sen. Larry Craig, "nasty, bad, naughty" nation.  China is reportedly openly hacking the U.S. for profit, gleefully stealing its government and businesses' financial and technological secrets.  At the same time the nation has been accused of hoarding its vast resource stockpiles in order to drive up profits.

I. China Holds World Hostage With Rare Earth Monopoly

The electronics industry -- deeply dependent on rare earth elements -- had little recourse thus far other than to try to minimize use in their products.  After China cut exports of the 17 prized scarce elements in 2010 by 40 percent, the decision wrought ripples of financial chaos upon manufacturers of everything from flat screen TVs to hybrid cars in the U.S., Europe, Japan, and South Korea.

The problem is driven by the fact that China bought up rights to many of the planet's most rich rare earth deposits in the 1990s and began actively developing.  To make matters worse, it take 5 or more years to bring a rare earth mining facility online -- perhaps as long as a decade to reach full production.  China foresight has become America's frustration

However, the situation may be headed to the breaking point as the U.S., European Union, and Japan have filed a formal World Trade Organization complaint against China, accusing it of hoarding the vital resource.

President Barack Obama (D), who supervised the filing, had harsh words for China in a speech, commenting, "We have got to take control of our energy future and we can't let that energy industry take root in some other country because they were allowed to break the rules."

President Obama
President Obama claims China is "breaking the rules" by manipulating trade supply.
[Image Source: AFP/Getty Images]

In a joint statement, EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht, jabbed, "China’s restrictions on rare earths and other products violate international trade rules and must be removed.  These measures hurt our producers and consumers in the EU and across the world, including manufacturers of pioneering hi-tech and ‘green’ business applications."

II. China Already Has Lost Once This Year Before the WTO

WTO complaints operate something similar intellectual property complaints, albeit on an international sale.  Nations have 60 days to come to a compromise or the matter is passed to arbiters on a WTO settlement board.
  

Rare earth metals
A binding resolution could force China to stop hoarding rare earth metals in an effort to inflate prices (Neodymium from Chinese-owned Inner Mongolia Baotou Steel Rare-Earth Hi-Tech Co. factory in Baotou, Inner Mongol is pictured). [Image Source: Nelson Ching/Bloomberg]

The board's resolutions are fairly binding, but can take years to resolve.  A series of complaints filed by the U.S., Mexico, and EU against China was finally ruled upon this year.  The board ruled in that China had acted improperly in fixing supplies of nine raw materials, including zinc, coke (coal byproduct), and magnesium at artificial lows.  The WTO rulings carry serious financial weight, and China has reportedly been relaxing resource supplies since the February ruling was made against it.

However, when it comes to rare earths China is loathe to relax supplies as it's coming to enjoy selling less of the product for the same amount of money, while funneling its extra stockpile to domestic firms.  

III. China Accuses Westerners of Promoting Pollution

China's Ministry of Commerce (MOC) rebutted the rhetoric of President Obama and Commissioner De Gucht, in a written statement claiming that raising exports would harm the environment.  China, a notorious polluter who bats nary an eyelash at its citizens laboring in toxic scrapyards suddenly "found religion", environmentally speaking, when the crisis hits.

Writes the MOC:

Previously, China has been in constant communication and contact with related countries about its export policy on raw material products, and has emphasized repeatedly that the policy aims to protect resources and the environment, and realize sustainable development.  China will properly deal with the request for dispute settlement in accordance with the WTO's settlement procedures.

China Minister of Industry and Information Technology Miao Wei told local news service Xinhua that he felt "pity" for the Americans, stating, "We would feel sorry for their decision to complain to the WTO."

Miao Wei
Chinese IIT administrator Miao Wei says he "feels sorry" for America's efforts, which he says China will crush in court.  He accuses the U.S. and its allies of promoting pollution. [Image Source: China.org.cn]

He says China will fight hard to prevent any sort of mandatory increase in exports.

China has filed 5 complaints against the U.S. before the WTO, while the U.S. has filed 12 against China.  Likewise China filed two complaints against the EU, who has filed 5 complaints against it.

IV. China a Heated Political Issue this Election Cycle

President Obama claims to be actively working to protect the U.S. against Chinese economic malice.  In February he created a new "Trade Enforcement Unit", tasked with policing China and retaliating against unfair policies.  He claims his administration has filed twice as many trade complaints as the administration of former President George W. Bush (R).

However, he has drawn criticism for some for not cutting back on America's subsidy system, which is accused of in effect gifting tax rebates to companies that ship their manufacturing jobs to China.  Critics also say he should be more critical of China's currency manipulation, which had placed American exports at a disadvantage.

Leading Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney promises that if he were elected, that on his first day of office he would name China a "currency manipulator".  While the move would disrupt a great deal of U.S. production, possibly impacting the supply chain of Apple, Inc. (AAPL) and others, he says that the consequences are better than allowing China to "steal" American business.

Mitt Romney
Former Mass. governor and Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney accuses President Obama of allowing China to steal U.S. jobs.  He says he would declare China a "currency manipulator" and move to cut the U.S. trade with its biggest manufacturing partner.
[Image Source: AP] 

Campaigning in Ohio he accused President Obama of casting a blind eye on the currency manipulation and intellectual property theft, allowing China to "walk all over him".

Alan Tonelson, a research fellow at the U.S. Business and Industry Council, a group that represents U.S. manufacturers, agrees, complaining, "Unless President Obama starts fighting back effectively against these transgressions, China’s market-rigging will keep stealing hundreds of thousands of valuable jobs and untold billions of dollars’ worth of growth that the struggling U.S. economy needs right now."

Sources: BusinessWeek, Xinhua, U.S. Trade Rep.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: What monopoly?
By ReloadAO on 3/14/2012 6:32:26 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is to re-open the mine. It can take few years to get one operational at same level when it was closed.

So if China will close all mines at the same time, it will be very expensive and hard to start mining enough resources for industry.


RE: What monopoly?
By phattyboombatty on 3/14/2012 6:41:31 PM , Rating: 4
No, the problem is that no business in these other companies is willing to invest any money in opening new mines because they know that as soon as they get up and running, China will simply dump its stockpiled supply onto the market, driving down prices and putting the new mine out of business. Then, once the new mine is out of business, China goes back to stockpiling. China's huge advantage here is its massive headstart and stockpiled supply.


RE: What monopoly?
By corduroygt on 3/15/2012 10:03:19 AM , Rating: 1
Sounds like precisely the sort of thing our government should subsidize instead of electric cars.


RE: What monopoly?
By Ammohunt on 3/14/2012 10:18:55 PM , Rating: 4
You think for a second the Obama Administration and his ECO-Freak friends would allow such mines to "open" and time soon? They are still whining about fracking!


RE: What monopoly?
By Dan Banana on 3/14/2012 10:44:49 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You think for a second the Obama Administration and his ECO-Freak friends would allow such mines to "open" and time soon?


Can you define the term "ECO-freak" please? Does it mean people that aren't willing to die from diseases caused by wallowing in their own filth due to industry/government corruption?

quote:
They are still whining about fracking!


I haven't heard anyone whine about fracking but have heard concerns about ground water destruction and other environmental destruction due to fracking. Fracking can be done safely but exempting energy companies from clean water laws and other laws that safeguard the environment is not a way to get that done.

------------------------------------------------- ----------

Fracking safely and responsibly
Environmentalists and the energy industry appear to be edging towards a consensus that would permit a big expansion in hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas in exchange for stricter rules on engineering procedures such as well casing and cementing.
In a thoughtful article in the “Wall Street Journal”, Russell Gold explains how energy officials and some environmental campaigners are converging on the view that poor well construction, rather than fracking itself, has been responsible for recorded instances of groundwater contamination (“Faulty Wells, Not Fracking, Blamed for Water Pollution”, March 12).

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/03/14/frack...


RE: What monopoly?
By Ringold on 3/14/2012 11:38:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Does it mean people that aren't willing to die from diseases caused by wallowing in their own filth due to industry/government corruption?


That's not their objective, as these same people protest Generation III/IV nuclear power and even the occasional solar or wind plant. Gotta protect them critters in the desert, after all.

Nah, they're anti-development, plain and simple. All that "filth" is part of an advanced society thats lead to more people being more educated and living with more advanced tools and access to information then any time prior to the industrial revolution and all that "filth," and pretty much any economic activity past getting out of bed in the morning can be linked, with enough trouble, to some "filth."


RE: What monopoly?
By Dan Banana on 3/15/2012 10:52:56 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's not their objective, as these same people protest Generation III/IV nuclear power and even the occasional solar or wind plant. Gotta protect them critters in the desert, after all. Nah, they're anti-development, plain and simple. All


Who is this monolithic "they" you speak of?


RE: What monopoly?
By lightfoot on 3/16/2012 6:54:31 PM , Rating: 2
I believe that they call themselves "liberals."

They have this mentality that if anyone on the planet has something that they don't have that it should be taken away from them in the name of fairness.


RE: What monopoly?
By Dan Banana on 3/18/2012 12:35:11 AM , Rating: 2
Frankly that's about the most slanted, simplistic, inaccurate and juvenile thing I've heard in a long time. I think you need to get out more and meet real people not the cardboard cutouts manufactured by Rush Limbaugh and friends.


RE: What monopoly?
By NellyFromMA on 3/15/2012 4:07:47 PM , Rating: 2
freaky-for-eco


RE: What monopoly?
By Dan Banana on 3/18/2012 12:38:26 AM , Rating: 2
Whatcha gonna do? Freaky Eco? Paraphrase of an old Richard Pryor bit.


"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel." -- AMD CEO Hector Ruiz in 2007














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki