The second China International Supply Chain Expo (CISCE) opened in Beijing on Tuesday, bringing together 620 companies and institutions from around the world to showcase their products, technologies and solutions.
Foreign officials, guests and exhibitors expect to strengthen global supply chains at 2nd CISCE
Reporters talk to the camera at the 2nd China International Supply Chain Expo, which kicked off on November 26 in Beijing. Photo: Chen Tao/GT
A recent article in The New York Times accused China of waging so-called supply chain warfare by sanctioning the American drone company Skydio. The article also mentioned a Global Times editorial titled "US company sanctioned by China 'cries out in pain,' tearing off American façade," but it failed to acknowledge that Skydio was sanctioned by China due to its involvement in US arms sales to Taiwan island. Inventing new terms to exert the discourse hegemony and label other countries, including China, is a typical tactic employed by some US media and think tanks.
Currently, the second China International Supply Chain Expo (CISCE) is being held in Beijing, attracting over 620 companies, institutions, and international organizations, a 20 percent increase from the inaugural expo. One notable feature of this year's expo is the joint exhibition booths set up by Chinese and foreign companies.
For example, Apple and its Chinese suppliers are exhibiting together; German company Bosch, Chinese electric vehicle maker Xpeng, global mining and materials company Rio Tinto, and China Baowu Steel Group are showcasing their collaboration in an industrial chain partnership; and New Zealand dairy giant Fonterra is displaying its green agriculture supply chain alongside Chinese partners. Clearly, these companies want cooperation. None of them would agree with The New York Times' claim that China is waging "supply chain warfare."
The supply chain emerged alongside global industrial division and cooperation, serving as a "win-win chain" that benefits all countries. The successful hosting of the CISCE is a strong testament to this. Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, who appeared at this year's CISCE, praised the event, saying "I think it's a very great expo, a tour de force of innovation."
In fact, since the 1990s, economic globalization has developed rapidly, significantly reducing the costs of multinational collaboration. Many companies have enhanced the quantity and quality of supply chains through the global division of labor, outsourcing, and cooperation, maximizing the comparative advantages of various countries while also increasing employment and enhancing people's well-being.
However, a few countries, such as the US, have initiated "supply chain warfare," transforming the "win-win chain" into a "blockade chain" and a "confrontation chain." This has caused disruptions and damage to the originally smooth-running global supply chain. These countries narrowly view trade deficits as "losses," forcibly swaying public opinion, and attempting to reverse so-called "unfair trade" through imposing additional tariffs. The ultimate result is that domestic consumers pay higher price.
A few countries feel uneasy and anxious about China's rising status in the global supply chain, which has led them to strengthen control over key technologies, critical resources, and essential links. They artificially politicize and weaponize the supply chain, promoting "decoupling," building "small yard, high fences," and abandoning international cooperation based on the resource endowments and comparative advantages of various countries. They enforce the "de-sinicization" of multinational companies' supply chains and reduce their own dependence on Chinese products. As a result, the institutional costs of supply chain cooperation are continuously increasing, undermining the original advantages of high efficiency and low costs, while adding more and more uncertainty and instability.
The reason the supply chain is referred to as a "win-win chain" lies in the fact that it is not merely a simple accumulation of independent links, but rather a complex system that is tightly interconnected and interdependent, formed over a long period of time through the collaboration of various countries, enterprises, talents, technologies, and regulations. Just as the skeletal and nervous systems of the human body are the cornerstones of sustaining life, every link and component of the supply chain is an organic part of the normal functioning of the global economy. Once this organic structure is damaged, it is akin to a broken bone or dislocated joint in the human body, and the difficulty of repair far exceeds the superficial loss. When the global supply chain experiences "dislocation" due to political interference, many long-accumulated structural advantages cease to exist. Although the supply of certain products or resources can be restructured, the deep cooperative relationships formed historically are difficult to repair. Furthermore, the rupture of a single link can trigger a chain reaction, leading to the accumulation of systemic risks in the global economy.
The supply chain belongs to the world, not to any single company or country, and it should not be used as a weapon. In the era of economic globalization, only by adhering to open cooperation in global industrial and supply chains can we achieve win-win development. China is committed to promoting the establishment of an open world economic system and maintaining the stability and smooth operation of global industrial and supply chains. It is not only a participant and beneficiary of the global industrial and supply chain cooperation but also a steadfast defender and builder of economic globalization. Those who claim that China is waging "supply chain warfare" have got the wrong playbook.
Ability to speak many languages a great advantage, academics say
A GOOD command of languages opens doors for fresh graduates entering the workforce.
Faced with the challenges of globalisation, and a competitive job market, multilingualism is a crucial communication skill to have, according to academics.
Being multilingual provides a greater advantage for employability, especially in a borderless world, linguistics expert Prema Ponnudurai, who oversees Taylor’s University Centre for Languages, said.
Last year, a report by the European Commission revealed that employees who speak another language are generally paid better than their monolingual counterparts.
And in 2019, up to 35% of people responsible for hiring or managing people told Forbes that an employee’s proficiency in another language resulted in extended job offers, job interview prospects, promotion recommendations and pay raises.
The article, referencing “The Wage Premium From Foreign Language Skills” survey, highlighted how speaking a second language can add 11% and 35% to one’s salary, depending on the language and the country employees are based in.
Dr Teh: Multilingualism gives job seekers an advantage.
National Association of Private Educational Institutions (Napei) secretary-general Dr Teh Choon Jin said proficiency in multiple languages is an invaluable communication skill which allows students to expand their networks easily when they enter the workforce.
“There is an element of familiarity when a person connects with another in a common language.
“Living in a multicultural country like Malaysia with various languages and dialects, one can easily switch from one language to another seamlessly.
“As international students from diverse backgrounds and countries flock to Malaysian universities, the integration and cultural exchange through engagement where language plays a part will enrich the learning experiences for both Malaysian and international students.
“There are also studies that show how being multilingual can improve a person’s cognitive ability through their sensory processes.
“Being multilingual is an underrated but hugely critical skill to have today more than ever,” explained Teh, who is also Asia Pacific University of Technology & Innovation (APU) senior director and registrar.
Knowledge transfer
But setting oneself apart from other jobseekers to secure employment isn’t the only advantage multilingualism holds.Prof Dr Mohd Tajuddin Mohd Rasdi of UCSI University said language opens up an avenue of understanding different cultures, values and belief systems.
Prof Mohd Tajuddin, who is from the varsity’s Tan Sri Omar Centre for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Studies, said language isn’t only a means of ordering food or asking for directions.
“Understanding another language not only opens the door to information, but also to spiritual, cultural and political understanding, which is essential.
Prof Dr Mohd Tajuddin: Language promotes understanding between different communities.
“The aspect of communication also involves appreciating and dignifying ‘the other’ and if we cannot learn this, then we are in conflict with our society.“This could lead to people sticking to their own groups, be it culturally or religiously, and this is not good,” he shared.
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Institute of Malay World and Civilisation (ATMA) director Prof Datuk Seri Dr Awang Sariyan said in addition to expanding career opportunities, the ability to speak more than one language allows for the transfer of knowledge between countries, fosters better understanding among citizens globally, and promotes unity, tolerance and the sharing of universal human achievements.
No nation, he said, should ignore the development of knowledge, science and technology in a barrier-free world.
This is vital, said Prof Awang, if the country wants to be competitive internationally.
“Language is the main vehicle in the context of countries benefiting from the development of knowledge, science and technology.
CLICK TO ENLARGECLICK TO ENLARGE
“There should not be a ‘clash of civilisation’. Instead there must be cooperation, sharing of knowledge, tolerance and respect among citizens,” he noted.
ATMA has been appointed by the Higher Education Ministry as the secretariat to start the strategic cooperation between HEIs in Malaysia and selected Asean countries to develop important aspects of Malay civilisation at the international level.
This is part of Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Dr Noraini Ahmad’s recommendation to the government to set up a Bahasa Malaysia (BM) language development steering committee for HEIs, in line with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob’s call for government officials to speak BM at conferences.
Ismail Sabri said there are more than 300 million people in South-East Asia speaking the language, and that it is the seventh most widely used language in the world.
“It is my ambition to make BM the second official language of Asean,” he said during his winding-up speech at the Umno general assembly on March 19.
Promote proficiency
Teh noted that proficiency in any language will only be enhanced through regular practice.
“There should be activities that are designed to promote the use of various languages, for example, social interaction using a specific language on certain days or during special events,” he said, citing initiatives such as local and international students communicating in BM when visiting an Orang Asli village, a debate or storytelling session in certain languages, and a national language month, as examples.
Activities and events geared towards promoting the usage of languages would enhance engagement and social integration while allowing students to practise their conversational skills, he offered.
Prema suggested that the design and development of the languages curriculum in HEIs be reviewed.
Prominent global languages for business and commerce, diplomacy, cyberspace, hospitality and the sciences, she said, should be structured as core subjects in the related disciplines.
“With this added importance to languages at the higher education level, we will be able to create proficient multilingual graduates.
Prema: Set up a multilingual steering committee in HEIs.
“University-industry partnerships with international language organisations are crucial in exposing students to the real world and in improving their language proficiency in an immersive environment.
“Joint accreditations for these subjects by such organisations will be an added value and provide due recognition,” she explained.
This level of exposure and qualifications will give students the opportunity to apply their language skills in a professional context and to understand the importance of being multilingual, she said, while calling on the Education Ministry to train more language teachers for schools.
Language acquisition, she said, occurs more easily at a younger age.
While students currently have the option of studying languages like Tamil and Mandarin at primary and secondary levels, the lack of trained teachers means that there is a disparity of learning opportunities between rural and urban schools, she noted.
“We should train more teachers in other languages if we are to promote a robust multilingual talent pool.”
Teens: Learn more languages
“I am one of the few Malaysians who are monolingual. It is incredibly uncommon in a country that is as culturally diverse as ours, and it has come with many challenges. In the private school where I studied, Bahasa Malaysia (BM) was not prioritised as our syllabus was in English. Because of this, I was not aware of just how critically I needed to know the language. It was only after I graduated at the age of 16 and moved on into the ‘real world’ that I realised not knowing any other language besides English could pose many challenges. Today, I still can’t go to the government sector or local-based businesses on my own because I cannot convey what I want. I am learning new phrases every day in hopes that I will improve my fluency in BM.”
Keerat Kaur Wathan, 18
“Hello, Selamat Pagi, Ni Hao, I speak three languages: English, BM and Mandarin. I have also been trying to learn the Cantonese and Hokkien dialects from my grandparents. Although I still have much to learn in all these languages, being multilingual has helped me tremendously within and beyond Malaysia. For instance, since I can draw words from a few languages, I can convey my thoughts and feelings with more precision. In addition, learning how to quickly translate between languages has definitely improved my cognitive skills. Learning the grammar, vocabulary and structure of one language can better prepare you to learn another like how Mandarin has been crucial to me learning the dialects. Furthermore, as I am studying overseas, I stay in a dormitory with international students. When possible, I try to converse with my peers in their native languages to make communication more comfortable for them. Thus, I am extremely grateful to have learnt these languages. If you are looking to learn new languages, I hope you will believe in your abilities and eventually reap the rewards.”
Amelia Lim, 18
“I speak both BM and English, and am learning to speak Spanish. Though I am nowhere near being fluent in Spanish, I am proud to say I can speak fluently in the other two languages. There is no denying that being able to speak more than one language has its benefits. For instance, being bilingual has definitely helped me in my studies. I am able to multitask and solve problems more efficiently because I am able to switch between the languages. Furthermore, it can increase our knowledge of other cultures. We can easily make friends with people in different countries and understand their cultures. Travelling will be much more fun and exciting as well because we will be able to communicate with the locals. In conclusion, everyone should make it a priority to learn at least two languages. Learning a new language may seem daunting, but it will help you in the long run. I hope one day I can achieve my dream of visiting Spain and speaking Spanish fluently.”
Syaza Ahmad Munawir, 18
- All students featured here are participants of the BRATs Young Journalist Programme run by The Star’s Newspaper-inEducation (StarNiE) team. To join Star-NiE’s online youth community, go to acebook.com/niebrats..
Experts: Ability to speak multiple languages important in borderlines world
'Multilingualism makes our graduates global citizens...' -Dr. Teh Choon Jin
PETALING JAYA: Employers and academicians back the government’s plan to promote Bahasa Malaysia (BM) while also extolling the advantages of being multilingual – particularly among young talents.The ability to speak different languages, they say, is all the more valuable in a borderless world.
Prema Ponnudurai, Linguistics expert from Taylor’s University’s Centre for Languages, suggested that a multilingual steering committee in Malaysian higher education institutions (HEIs) be set up.
Such a committee could serve to identify language trends and evaluate language-based issues which take into account national as well as global demands, said Prema, who is also the varsity’s Liberal Arts and Humanities department head.
“This will ensure that our graduates start on the right footing when they venture into the real world,” she said, adding that having the proficiency to communicate effectively in more languages creates greater options for students as such skills are beneficial to employers.
National Association of Private Educational Institutions secretary-general Dr Teh Choon Jin said being multilingual gives job seekers an advantage over their peers as bosses see this as an asset.
“In this era of globalisation, Malaysian graduates who are multilingual are able to work in different parts of the world so this skill is a plus point in advancing their career.
“It makes our graduates global citizens who can work and live wherever they go,” he said.
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Institute of Malay World and Civilisation director Prof Datuk Seri Dr Awang Sariyan agreed, adding that multilingualism offers better employment opportunities.
He said efforts in uplifting the status and role of the national language does not deny the importance of mastering other languages.
Prof Awang added that the government could work on both areas simultaneously, as multilingualism is pertinent in facing globalisation while BM is significant for national identity and unity.
“Multilingualism allows nations to develop knowledge, especially in science and technology, which is vital for us to be globally competitive.“Therefore, the government must have a two-pronged strategy in implementing the national language policy while promoting multilingualism.
“This is the model used by countries like Germany, Netherlands, France, China, Japan and South Korea in their language and education planning,” he said, adding that the government must ensure that the existing policy to encourage the learning of a third language in schools is implemented nationwide.
On March 7, Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Dr Noraini Ahmad recommended the government to establish a BM development steering committee for HEIs.
She said her ministry has identified 19 universities in Brunei, Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines that have the potential to hold collaborative programmes with local universities.
The move came following Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob’s call for BM to be used at official government functions abroad when English is not the host country’s national language.
Malaysian Employers Federation president Datuk Syed Hussain Syed Husman said Ismail Sabri is also encouraging the private sector to use BM in its official communications, but in today’s global society, business is increasingly being conducted across borders with English often used as an international language of communication.
The ability to communicate in English, said Syed Hussain, is a huge asset to many companies including those that do not use English as an official language.
“We should be encouraging Malaysians to be multilingual and speak at least three to four languages. We sometimes lose the essence of what is said when we rely on interpreters,” he said.
MAN and nature are running out of time. That’s the core message of the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released this week.
`
UN secretary-general António Guterres called the report a “code red for humanity”. “The evidence is irrefutable: greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel burning and deforestation are choking our planet and putting billions of people at immediate risk.”
`
What can we, individually and collectively, do about it?
`
Many animals and human beings cannot survive at high temperatures. Seattle, a temperate climate city, hit 104 degrees Fahrenheit in June, only four degrees below the maximum 108 degrees where humans can’t survive.
`
Like the pandemic, the twin effects of climate warming and biodiversity loss are hurting the bottom half of society who are most vulnerable to natural and/or man-made disasters.
`
Indeed, indigenous and native people who live closest to nature, comprising 5%-6% of world population scattered in remote areas, are likely to face loss of culture, lives and habitat because all their water, food and livelihoods will be devastated by climate change.
`
In essence, we are in an existential situation whereby nature is being destroyed by human excess consumption, which creates pollution and carbon emission, but all this is made possible by monetary creation by bankers and businesses who seem to care more about their profits than the human condition.
`
Thus, decisions over climate change, human activities, financialisation and globalisation are essentially moral questions over the power to lead us out of the wilderness of nuclear destruction through war or planetary burning.
`
In his monumental “History of Western Philosophy” (1946), British philosopher Bertrand Russell argued that those in power understand that they have twin powers over nature and political power to rule other human beings.
`
Traditionally, the limits to such power have been God and truth. But today, religions are also in turmoil on what is their role in finding pathways out of the current mess. Furthermore, FakeNews obscures what is truth.
`
The current mess is not unlike the Lost People wandering in the desert waiting for Moses to find the 21st century version of the 10 Commandments. Unfortunately, the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are aspirations and not commandments.
`
As economists say, climate change is a market failure, but there is no modern day Moses nor operating manuals to translate SDGs to environmental, social and governance (ESG) projects and programmes for businesses, governments and social institutions.
`
In this twin injustices against man and nature, people sense that there is both a moral vacuum in globalised modernity, as well as lack of a shared, practical pathway out of planetary destruction. If secular science or politics cannot help us, is religion the solution?
`
Ironically, religion has played a far larger role in the current quandary than meets the eye.
`
Two papal bulls empowered the Portuguese and Spanish conquests of new land in the second half of the 15th century. Papal bulls are public decrees, letters patent or charters issued by a Catholic pope.
`
The Papal Bull Romanus Pontifex issued by Pope Nicholas V in 1455 gave Portuguese King Alfonso the right to “invade, search out, capture, vanquish and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ whatsoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery... to convert them to his profit... [such assets becoming] justly and lawfully acquired.”
`
The Papal Bull Inter Caetera, issued after Christopher Columbus returned from America in 1493, not only reinforced the Spanish right to property and slavery seized or colonised from non-Christian kingdoms or pagan natives, but also established the Doctrine of Discovery.
`
This doctrine formed the basis of national and later international laws that gave licence to explorers to claim vacant land (terra nullius) on discovery. Vacant land meant land not populated by Christians, and thus the Christian discoverers and occupiers could have legal title to them, regardless of the rights of the indigenous people.
`
In short, historically it was the Church that gave the moral blessing for colonisation, slavery and genocide during the Age of Globalisation. The tragedy is that the Doctrine of Discovery is now embodied in US laws.
`
In the historic case of Johnson vs McIntosh (1823), Supreme Court Justice John Marshall ruled: “According to every theory of property, the Indians had no individual rights to land; nor had they any collectively, or in their national capacity; for the lands occupied by each tribe were not used by them in such a manner as to prevent their being appropriated by a people of cultivators. All the proprietary rights of civilised nations on this continent are founded on this principle. The right delivered from discovery and conquest, can rest on no other basis; and all existing titles depend on the fundamental title of the crown by discovery.”
`
If humanity still treats nature as a free asset to be mastered, and other human beings to be dominated and disenfranchised because of the Doctrine of Discovery, how can we move forward morally to create human inclusivity and planetary justice?
`
Under secular science, the elites that control the media, military, economy, political or social institutions have forgotten that they are not masters of man and nature, but stewards to protect human well being and nature for future generations.
`
In this polarised age, we forget that the shamans of the indigenous people carry ancient wisdoms about how to live with nature and each other through traditional values, medicine and shared rituals. The shamans are not seers but healers and carriers of tribal memories and values.
`
When modern scientists and technocrats have no solutions to present problems except more speed, scale and scope in the rush to modernity, isn’t it time to listen to traditional wisdoms from those who have living but dying memories of how to live with nature and each other?
`
Without moral bearings, no wonder we have no maps out of the current mess.
Few Westerners see the irony of a supposedly closed China celebrating the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), when communism was born but essentially rejected in the West. What was it about Marx that resonated with Chinese civilisation that prided itself with its own ancient and enduring philosophy? (PIC: Chinese President Xi Jinping waves as he attends a gala in connection with the anniversary - AP)
"Globalisation is interpreted as universalisation of American or European values and standards. But the fact remains that these standards and rules were imposed historically by conquest, colonisation and force".
China Does Not Recognize The Rule-Based International Order imposed historically by Conquest, Colonisation and Force !
https://youtu.be/_ThU1vvW0A4
China has never interfered in the internal affairs of other countries and never obstructed their development. It will never accept any country interfering in China's internal affairs and obstructing its development. Today's China has long been different from the China of 100 years ago. No one and no force should underestimate the Chinese people's firm will and strong ability to defend national sovereignty, security, and development interests.
WHY is Marxism thriving in China and not in Marx’s place of birth? Why is Buddhism more practiced in East Asia than in India? Why has Islam more followers outside Saudi Arabia?
Ideas and religion spread through globalisation, but it was really their localisation that created more believers and followers.
What succeeded was not globalisation, but glocalisation, the internalisation of universal ideas and beliefs by the many, and not just the few.
Few Westerners see the irony of a supposedly closed China celebrating the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), when communism was born but essentially rejected in the West.
What was it about Marx that resonated with Chinese civilisation that prided itself with its own ancient and enduring philosophy?
London School of Economics Emeritus Professor Megnai Desai, writing on “Marx’s Revenge”, made the shrewd observation that the Chinese Revolution in the 20th century was very different from the French and American Revolutions in the 18th century.
The French Revolution was a domestic rebellion against the monarchy and the landed gentry, whilst the American Revolution was rebellion against British foreign domination
Both created republics and preached equality, liberty and freedom, but both went on to create empires, one by conquering lands from the native Indians and Mexico, and the other through Napoleon’s rampage in Europe.
The Chinese Revolution was different because it was simultaneously a struggle against foreign invasion (Japanese and earlier Eight Nations Alliance) as well as the Nationalist government that favoured the capitalist and landed classes.
The CCP won because it represented the rural peasantry, rather than adopting the Comintern strategy of starting the revolution from the cities. In short, the CCP localised universal Communism with Chinese characteristics. It was practical rather than ideological.
By the time of the fall of the Qing Dynasty in 1911, Chinese thinkers struggled with what would replace the old order.
The country fell into warlordism. The Nationalist Party under Sun Yat-sen struggled to balance the conservative wing that represented the landlords and capitalists, and the left wing influenced by Communism and socialism.
Chinese revolutionaries followed closely the Russian Revolution in 1917, because it was then the most recent model of social transformation. The Chinese elite understood that the rebuilding of China from the collapse of the old order was a monumental task. The country was backward and the uneducated masses were unprepared for modernity, vulnerable to foreign conquest.
Even though they felt the burden of history, they also understood that there was no parallel in history on the scale of Chinese transformation.
The Chinese Left took to Marxian thinking because Marx gave both a historical and political economy perspective on how capitalism would evolve, as well as a philosophical tool in terms of Hegelian dialectics.
Marx used the profound insights of the Prussian philosopher Hegel that transformations come from contradictions of opposites, in which change will not happen in a smooth line, but through revolution or discontinuity.
Marx’s discovery of dialectic materialism – in everything, the contradiction and interaction between opposites lead to the destruction of the old and emergence of the new – was music to the ears of those who sought a path out for the New China.
Furthermore, the fundamental ideas of dialectics were very similar to the Chinese yin-yang philosophy of the I Ching and Dao Dejing. As Lenin put it, “dialectics is the study of the contradiction within the very essence of things. Development is the struggle of opposites.”
Having theory is one thing, but putting these ideas into practice is another. We can only appreciate China’s miraculous transformation from a backward economy to the second largest economy in the world by understanding that this was done through essentially three dictums: “seek truth from facts”, crossing the river by feeling the stones” and “it doesn’t matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice.”
In other words, make fact-based decisions, always try or test under uncertainty, and above all, be practical and have an open mind. Change is a process between conflicting contradictions. There is no absolute black and white.
Historian Ray Huang, one of the finest sinologists of his generation and a former Nationalist soldier, wrote in the Preface to his classic “China: A Macro-History”: “Chinese history differs from the history of other peoples and other parts of the world because of an important factor: its vast multitudes.
In the imperial period as well as in the very recent past, practical problems had to be translated into abstract notions in order to be disseminated.
In turn, at the local level the message had once again to be rendered into everyday language.”
It is the reduction of very complicated policies into simple language that the Chinese people had to understand and own that enabled them to buy into the transformation, despite the huge sacrifices at the individual and community levels. The people’s eyes are clearer than those of the elites.
The US-China rivalry has done the world a favour by contrasting very fundamental worldviews. When the West preaches a value and rules-based order, what is meant is that freedom, democracy and individual rights are absolute – essentially a zero-sum “my way or no way.”
Globalisation is interpreted as universalisation of American or European values and standards. But the fact remains that these standards and rules were imposed historically by conquest, colonisation and force.
When China, Russia, India or any other country deviates or disagrees with that, then they must be contained, confronted or sanctioned. Localisation or being different is almost seen as deviant rather than a celebration of diversity.
Civilisations reach their highest levels through tolerance and openness. When they become inward-looking, fundamentalist and mono-thinking, fragility and decay sets in.
The world is simultaneously becoming more global in inter-connectivity, even as regionalisation, fragmentation and localisation speeds up.
Glocalisation, the simultaneous contradiction between global and local, is to be welcomed, rather than feared.
The future will always be open, uncertain and contradictory. Such diversity is the nature of humanity.
Andrew Sheng comments on global affairs from an Asian perspective. The views expressed here are his own
Few Westerners see the irony of a supposedly closed China celebrating the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), when communism was born but essentially rejected in the West. What was it about Marx that resonated with Chinese civilisation that prided itself with its own ancient and enduring philosophy? (PIC: Chinese President Xi Jinping waves as he attends a gala in connection with the anniversary - AP)
"Globalisation is interpreted as universalisation of American or European values and standards. But the fact remains that these standards and rules were imposed historically by conquest, colonisation and force".
WHY is Marxism thriving in China and not in Marx’s place of birth? Why is Buddhism more practiced in East Asia than in India? Why has Islam more followers outside Saudi Arabia?
Ideas and religion spread through globalisation, but it was really their localisation that created more believers and followers.
What succeeded was not globalisation, but glocalisation, the internalisation of universal ideas and beliefs by the many, and not just the few.
Few Westerners see the irony of a supposedly closed China celebrating the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), when communism was born but essentially rejected in the West.
What was it about Marx that resonated with Chinese civilisation that prided itself with its own ancient and enduring philosophy?
London School of Economics Emeritus Professor Megnai Desai, writing on “Marx’s Revenge”, made the shrewd observation that the Chinese Revolution in the 20th century was very different from the French and American Revolutions in the 18th century.
The French Revolution was a domestic rebellion against the monarchy and the landed gentry, whilst the American Revolution was rebellion against British foreign domination
Both created republics and preached equality, liberty and freedom, but both went on to create empires, one by conquering lands from the native Indians and Mexico, and the other through Napoleon’s rampage in Europe.
The Chinese Revolution was different because it was simultaneously a struggle against foreign invasion (Japanese and earlier Eight Nations Alliance) as well as the Nationalist government that favoured the capitalist and landed classes.
The CCP won because it represented the rural peasantry, rather than adopting the Comintern strategy of starting the revolution from the cities. In short, the CCP localised universal Communism with Chinese characteristics. It was practical rather than ideological.
By the time of the fall of the Qing Dynasty in 1911, Chinese thinkers struggled with what would replace the old order.
The country fell into warlordism. The Nationalist Party under Sun Yat-sen struggled to balance the conservative wing that represented the landlords and capitalists, and the left wing influenced by Communism and socialism.
Chinese revolutionaries followed closely the Russian Revolution in 1917, because it was then the most recent model of social transformation. The Chinese elite understood that the rebuilding of China from the collapse of the old order was a monumental task. The country was backward and the uneducated masses were unprepared for modernity, vulnerable to foreign conquest.
Even though they felt the burden of history, they also understood that there was no parallel in history on the scale of Chinese transformation.
The Chinese Left took to Marxian thinking because Marx gave both a historical and political economy perspective on how capitalism would evolve, as well as a philosophical tool in terms of Hegelian dialectics.
Marx used the profound insights of the Prussian philosopher Hegel that transformations come from contradictions of opposites, in which change will not happen in a smooth line, but through revolution or discontinuity.
Marx’s discovery of dialectic materialism – in everything, the contradiction and interaction between opposites lead to the destruction of the old and emergence of the new – was music to the ears of those who sought a path out for the New China.
Furthermore, the fundamental ideas of dialectics were very similar to the Chinese yin-yang philosophy of the I Ching and Dao Dejing. As Lenin put it, “dialectics is the study of the contradiction within the very essence of things. Development is the struggle of opposites.”
Having theory is one thing, but putting these ideas into practice is another. We can only appreciate China’s miraculous transformation from a backward economy to the second largest economy in the world by understanding that this was done through essentially three dictums: “seek truth from facts”, crossing the river by feeling the stones” and “it doesn’t matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice.”
In other words, make fact-based decisions, always try or test under uncertainty, and above all, be practical and have an open mind. Change is a process between conflicting contradictions. There is no absolute black and white.
Historian Ray Huang, one of the finest sinologists of his generation and a former Nationalist soldier, wrote in the Preface to his classic “China: A Macro-History”: “Chinese history differs from the history of other peoples and other parts of the world because of an important factor: its vast multitudes.
In the imperial period as well as in the very recent past, practical problems had to be translated into abstract notions in order to be disseminated.
In turn, at the local level the message had once again to be rendered into everyday language.”
It is the reduction of very complicated policies into simple language that the Chinese people had to understand and own that enabled them to buy into the transformation, despite the huge sacrifices at the individual and community levels. The people’s eyes are clearer than those of the elites.
The US-China rivalry has done the world a favour by contrasting very fundamental worldviews. When the West preaches a value and rules-based order, what is meant is that freedom, democracy and individual rights are absolute – essentially a zero-sum “my way or no way.”
Globalisation is interpreted as universalisation of American or European values and standards. But the fact remains that these standards and rules were imposed historically by conquest, colonisation and force.
When China, Russia, India or any other country deviates or disagrees with that, then they must be contained, confronted or sanctioned. Localisation or being different is almost seen as deviant rather than a celebration of diversity.
Civilisations reach their highest levels through tolerance and openness. When they become inward-looking, fundamentalist and mono-thinking, fragility and decay sets in.
The world is simultaneously becoming more global in inter-connectivity, even as regionalisation, fragmentation and localisation speeds up.
Glocalisation, the simultaneous contradiction between global and local, is to be welcomed, rather than feared.
The future will always be open, uncertain and contradictory. Such diversity is the nature of humanity.
Andrew Sheng comments on global affairs from an Asian perspective. The views expressed here are his own
With the new President in the White House,
the time to embrace the global community is now and not delay any
longer. Washington will then be looked upon with great respect after
four years of rule by one man, which was nothing but traumatic, chaotic
and deceitful.( Pic shows Biden signing executive orders on first day of
Presidency.)
AS we now welcome the era of Bidenomics over the next four years, one cannot help but to review the impact of the previous US president’s tenure which ended just three days ago.
One of Trump’s rallying cry was his call of making America great again. With that, the US embarked on a trade war with the rest of the world, in particular with China, to reduce the massive trade deficits that the US has been experiencing for umpteen years.
In addition, Trump also wanted to bring foreign manufacturers to the US on the assumption that this would reduce their import bill, attracting foreign direct investments as well as creating jobs for Americans.
The trade war saw US imposing tariffs on Chinese goods, and in retaliation, China too started to impose tariffs on US goods – effectively a tit-for-tat move by the two superpowers where effectively nobody wins.
The US-China trade war led to nervousness in markets, in particular during the 2018-2019 period, but the impact of the stand-off tapered off sometime about a year ago when both agreed to enter into the Phase 1 trade deal.
To recap, that trade truce entailed China agreeing to increase the import of American goods and services by at least US$200bil over the next two years. China, which purchased some US$130bil in total goods and US$56bil in services in 2017, was supposed to increase total imports by about US$162bil in total goods purchased and US$38bil in services over the two-year period.
In terms of breakdown for the year 2020 and 2021, China was to increase its imported goods by US$64bil in 2020 and US$98bil this year from the base line figure of 2017. In terms of services, the level of imports by China was expected to increase by about US$13bil last year and US$25bil this year.
Since the Phase 1 trade deal was inked about a year ago, how has the Chinese trade with the rest of the world and in particular the US performed in 2020? Overall, with the December 2020 trade data just released last week, China saw its total exports for the year rising by 3.6% while imports fell by 1.1% year-on-year (y-o-y).
This, of course, would lead to one thing – a widening trade surplus. In fact, China’s 2020 total trade surplus jumped by 27% to US$535bil – the highest in five years.
How about China’s trade with the US? Based on the data released, China’s trade surplus with the US rose by 7.1% to US$316.9bil and contrary to what president Trump intended to achieve with his tariff measures. Chinese exports to the US in 2020 increased by 7.9% to US$451.8bil while imports surged 9.8% y-o-y to US$134.9bil.
This definitely fell short of the targeted US$194bil total goods that was supposed to be imported by China in 2020 (US$130bil base line + US$64bil target). In terms of percentage, the shortfall was as much as 30%.
Based on the data from the US, trade with China up to November 2020 showed that US exports to China totalled some US$110bil while imports stood at US$393.6bil, giving rise to a trade deficit of US$283.6bil.
It is likely that for the month of December 2020, the US will add another US$30bil in deficit and thus bringing the 2020 total trade deficit with China to around US$314bil. Total exports for the year will likely come in at about US$125bil, up 15.8% y-o-y; while imports are expected to come in 3% lower at US$439bil.
Compared with the 2018 import value, US imports from China effectively would have dropped by about US$102bil but exports to China have increased by just 2.5% from the 2018 level of US$122bil.
In essence, while the US bought 19% less goods from China, what it sold to Beijing was barely any higher. In addition, while the US trade deficit with China may have improved by about US$30bil y-o-y in 2020, the Chinese trade surplus with the rest of the world is significantly higher.
What does this mean for Phase 1 Trade Deal?
With a shortfall of some US$70bil (based on US data) in 2020 and on the assumption that China is to import an additional amount of US$98bil this year to meet the target of Phase 1 trade deal, China would need to import as much as US$298bil worth of goods from the US this year!
This is derived after taking into consideration the base line of US$130bil in 2017, adding the US$70bil shortfall in 2020 and topping it up with the pledged US$98bil increase. Indeed, it is highly unlikely that China would be able to meet this target, which is more than doubled what it imported from the US last year.
Effectively, Phase 1 trade deal is dead in the water. Trump’s strategy can be said to have failed and China in effect has emerged as a clear winner in the trade war. What is now left to be seen is what will Bidenomics bring to the table as far as the trade war is concerned.
Will the new President soften his approach towards China? Will it be status quo or will Biden continue with Trump’s hard approach in dealing with China? After all, Janet Yellen, the treasury secretary nominee was quoted as saying that the US is prepared to take on China’s “abusive” trade and economic practices.
However, in the interest of globalisation and ease of movement of goods and services, tariffs effectively serve no purpose, especially to consumers as it actually only adds to the cost of goods purchased as the cost of tariff is passed on to the end buyers. Tariff is not a tool to restrict movement of goods or services. Instead, nations should strive to make themselves more competitive.
With the new President in the White House, the time to embrace the global community is now and not delay any longer. Washington will then be looked upon with great respect after four years of rule by one man, which was nothing but traumatic, chaotic and deceitful.
By Pankaj C. Kumar who is a long-time investment analyst. Views expressed here are the writer’s own.
By 
