公孙明：狗皮倒灶漏洞百出的特朗普301制裁中国报告

公孙明   04/27/2018

此次特朗普以中国违反所谓的301报告（Section 301 report）为名，在贸易上制裁中国，是手下反华大将死硬派白宫贸易顾问老猴子纳瓦罗（Peter Navarro）搞出来的死计，这招可谓狗屁倒灶漏洞百出，但仍然成功无比。原因是：

1.    特朗普认为中国不公平对待美国商家，强迫美国公司交出智慧财产权，却是跟整个事实相反。以技术换市场，全世界做生意者莫不如此，是一种你情我愿的常态行为。“partnerships with domestic counterparts which China and other countries have long established as models for the growth and expansion of new businesses.” （见下原文）

2.    中国跟其他国家签了8000跟类似的条约，但与此同时，全世界共有110，000类似的契约。这个狗屁倒灶的301制裁，不但不合理，简直就是无事生非。“Currently, there are more than 8,000 JVs operating in China, compared to a total of over 110,000 JVs and strategic alliances that have been set up around the world since 1990.” （见下原文）

可问题仍在于北京中南海里边的那个土共野狗党；特朗普祭出这个301魔咒后，超级木马习近平不但不敢对仗据理力争，反而立马于海南博鳌论坛公开宣读特级木马刘鹤写下的卖国投降稿子，不但坐实了特朗普的控告，还因此而开了一条日后勒索敲诈中国的阳关大道。

公孙明看到了下文一个道地美国人为中国人写的，一篇有理有利有节，仗义执言的稿子，真是无语！

 国之将亡，必有妖孽！此之谓也！

America’s Weak Case Against China

Apr 24, 2018 Stephen S. Roach

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/ustr-section-301-report-biased-by-stephen-s--roach-2018-04

The US Trade Representative appears to have made an ironclad case against China in the so-called Section 301 report issued on March 22. But the report – now widely viewed as evidence justifying the Trump administration's recent tariffs and other punitive measures against China – is wide of the mark in several key areas.

NEW HAVEN – On the surface, United States Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer appears to have made an ironclad case against China in the so-called Section 301 report issued on March 22. Laid out in a detailed 182-page document (which, with 1,139 footnotes and five appendices, would make any legal team blush with pride), the USTR’s indictment of China on charges of unfair trading practices regarding technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation seems both urgent and compelling. It has quickly been accepted as foundational evidence in support of the tariffs and other punitive trade measures that President Donald Trump’s administration has initiated against China in recent months. It is powerful ammunition in a potential trade war.

But don’t be fooled. The report is wide of the mark in several key areas. First, it accuses China of “forced technology transfer,” arguing that US companies must turn over the blueprints of proprietary technologies and operating systems in order to do business in China. This transfer is alleged to take place within the structure of joint-venture arrangements – partnerships with domestic counterparts which China and other countries have long established as models for the growth and expansion of new businesses. Currently, there are more than 8,000 JVs operating in China, compared to a total of over 110,000 JVs and strategic alliances that have been set up around the world since 1990.

Significantly, US and other multinational corporations willingly enter into these legally-negotiated arrangements for commercially sound reasons – not only to establish a toehold in China’s rapidly growing domestic markets, but also as a means to improve operating efficiency with a low-cost offshore Chinese platform. Portraying US companies as innocent victims of Chinese pressure is certainly at odds with my own experience as an active participant in Morgan Stanley’s joint venture with the China Construction Bank (and a few small minority investors) to establish China International Capital Corporation in 1995.

Yes, as we joined with our partners in creating China’s first investment bank, we shared our business practices, proprietary products, and distribution systems. Yet, contrary to the assertions of the USTR, we were hardly forced into these arrangements. We had our own commercial objectives and wanted to build a world-class financial services firm in China. By the time we sold our stake in 2010 – at a rather attractive return to Morgan Stanley shareholders, I might add – CICC was well on its way to attaining those goals.

The second area where the USTR’s Section 301 report is problematic is its portrayal of China’s focus on outward investment – its “going out” strategy – as a unique state-directed plan aimed at gobbling up newly emerging US companies and their proprietary technologies. In fact, the report devotes more than twice as many pages to charges concerning China’s supposed external technology theft via such acquisitions – which are framed as a blatant grab for America’s most precious assets – as it does to internal transfers through JVs and alleged unfair licensing practices.

As such, the Made in China 2025 campaign is presented as prima facie evidence of a devious socialist plot to attain global dominance in the great industries of the future: autonomous vehicles, high-speed rail, advanced information technologies and machine tools, exotic new materials, biopharma and sophisticated medical products, as well as new power sources and advanced agricultural equipment.