Trade War Debate on FOX Business: Trish Regan talks trade with CGTN’s Liu Xin

I’m going to provide link here, and post the transcript of their talk in case the video does not work in somewhere.

https://video.foxbusiness.com/v/6042507238001/#sp=show-clips

Trish: Good night, I have special guest joining me all the way from Beijing, China, to discuss the challenge of trade between the US and her home country. She is the host of Prime Time English language television program overseen by the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party. Though she and I may not agree on everything, I believe this is actually a really unique opportunity. An opportunity to hear a very different view. As these trade negotiations stall out, it’s helpful to now  how the Chinese Communist Party is thinking about trade and about the United States. Now, in the interest of transparency, I should explain that I don’t speak for anyone but myself, as the host of a Fox Business show. My Guest, however, is part of the CCP. and that’s fine. As I said, I welcome different perspectives on this show. With all that in mind, I’m very pleased tonight to welcome Ms. Liu Xin, host of Prim Time Opinion Program, the Point with Liu Xin to Trish Regan Prime Time. And just quickly to viewers, please bear with us as we have a significant time delay in our satellites between Beijing and the US. And because of that, we’re going to do our very best not to speak over each other, but, Xin, Welcome. It’s good to have you here.

Xin: Thank you, Trish, for having me. It’s a great opportunity for me, I’m unprecedented. I never dreamed that I would have this kind of opportunity to speak to you and to speak to many audiences, and ordinary households in the United States.

[Due the delay, they over speak with each other for the following part.]
Trish: Yeah, it is, indeed, unprecedented…Hang on…

Xin: You said to couple of thing…

Trish: I’m going to jump in…I guess our…

Xin: I need to correct. I am not…I am not…

Trish: Forgive me, you’re not what?…

Xin: Trish, I have to get it straight. I am not a member of the Communist Party of China. This is on record, so please don’t assume that I’m a member, and I don’t speak for the Communist Party of China, and I’m here for today, I’m only speaking for myself as Liu Xin, a journalist working for CGTN.
[Done with over speak for this part.]

Trish: Well…OK, appreciate it. What’s your current assessment of where the trade talks actually are right now.

Xin: Sorry?

Trish: Give me your current assessment of where we are on these trade talks. Do you believe a deal is possible?

Xin: It is true that the satellite connection is not very good, but I believe that you’re asking me where we are in terms of the trade negotiations. Ah…I don’t know. I don’t have any insight or information. What I knew was the talks were not very successful last time they were going on in the United States, and I think both sides are considering where to go next. But I think China has made, the Chinese government has made it’s  position very clear that unless the United states treat the Chinese government, treat the Chinese negotiating team with respect and show the willingness to talk without using outside pressure, there is high possibility that there could be a productive trade deal. Otherwise, I think we might be facing a prolonged period of problems for both sides.

Trish: And I would stress that trade wars are never good. They’re not good for anyone. so I want to believe, Xin, I want to believe that something can get done.

Xin: Agreed.

Trish: These are certainly Challenging times, I realize there’s a lot of rhetoric out there. Let me turn to one of the biggest issues, and that’s intellectual property rights. Fundamentally, I think we can all agree it’s never right to take something that’s not yours. And yet in going through so many of these cases, cases at the independent World Trade Organization, the WTO that China’s member of as well as the DOJ and FBI cases, you can actually see some of them on the screen right now. There’s evidence there that China has stolen enormous amounts of intellectual property, hundreds of billions of dollars worth. Now, you know, that’s a lot of money. But truly, I guess we shouldn’t really care if it’s hundreds of billions of dollars or just 50 cents. How do American businesses operate in China if they’re at risk for having the property, their ideas, their hard work stolen?

Xin: Well, I think, Trish, you have to ask american businesses whether they wanted to come China, whether they find coming to China and cooperating with Chinese businesses has not been profitable or not, and they will tell you their answers as far as I understand, many American companies have been established in China, and they are very profitable. And great majority of them, I believe, plan to continue to invest in China and explore the Chinese market. U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs make it a little more difficult, make the future uncertain. I do not deny that there are IP infringement, there are copyright issues or there are piracy or even theft of commercial secrets. I think that is something that has to be dealt with, and I think the Chinese government and the Chinese people and me as an individual, I think there’s a consensus. Because without the protection of IP right. Nobody, no country, no individual can be stronger, can develop itself. So I think that is a very clear consensus among the Chinese, you know, society. And, of course, there are cases where individuals, where companies go and steal, and I think that’s a common practice, probably in every part of the world. There are companies in the United States who sue each other all the time over infringement on IP rights, and you can’t say simply because these cases are happening that America is stealing or China is stealing or the Chinese people are stealing. Basically, that’s the reason why I wrote that rebuttal, because I think this kind of blanket statement is really not helpful.

Trish: Well, it’s not just a statement, it’s multiple reports including ED from the WTO. But let me ask you about Huawei, Because that’s…

Xin: Sure, I don’t deny those. No, I don’t deny those.

Trish: Right. You know, look, I think as I said we can all agree that if you are going to do business with someone, it has to be based on trust. And you don’t want anyone to steal your valuable information that you’ve spent decades working on. Anyway, China passed a law in 2017 requiring tech companies to work with the military and the government, so it’s not just individual companies, right, that might be getting access to this technology, it’s the government itself which is an interesting nuance. But I get that China is upset that Huawei’s not being welcomed into the U.S. markets. I totally get it. So let me me just ask you this, it’s an interesting way to think about it. I think. What if we said, hey, you know, sure, Huawei, come on in. But here’s the deal, you must share all those incredible technological advances that you’ve been working on. You’ve got to share it with us. Would that be OK?

Xin: I think it is, if it is through cooperation, if it is through mutual leaning, if it is through…if you pay for the use of this IP of this high technology, I think it’s absolutely fine. Why not? We all, we all, prosper because we learn from each other. I learned English because I had American teachers. I learned English because I had American friends. I still learn how to do journalism because I have American copy editors or so I think that’s fine so long as it is not illegal. I think everybody should do that, and can that’s how you get better, right?

Trish: But you mentioned something pretty important which is that you should pay for the acquisition of that, and, you know, look, I think that the liberalized economic world in which we live has valued intellectual property, and it’s governed by a set of laws. And so we all need to kind of play by the rules and play by those laws if we are going to have that kind of trust between each other. But I think you bring up some good points. let me turn to China which is now, wow, the second largest economy. At what point will China decide to abandon its developing nation status and, well, stop borrowing from the World Bank?

Xin: Well, I think this kind of discussion is going on, and I’ve heard very live discussions about this, and, indeed, there are people talking about China already becoming so big, why don’t just grow up. Basically, I think you said it, in your program as well, China grow up. Well, I think we want to grow up. We don’t want to be dwarfed or poor, underdeveloped all the time. It depends on how you define developing country, right? If you look at China’s overall size, the overall size of the Chinese economy, yes, we are very big, the world’s number one. Don’t forget, we have 1.4 billion people. This is over three times the population of the United States. So if you decide the second largest overall economy in the world, basically when it comes down to per cap that GDP, capita GDP, I think we’re less that 1/6 of that of the United States and even less than some other more developed countries in Europe. So you tell me where shall we put ourselves. This is very complicated issue, because per capita, as I said, is very small. But overall it’s very big, so we can do a lot of big things, and people are looking up, looking upon us to do much more around the world. So I think we are doing that, we are contributing to United Nations, we are the world’s biggest contributor to U.N. peacekeeping missions, and we are beginning out donations and humanitarian aid and all of that because we know we have to grow up. And, Trish, Thank you for that reminder.

Trish: Let’s get to tariffs. I’ve seen some of your commentaries too, and, Xin, I appreciate that you think China could lower some of its tariffs. I watched you say that, and I’m totally in agreement with you. In 2016, the average tariff effectively a tax that was charged on an American good in China was 9.9%. Now that was nearly three times what the US is charging. So what do you say about this? What do you think about saying, hey, you know, the heck with these tariffs, let’s get rid of them altogether. Would that work?

Xin: I think that would be a wonderful idea. I mean, don’t you think for american companies, products from China would be even cheaper, and for consumers in China, products from America would be so much more, so much cheaper too. I think that would be a wonderful idea. I think we should work towards that. But, you know, you talked about a rule-based system, rule-based order. This is the thing, if you want to change the rules, it has to be done in mutual consensus. Basically, we talk about tariffs. It is not just between China and the United States. I understand if you lower tariffs just between China and the United States. The Europeans will come, the Japanese will come, the Venezuelans probably would come and say, hey, we want the same tariff. You can’t discriminate, you know, between countries. So it is a very complicated settlement to reach, and I think there’s a lot of agreement that China and the…about the trade, yes, I’m talking about tariffs. And I think the last time when the world agreed on the kind of tariff reduction China should commit to was exactly the result of multilateral and years of difficult negotiations. The United States saw in its interests and decided to what degree they can agree or to what degree they could lower their tariff. China agreed to lower our tariff considerably. It is all the decision of countries according to their own self-interests. Now, things are different, yes, I agree, 20 years later, what are we going to do? Maybe these old rules need to be changed. You know what? Let’s talk about it. Let’s do it according to the rules. If you don”t like the rules, change the rules. But again, it has to be multi-national, multilateral.

Trish: Yeah, I was going to say, you know, you could go back to trade agreement of 1974, there is a rule that enables the United States to use tariffs to try and influence behavior of China should it be taking, stealing our intellectual property. And that, I think in some ways, is part of what this all comes back to, and it’s this sense of trust. I hear you on the forced technology transfer, and I think that some American companies perhaps have made some mistakes in terms of being willing to over look what they might have to give up in the near term. But this is an issue, I think, where the country as a whole needs to step in, and we are seeing United State do that. Perhaps, Xin, in a way that hasn’t happened. I mean, it’s been in the background, don’t get me wrong. I think previous administrations have identified the challenge, but have really been a little unwilling to take it on. So we are living in the very different times. How do you define state capitalism?

[The following part is an over speak]
Xin: You mean how do I define…Sorry, I didn’t hear the last… You mean forced technology transfer?

Trish: No, state capitalism. In other words…

Xin: Because you started with the whole technology transfer, and somehow you kind of skipped away.
[Done with over speak for this part.]

Trish: I’m paying a compliment here. I want to say, you know, your system of economics is very interesting, because, you know, you have a capitalist system, right? But it’s state-run. So talk to us about that. How do you define it?

Xin: Well, we would t like to define it as socialism with Chinese characteristics where the market, where market forces are expected to play the dominating or the deciding role in the allocation of resources. Basically, you know, let the market, we want it to be a market economy, but there are some Chinese characteristics. For instance, some state-owned enterprises which are playing an important but increasingly smaller role, maybe in the, in the economy. And everybody thinks that China’s Economy is state-owned, everything is state-controlled, everything is state, state. Let me tell you, it is not the true picture. If you look at the statistics, for instance, 80% of Chinese employees were employed by private enterprises. 80% of Chinese exports were done by private companies, were produced by private companies. About 65% of technological innovation were achieved, were carried out by private enterprises. The larges, some of the largest companies that affect our lives, for instance, some Internet companies or some 5G technology companies, they are private, so we are, yes, a socialist economy with Chinese characteristics, but it’s, you know, not everything is state-controlled, state run. Not like that. We are actually quite mixed and very dynamic and actually very, very open as well.

Trish: Well, I think you need to probably keep being open. I think that that, you know, as a free trade person myself, I think that that’s the direction to pursue. And, ultimately, that leads to greater economic prosperity for you and better economic prosperity of us. And so then you’ve got a win-win.

Xin: Absolutely.

Trish: This is interesting. I appreciate you being here. Thank you.

Xin: Thank you. Thank you so much. If you want to have a discussion in the future, we can do that. If you want to come to China, you’re welcome, and I’ll talk you around. Thank you, Trish, for the opportunity.

Trish: I’d love it. OK, you know, I would just say, as I told Xin, no one wants a trade war.

 

Spread the love

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *