Hello delegates!
Here's an article by the Council on Foreign Relations, an American think tank, on America's reaction to Made in China 2025.
Although the article has an American perspective, many of the concerns raised are applicable to other countries as well. Some of these concerns, such as national security, government influence on private Chinese companies, and an unfair playing field for non-Chinese companies in China, are key points to focus on when thinking critically about this topic and developing potential solutions.
How can China's leaders encourage the growth of local firms while also addressing concerns that government subsidies and protectionist measures by the central government are inhibiting international companies and providing an unfair advantage to Chinese firms?
Feel free to discuss in the comments below!
Hubert
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Hi Delegates, This is an excerpt from an interview with Peter Navaro, President Trump's Trade Advisor. Navaro undoubtedly has a biase...
-
Hello everyone, Check out our BMUN Learn website for practical advice on everything from forming blocs to writing resolutions. Feel free ...
-
On this day over 200 years ago, the Qianlong Emperor died on February 7, 1799. One of the longest-serving emperors of the Qing dynast...
(English only)
ReplyDeleteHello everyone,
The Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security would like to once again emphasize its loyalty to the "Made in China 2025" plan put forward by Comrade Li at a plenary session in 2018.
Our ministry believes that China must remain Chinese; in other words, our workforce and our industries must remain in the hands of our people. Too much foreign influence and we're back to the century of humiliation (百年国耻）。Of course, we want foreign investment and we highly encourage it, especially at the MOHRSS.
Thus, the American authors of the article are mistaken. The CFR does not seem to understand the fact that Made in China 2025 isn't a threat to global trade but that it is global trade, just another addition to it. Every government has the right to control trade and they frequently do it. Case in point, the current protectionist policies of the Trump administration in the US. The Chinese government tries to interfere as little as possible in trivial matters but will always intervene in cases of social benefit. That is the purpose of government and that is the motto of socialism with Chinese characteristics. However, the MOHRSS does agree that more oversight over the practices of domestic firms should be conducted. Perhaps a new bureau could be set up for such explicit purposes or a current one could take up this duty.
In any case, the MOHRSS is interested to hear the opinions of other ministers on the matter as well.