公孫明：狗皮倒灶漏洞百出的特朗普301制裁中國報告

公孫明   04/27/2018

此次特朗普以中國違反所謂的301報告（Section 301 report）為名，在貿易上制裁中國，是手下反華大將死硬派白宮貿易顧問老猴子納瓦羅（Peter Navarro）搞出來的死計，這招可謂狗屁倒灶漏洞百出，但仍然成功無比。原因是：

1.    特朗普認為中國不公平對待美國商家，強迫美國公司交出智慧財產權，卻是跟整個事實相反。以技術換市場，全世界做生意者莫不如此，是一種你情我願的常態行為。“partnerships with domestic counterparts which China and other countries have long established as models for the growth and expansion of new businesses.” （見下原文）

2.    中國跟其他國家簽了8000跟類似的條約，但與此同時，全世界共有110，000類似的契約。這個狗屁倒灶的301制裁，不但不合理，簡直就是無事生非。“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.” （見下原文）

可問題仍在於北京中南海裡邊的那個土共野狗黨；特朗普祭出這個301魔咒後，超級木馬習近平不但不敢對仗據理力爭，反而立馬於海南博鰲論壇公開宣讀特級木馬劉鶴寫下的賣國投降稿子，不但坐實了特朗普的控告，還因此而開了一條日後勒索敲詐中國的陽關大道。

公孫明看到了下文一個道地美國人為中國人寫的，一篇有理有利有節，仗義執言的稿子，真是無語！

 國之將亡，必有妖孽！此之謂也！

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.