News Center

Heavy! In the context of the continuous escalation of Sino-US trade frictions despite the opposition of the United States, the Information Office of the State Council of China issued a white paper "Facts on Sino-US Economic and Trade Frictions and China's Position" on September 24. This nearly 40000-word document uses detailed data and cases to clarify key facts in Sino-US economic and trade, strongly refutes a series of untenable arguments of the US government, and fully clarifies China's position and attitude. On Sino-US economic and trade frictions, the white paper puts forward 13 authoritative assertions!

Argument I. The "American Loss Theory" is untenable.

Since the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States, bilateral economic and trade relations have continued to develop, and cooperation in trade and investment has achieved fruitful results, achieving complementary advantages and mutual benefit. China has benefited a lot from it, and the United States has also gained extensive and huge economic benefits from it, sharing the opportunities and achievements brought about by China's development.

On the whole, Sino-US economic and trade cooperation is a win-win relationship, not a zero-sum game. American companies and citizens have received tangible benefits from it. The "American loss theory" claimed by some people in the United States is untenable.

Argument 2: It is unfair to blame China for the imbalance in trade in goods between China and the United States.

The imbalance of Sino-US trade in goods is more of a natural result of the independent choice of the market under the US economic structure and the existing pattern of comparative advantage, and solving this problem requires the joint efforts of both sides to make structural adjustments. It is unfair and unreasonable for the United States to ignore the various factors affecting Sino-US economic and trade relations, unilaterally emphasize the imbalance in trade in goods between the two countries, and blame China for it.

Argument that 3. the so-called "fair trade" of the United States will cause a wider range of unfairness

The so-called "fair trade" emphasized by the current US government is not based on international rules, but on the premise of "America first" and aims to safeguard the interests of the United States.

The "fair trade" and "reciprocal opening up" advocated by the United States deny the objective differences in the development stages, resource endowments and advantageous industries of various countries, and ignore the right to development of developing countries. It is bound to have an impact on the economies and industries of developing countries, resulting in greater unfairness, and ultimately not conducive to the expansion of international markets and sharing of development opportunities in developing countries.

The so-called "forced technology transfer" in China is a complete distortion of the facts.

Since China's reform and opening up, in order to expand emerging markets, save production expenditures, achieve economies of scale, and extend the time for technological profitability, foreign companies have taken the initiative to establish partnerships with Chinese companies, enter into contractual contracts, and transfer production capacity and orders to China. Voluntary behavior of enterprises based on commercial interests. The original voluntary trading activities of both parties should not be distorted as forced technology transfer because of the technological progress of Chinese enterprises. This is not only in line with historical facts, but also a reneging on the spirit of contract.

The U.S. government calls the voluntary cooperative behavior of foreign-invested enterprises to establish partnerships with Chinese enterprises through the conclusion of commercial contracts, transfer or license their technology, and jointly obtain commercial returns in the Chinese market as "forced technology transfer", which is a complete distortion of the facts.

The United States' accusation against China's intellectual property protection is contrary to the facts.

China's attitude towards the protection of intellectual property rights is clear and firm, and it has continuously strengthened protection at the legislative, law enforcement and judicial levels, and has achieved remarkable results. The recent accusations made by the US government against China's intellectual property protection are contrary to the facts and completely obliterate China's great efforts and achievements in protecting intellectual property rights.

The Chinese government's support for enterprises to go global is not a government action to promote enterprises to acquire advanced technology from other countries through mergers and acquisitions.

Like other countries and regions in the world, the Chinese government supports enterprises with strength and conditions to invest abroad and expand the international market on the premise of abiding by the laws, regulations and international rules of the host country. The government provides convenient services for enterprises' foreign investment and cooperation. The United States regards the Chinese government's support for enterprises to go global as a government behavior that promotes enterprises to acquire advanced technology from other countries through mergers and acquisitions, which lacks factual basis.

Argument 7, the United States has a large number of investment and trade restrictions policies and behavior.

The United States has a large number of investment and trade restriction policies and behaviors that distort market competition, hinder fair trade, and separate the global industrial chain, which damages the rule-based multilateral trading system and seriously affects the normal development of Sino-US economic and trade relations.

The United States provokes international trade friction will eventually harm the long-term interests of the United States.

As the main builder and participant of the international economic order and multilateral trading system after the end of World War II, the United States should have taken the lead in abiding by multilateral trade rules and properly handling trade frictions with other member states through the dispute settlement mechanism under the framework of the World Trade Organization. This is also a clear commitment made by the US government to the international community. However, since the new U.S. administration took office, it has unilaterally emphasized "U.S. priority", pursued unilateralism and economic hegemonism, reneged on international commitments, and provoked international trade frictions in all directions, which not only harmed the interests of China and other countries, but also harmed the United States itself. The international image has shaken the foundation of the global multilateral trading system, and will eventually harm the long-term interests of the United States.

The extreme trade protection measures taken by the United States hurt global economic and trade relations.

A series of extreme trade protection measures taken by the US government have undermined the international economic order, hurt global economic and trade relations, including economic and trade exchanges between China and the United States, impacted the global value chain and the international division of labor system, interfered with market expectations, triggered severe shocks in international financial and commodity markets, and became the biggest uncertain factor and risk source of global economic recovery.

The conclusion 10. that China has the confidence, determination and ability to deal with various risks and challenges.

Regarding the trade war, China is unwilling to fight, is not afraid to fight, and has to fight when necessary. We have strong economic resilience and broad market space, the hardworking, intelligent and united Chinese people, and the support of all countries in the world that oppose protectionism, unilateralism and hegemonism. We have the confidence, determination and ability to deal with various risks and challenges. No external factor can stop China from growing.

The healthy and stable development of China-US economic and trade relations is expected by the international community.

Sino-US economic and trade frictions are related to global economic stability and prosperity, as well as world peace and development, and should be properly resolved. Peace between China and the United States will benefit both, while struggle will hurt both. Maintaining the healthy and stable development of economic and trade relations between the two sides is in the fundamental interests of the two peoples, in line with the common interests of the people of the world, and is expected by the international community.

Judgment 12. China's open door will not be closed, it will only open wider and wider.

Reform and opening up is China's basic national policy and the fundamental driving force for China's development. The direction of China's reform will not be reversed, but will only continue to deepen. China's door to opening up will not be closed, but will only open wider and wider. China continues to follow the established deployment and pace, unswervingly deepen reform, expand opening up, comprehensively promote the rule of law, and build a socialist country under the rule of law.

China follows the general trend, follows the right path, and unswervingly upholds the multilateral trading system.

Many people get help, but few people get help. In the face of the international situation of increasing uncertainty, instability and insecurity, China has always walked with the world, followed the general trend, assumed justice, and followed the right path, unswervingly safeguarded the multilateral trading system, and unswervingly promoted the reform of the global governance system. Always be a builder of world peace, a contributor to global development, and a defender of the international order, and unswervingly promote the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.