Another clickbait advocate for US-China decoupling
- Superseding the World Trade Organization with an ‘economic Nato’ and registering American business leaders too close to China as ‘foreign agents’ are more alarming ways of hawkish US economist Clyde Prestowitz to promote a hardline disassociation of two of the world’s largest economies
Anti-China hawks in Washington and anti-American pandas in Beijing are easy to spot. They basically say the same thing about each other’s country, only that the subject and object nouns in their sentences are usually reversed. Clyde Prestowitz, a prominent US labour economist, is right up there.
I do, however, have a grudging respect for some of his work, and am easily amused by his more outlandish remarks.
By the same standard, most CEOs on Wall Street and not a few on Main Street will have to register too, given their massive China exposure. There is, however, method to the guy’s madness.
He also argues for an “Economic Nato”, or ENato – a trading alliance made up of democratic countries that practise free-market capitalism – and a crackdown on US investment in China.
Sound crazy? Well, it’s his clickbait for calling for complete economic decoupling.
That’s still not a mainstream policy position, at least according to US Trade Representative Katherine Tai. But who knows what will happen with the next occupant in the White House? If Russia can invade Ukraine, the US may very well decouple from China. The world today is terrifyingly uncertain.
However, the record of Prestowitz’s policy recommendations is full of hits and misses. Writing in Foreign Policy a year ago, he blasted France and Germany for spearheading a comprehensive investment pact with China without listening to the then-new US president’s objections first.
China and Saudi Arabia reaffirm energy ties as Ukraine war pushes up prices
Does Washington consult Paris and Berlin when it concludes trade agreements with other countries? As it was, he spoke too soon; the EU-China pact is as good as dead.
Interestingly, he also criticised the Europeans for “claiming success in persuading Beijing to make ‘sustained efforts’ to sign the International Labour Organization’s [ILO] protocol against forced labour. One wonders if EU leaders are going to hold their breath until that signature appears”.
Well, they don’t have to hold their breath long. The Chinese parliament is ready to ratify the Forced Labour Convention (1930) and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention (1957). Both are foundational conventions of the ILO.
Is Prestowitz going to eat his own words? I doubt it.
