Number of results to display per page
Search Results
62. China’s Infrastructure Projects in the Middle East: Lessons from China’s Engagement Elsewhere
- Author:
- Dominika Urhová
- Publication Date:
- 12-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
- Abstract:
- In our latest issue of Iqtisadi, Ms. Dominika Urhova discusses the economic strategy and role of China in the Middle East, and analyzes the implications of China's growing influence in the region.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Development, Economics, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Strategic Engagement
- Political Geography:
- China, Middle East, and Asia
63. The Diminishing Path to Growth: Can Xi Jinping Avoid Crisis during China's Economic Transition
- Author:
- Thomas J. Duesterberg
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Since Deng Xiaoping changed the trajectory of Chinese economic policy in 1978, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has amassed an impressive record of economic growth. Starting as a poverty-stricken agricultural society under rigid socialist rule, the country has grown steadily and rapidly to become the second largest economy in the world and carved out a growth path whose strength and longevity is historically unprecedented. As the 21st century has unfolded, the PRC has become a near peer competitor to the United States and other developed countries in terms of economic and political power. It is deploying this power in multiple ways that explicitly challenge US leadership in both the economic and global political spheres. If the PRC manages to maintain recent growth rates of around 6 percent per year, it will soon overtake the United States as the world’s largest economy and enhance its ability to challenge the global US leadership position, which has been a pillar of stability since World War II. The US and its allies had hoped that the PRC would become a responsible stakeholder in a liberal international order, but these hopes have been undermined in recent years by China’s increasingly apparent mercantilist economic policies, its aggressive expansion of political power, the resurgent dominance of state-owned enterprises, and the ever-more evident suppression of political liberties and traditional cultures in its sphere of influence. Many economists and political analysts, however, have come to question whether the top-down, mercantilist economic system in the PRC is sustainable in the medium to long term. A number of trends suggest weaknesses in the traditional economic and political structures that have propelled growth in China: growing private and public sector debt, adversely shifting demography, the return to prioritizing state-run enterprises over private firms, the continued reliance on an export-oriented economic system, growing weaknesses in the financial system, dependence on external commodity and technology suppliers, persistent economic and geographic inequality, and continued reliance on external financing. Recent economic data show that bankruptcies are growing, returns on investment are shrinking, and capital controls are contributing to unrealistic valuations of internal capital stock and housing stock. Additionally, regulations are stifling innovative sectors of the economy, and opaque and unregulated consumer financing products are undermining central bank monetary policy and contributing to over-leveraged balance sheets among consumers and small businesses. Consumer purchasing power that is consistently too weak to absorb domestic production, along with incentives to increase that production, has resulted in sustained trade surpluses that create a closed loop of increased investment in manufacturing and the need for growing markets. More recently, US-led efforts to deny China access to certain high-technology products and materials have underscored Chinese vulnerabilities in key sectors like telecommunications and semiconductors. This dynamic results in trade tensions with developing countries and in economically questionable investment in the developing world. These tensions, along with the undermining of developing world markets through subsidized PRC production, are increasingly causing costly disruptions in trade flows and placing pressure on the state banking system, which is the source of most external financing. If the mounting problems with the current Chinese economic model result in material slowing of growth or even sustained recession in the PRC, this would have substantial impact on the United States and its allies in two important ways. First, given that the PRC is the second largest (or in some measures the largest) economy in the world and has been an engine of growth for economies in Europe and the rest of Asia, slower growth or recession in China would likely lead to a global slowdown or recession. Second, because growth has immense political salience in the PRC—it justifies the authoritarian system of governance—a significant slowdown or recession could lead to political instability. Given Chinese nationalist rhetoric and revanchist ambitions toward Taiwan, political instability could in turn motivate risky military activities that escalate into confrontations with democratic, market-oriented countries. From the perspective of the United States, a slowdown could exacerbate the already serious trade and economic tensions, especially if nationalist forces in China sought to cast the US as the scapegoat for its internal problems. In sum, a better understanding of the weaknesses within the PRC growth model and its potential frailties would allow policymakers to craft targeted tools when needed to support US policy objectives, either economic or political, and to deter PRC aggression or the undermining of US economic interests. Policy tools such as trade tariffs, export controls, and limitations on direct investments and access to US financial markets could have material impact on Chinese performance. A more robust understanding of the impact of these tools would help the United States and its allies craft overall strategies to meet the Chinese economic and political challenge. Even while operating in a time frame longer than twelve months, many financial analysts have begun to describe the unfolding economic challenges in the PRC. The general public, including political opinion leaders and government analysts, have not generally understood the extent of the danger of economic crisis in China. Instead, the common assumption is that growth in the PRC, albeit a continuing economic threat to the US economy, is not in danger of faltering. This white paper takes a different view, exploring the structural weaknesses characterizing the current Chinese economic model and the recent policy changes initiated by President Xi Jinping. Its working assumption is that the combination of these two factors will result in a material weakening of the dynamic growth China has enjoyed since Deng Xiaoping set his country on a more Western-style growth path in the late 1970s. At a minimum, various factors will slow growth to levels more characteristic of modern developed economies; and at the extreme these factors may possibly lead to negative growth and weakening of the political strength that underpins the dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Economics, Economic Growth, and Xi Jinping
- Political Geography:
- China and Asia
64. Building on the Middle: Diversifying South Korea’s Foreign Policy Narrative and Economic Ties
- Author:
- Carolin Wefer
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- The rivalry between the United States and China is affecting countries in its midst. This particularly applies to South Korea. The country is a strong economic player with a successful net of free trade agreements. Additionally, it has branded itself as a middle power, a multilateralist, and good international citizen. However, South Korea’s middle power perspective has recently assumed a literal definition of being situated in the middle of two great powers. Seoul’s dependencies on both the U.S. and China are undeniable. As the conflict intensifies, it is thus essential for South Korea to diversify its ties through trade policy and multilateral fora. This requires leaving the literal middle power definition behind and leveraging its economic standing towards an increase in international status, as well as refocusing on the figurative middle power narrative that brought the country to its initial global esteem. Through diversification and the build-up of its economic and multilateral prowess, South Korea stands to lessen the shocks of the U.S.-China rivalry. Joining RCEP and obtaining a guest role at the G7 were important steps in that direction. They offer an expansion of both regional and global ties and an involvement in discussions on the redefinition of international fora, but more can be done.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Economics, Multilateralism, Rivalry, and Middle Power
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, South Korea, and United States of America
65. COVID-19, Supply Chains, and Dependence on China: The Indian Perspective
- Author:
- Amitendu Palit
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- China is India’s largest source of imports, nearly 15 percent of which are sourced from China. Many of India’s major imports—electrical machinery, electronic and semiconductor devices, fertilizers, antibiotics, iron and steel products, and vehicular parts—are extensively sourced from China. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the critical dependence of India’s pharmaceutical industry on China for active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs). The dependence on China for both intermediate and finished products, has encouraged India to incentivize greater production at home through production-linked-incentives (PLIs) and to work with Japan and Australia on reorganizing regional supply chains. The paper examines the repositioning of supply chains in the strategic industry of pharmaceuticals. Efforts to reduce dependence on China assume great importance in this regard as India strives to become the leading supplier of affordable vaccines for tackling COVID-19.) The decade of the 2020’s has begun with India embarking on the dedicated mission of reducing import dependence and increasing self-reliance. The COVID-19 pandemic has starkly exposed the frailties of supply chains relying heavily on China. For India, which relies extensively on China for several critical imports, no sector is more vulnerable to disruptions from over-dependence than its pharmaceuticals. India’s reputation as the “pharmacy of the world” drawn from its great proficiency in making affordable pharmaceutical formulations and vaccines, relies fundamentally on sourcing essential drug intermediates from China. As one of the leading actors in the world’s fight against COVID-19, India is wary of sourcing disruptions from China affecting its ability to contribute to expanding global health security. After focusing on the import dependence of India’s pharmaceutical industry on China, this paper analyzes the recent initiatives announced by India for increasing economic self-reliance and reducing such dependence. It concludes by reflecting on the prospects of India decoupling from China in sourcing pharmaceutical ingredients.
- Topic:
- Economics, COVID-19, Imports, and Supply Chains
- Political Geography:
- China, South Asia, India, and Asia
66. Taiwan’s Shifting Role in the Global Supply Chain in the U.S.- China Trade War
- Author:
- Jinji Chen, Hong-yu Lin, and Yi-ting Lien
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- The U.S.-China trade war and the pandemic have had a profound impact on cross-border supply chains. In the past few years of U.S.-China tensions, China has been accused of engaging in unfair competition by abusing its national power, from trade and technology to COVID-19 responses. Amid such accusations, some countries have been stepping back from cooperating with China due to national security concerns. As the lockdowns have further disrupted value chains and highlighted the vulnerability of global supply chains, enhancing supply chain resilience has now become a national imperative for the U.S., Japan, and other countries, with an emphasis on strengthening their production capabilities in the semiconductor and medical care industries.
- Topic:
- Economics, National Security, Trade Wars, and Supply Chains
- Political Geography:
- China, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America
67. The Pandemic’s Impact on Supply Chains from China and their Evolution: The View from South Korea
- Author:
- Jin Kyo Suh
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- Today’s global economy is highly interconnected and interdependent. Supply chains across the world are finely tuned to deliver parts just when they are needed, so that companies and industries do not need to waste money on maintaining big warehouses. The economic system runs with remarkable efficiency, and companies are able to keep inventory to a minimum. However, firms have started rethinking their supply chains in response to changing labor costs, advances in automation, rising protectionism, and external shocks, such as natural disasters. In particular, the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the structural fragility of current global supply chains and has forced many global enterprises to fundamentally reconsider their approach to global manufacturing and sourcing. The crisis has also highlighted geopolitical tensions, trade restrictions, and nationalist politics aimed at promoting a country’s domestic industries, which are likely to continue reshaping the global business landscape. As a consequence, most global enterprises are going to be under greater political and competitive pressure to increase their domestic production, grow employment in their home countries, and rethink their use of lean manufacturing strategies that involve minimizing the amount of inventory held in their global supply chains. Previously, supply chains were designed to keep costs low and inventories lean. However, supply chains are now being reworked to reduce the risks of future disruption even if doing so means incurring additional costs. Because China is decidedly the world’s largest goods exporter and is also currently mired in a trade conflict with the United States, supply chains going through China may be among the most vulnerable to future disruptions. Hyundai, South Korea’s largest automaker, temporarily stopped production lines at its factories in South Korea because of shortages of Chinese parts. The Hyundai shutdown—encompassing the first factory lines to be idled outside China—could foreshadow considerably more serious disruptions in the complex networks that supply automakers with essential components and materials (Automakers are especially susceptible to interruptions in the flow of goods because the industry is global, and cars are complex products with a myriad of precision parts). Recognizing the risk that dependency on China poses to national industries, some governments have offered manufacturers incentives to exit China and ease the pain of diversification. For example, Japan put $2.2 billion of its COVID-19 economic stimulus package into supporting its manufacturers moving toward shifting production outside of China. There was also mounting public pressure in some countries, such as the United States, to move essential production of pharmaceuticals and medical equipment out of China and closer to home. It is, however, not that simple to reduce global supply chain reliance on China: the nation still retains not only considerable comparative advantages in many areas (e.g. electronics, machinery, and equipment manufacturing), but also enormous purchasing power as the world’s second largest market. Even those companies that have diversified production are finding it hard to break free of China’s pervasive influence. Anticipating a rise in tariffs due to the U.S.-China trade conflict, videogame producer Nintendo shifted the manufacturing of its blockbuster gaming console called Switch to Vietnam in 2019. There was, however, a shortage of Switch consoles in stores in early 2020 due to a lack of essential components flowing to the company’s Vietnamese factories, as COVID-19 paused production of component parts by Chinese suppliers. In addition, most businesses have developed complex interdependencies, resulting in a deep tiering of supply chains. Many manufacturers depend on first-tier suppliers which, in turn, rely on a second-tier, and so on. Therefore, relocating factories or replacing all Chinese suppliers would be infeasible in the short-term. This chapter reviews the impact of supply chain disruption caused by COVID-19 on the South Korean economy and examines the future of regional supply chains centered on China. The rest of the paper is structured as follows. How supply chain disruption caused by COVID-19 will affect the South Korean economy, including trade, is discussed in Section 2. According to the latest national GDP report by the Bank of Korea (BOK), South Korea is going to see a mere 1 percent GDP contraction for 2020, the second-best performance among major economies behind only China. Reasons for why the South Korean economy was not seriously affected by the pandemic are also discussed in Section 2. Section 3 highlights the difficulty of reducing global supply chain reliance on China. China is likely to remain a key player, and the world must look at the reality that global supply chains are highly interconnected with China and that disconnecting from China’s supply chain is not an easy economic task for many multinational companies. The final section offers a few concluding remarks on deepening regionalism specifically in Asia, including policy implications for South Korea.
- Topic:
- Economics, COVID-19, and Supply Chains
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, and South Korea
68. The Future of U.S. Supply Chains: National Security and the Pandemic
- Author:
- Troy Stangarone
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- The COVID-19 pandemic has been the most significant economic disruption to the international economy since the Great Depression. The IMF estimates that the global economy contracted by 3.5 percent last year, while the WTO has projected a 5.3 percent decline in global trade. The economic impact on the United States has been significant as well. Early in the pandemic the United States experienced shortages of critical medical supplies and products, while the need to social distance has continued to place restrictions on the overall economy. For 2020, the pandemic saw GDP decline by 2.3 percent, while exports fell by 12.9 percent and imports by 6.4 percent. All of this has resulted an increased focus on supply chains and their vulnerabilities.
- Topic:
- Economics, National Security, COVID-19, and Supply Chains
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
69. The Big Squeeze: Japanese Supply Chains and Great Power Competition
- Author:
- Mireya Solis
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- Japan led, and was transformed, by the global supply chain revolution. Facing growing protectionism in industrialized markets and reeling from sharp yen appreciation in the aftermath of the 1985 Plaza Accord, Japanese firms responded with a drastic increase in their overseas investment activities. In so doing, many of these companies spearheaded the movement towards the fragmentation of production across national boundaries that sought efficiency gains by pooling the competitive advantages of different locations. Japan’s experience with the first supply chain revolution was transformative. It altered its export-led model with important implications for its foreign policy. Japanese investments in the United States helped abate trade frictions; integrated production was at the heart of the project to rebuild relations with China, and Japan’s lead as foreign investor in Southeast Asia has been a pillar of its blueprint for regional integration. The strains in the rules-based international trade order, however, have raised questions about the ability of global supply chains to continue to operate effectively. The U.S.-China geopolitical rivalry has manifested in a damaging trade war, and moves to restrict tech flows are creating decoupling pressures. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these trends with lockdowns that disrupt supply chains while export protectionism and calls to renationalize production are on the rise. The intensified risk environment could lead to a second supply chain revolution with a greater emphasis on redundancy and diversification and bifurcation of productive chains. How will Japan respond to the challenges to international production, a central engine of its economic prosperity, and with what consequences for its relations with major powers? To provide greater clarity on this overarching question, this paper is organized as follows. Section 1 describes the central role of Japanese firms in the emergence and deepening of regional production networks. Although Japan’s overall share of intra-regional trade has decreased in the 21st century—in tandem with China’s rise as regional hub- Japanese firms have retained their central role in GVCs (Global Value Chains) through their advanced manufacturing capabilities. Section 2 offers a glimpse of past and recent supply chain shocks—China’s embargo of rare earth metals, the Great East Japan Earthquake in Tohoku, and the Japan-Korea export control dispute—to illustrate both sources of vulnerability and resilience of Japanese GVCs. Section 3 assesses the systemic shift brought about by revived great power competition, and identifies some early adjustment responses from Japanese firms to a new normal of heightened geopolitical tension.
- Topic:
- Economics, Strategic Competition, and Supply Chains
- Political Geography:
- Japan, China, and Asia
70. Hong Kong’s future on edge: Countering China’s national security law
- Author:
- Ash Jain, Joel Kesselbrenner, and Peter Mattis
- Publication Date:
- 06-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Over the past seventy-five years, the United States and its allies have constructed and defended a rules-based international system that has provided unprecedented levels of peace, prosperity, and freedom. In recent years, the system has come under increasing strain, as a new era of great power competition has emerged. Despite hopes that China would become a “responsible stakeholder” in a rules-based system, Beijing has grown increasingly assertive, especially under President Xi Jinping. Beijing’s more confrontational path poses a significant challenge to a rules-based system. The challenge presented by China is particularly acute in the context of Hong Kong, where the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has brashly violated an international treaty and curtailed democratic institutions and human rights. As the world enters an era of strategic competition with China, Beijing’s actions in Hong Kong should be a priority for policymakers in the United States and allied countries. This report addresses the importance of Hong Kong within the context of China’s broader challenge to the rules-based system and offers recommendations for how the United States and its allies can prevent a further erosion of democracy in Hong Kong and, over time, seek to restore it. It suggests that the United States and its allies still have available a range of pragmatic policy tools that can can be used to exert pressure and impose meaningful costs on Beijing. These should be implemented as part of a broader, comprehensive strategy to prevent China from undermining the rules-based system in the security, economic, and governance domains. On June 30, 2020, the CCP imposed a sweeping new National Security Law on Hong Kong, effectively giving Beijing direct control over the autonomous territory. Since then, China has acted to erode Hong Kong’s liberal traditions, in violation of Beijing’s treaty commitments under the Sino-British Joint Declaration. The National Security Law has for all practical purposes outlawed democratic activism, organizing, and speech. Over the past year, Beijing has cracked down on Hong Kong’s democratic institutions and thrown the pro-democracy movement into disarray. Beijing’s crackdown in Hong Kong is aimed at achieving several objectives. First, China’s leaders seek to maintain the legitimacy of the CCP in the face of a pro-democracy movement that it fears could spread to the mainland. Second, they seek to advance the unification of China by harmonizing the cultural, social, and economic aspects of life across the country, including Hong Kong. Third, the CCP aims to achieve a comprehensive modernization of China, while retaining the Party’s leadership, including by reaping economic benefits from the Greater Bay Area Integration Plan. Finally, China’s crackdown is aimed at stemming the advance of a liberal, democratic world order by pushing back on democratic norms that it views as antithetical to the Party and a danger to its efforts to modernize China on its own terms.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Economics, Human Rights, Politics, Sanctions, and Business
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, and Hong Kong