Do not misread China, Victor Gao on How the US Misunderstands China

 

 

Video link

https://youtube.com/shorts/3NwjMutfLRg?feature=share

 "https://www.youtube.com/embed/RPEOJN3JS4U"

Related posts:

Victor Gao: ‘China has become a very powerful force promoting peace

Victor Gao 

Victor Zhikai Gao^[a] (born 1962) is a Chinese lawyer, businessman,^[1] and academic who is the vice president of the Beijing-based Center for China and Globalization (CCG).

Gao is an expert on international relations at Soochow University,^[2] where he is a Chair Professor. Gao is also a member of the Beijing Municipal Committee of the Revolutionary Committee of the Chinese Kuomintang, a minor and non-oppositional party under the direction of the Chinese Communist Party.^[3] He was formerly a translator for Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping.^[4][5][6]

Early life and education

Gao was raised in rural China during the 1970s.^[7] He attended high school in Southern China. When Chinese Communist Party leader Deng Xiaoping reopened universities during the Chinese economic reform, Gao convinced local authorities to allow him to take the Gaokao for college admission in 1977 before he had graduated high school.^[8]

Gao received a Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in English language and literature from Soochow University in 1981,^[9] then earned a Master of Arts (M.A.) in English language and literature from Beijing University of Foreign Studies in 1983. He pursued graduate studies in the United States at Yale University, where he graduated with a master's degree in political science in 1990 and then a Juris Doctor (J.D.) from Yale Law School in 1993.^[10] He was admitted to the New York State Bar Association in 1994.^[11]

Career

From 1983 to 1988, Gao was a translator for Deng Xiaoping.^[7] He was also a member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs from 1983 to 1989 at the United Nations Secretariat in New York. After leaving the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1988, Gao was recommended by Henry Kissinger to study at Yale University, where he earned a Juris Doctor degree from Yale Law School in 1993. Then he was a policy adviser for the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission from 1999 to 2000.^[12]

Gao has been an investment banker for Morgan Stanley.^[13] He is a director of the China National Association of International Studies^[14] and an executive director of Beijing Private Equity Association.^[15] Gao is the vice president of the Center for China and Globalization.^[16]

According to Foreign Policy, "Gao was once treated as a reputable interlocutor in U.S.–China relations."^[17]

Views

Hong Kong

In 2014, Gao condemned pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong as illegal and provocative.^[18] He supports the 2020 Hong Kong National Security Law.^[19]

Goodbye trade war

 

China seems to be winning the tariff war even as Trump threatens to impose a massive increase of tariffs on Chinese imports in response to the republic's announcement of new export controls on rare earths. — Getty Images/AFP

South-east asia, once only a bruising trade war’s secondary victim, should now have asean showing its mettle as china wins.

BEYOND multiple global uncertainties are two core fundamentals: Us-china relations being the world’s most important bilateral relationship, and economics determining much of everything else.

This makes the trade war between the world’s two biggest economies pivotal to all. Multiple spheres in various regions are impacted accordingly.

That much is the main plot in today’s geopolitics. Problems tend to arise when the script is amended without warning, explanation or acknowledgement.

US President Donald Trump has sought a personal meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping since last year, but that will happen only next year. Why does it take two years for such a crucial event to occur?

It is precisely because of the summit’s importance that it has to take so long. Unlike MOUS, summits do not set the tone of an intended agreement but to cap what has already been agreed.

Transnational deals are too important to be left to formal summits with their pomp and pageantry. The serious business of negotiations by government experts and specialists differs vastly from the PR theatre of official photo opportunities.

The months and years between signalling interest in a summit and actually holding it are for senior officials to work out sufficiently agreeable terms to constitute a deal. That period of talks by officials began informally last year between the incoming US administration and China’s incumbent team.

It is a period now effectively coming to a close in ending the trade war, but still only unofficially. The basic agreement that is now done in all but writing has the US broadly conceding to China’s terms.

China is the only country that has pushed back on Trump’s tariffs, with resounding effect as recent events show.

After Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s grating condescension about supplying China with only Nvidia’s sub-par microchips, Beijing blocked all of Nvidia’s chips. Nvidia boss Jensen Huang said China’s own chip development is only “nano seconds behind” his company’s best products.

In agriculture, China has stopped buying US soybeans for supplies from Brazil and elsewhere. With US farmers devastated, China again demonstrated considerable leverage.

With Trump clamping down on countries buying Russian and Iranian oil and gas, India was hit with high additional tariffs, but not China. Instead, China raised Russian gas supplies with the Power of Siberia (POS) pipeline and now also POS 2.

China is also importing more than a million barrels of Iranian oil daily, amounting to almost 90% of Iran’s output. These major purchases were never going to be impacted by US restrictions.

Trump declared victory on Tiktok but it was a net gain for China. Beijing refused to sell Tiktok’s proprietary algorithm, the heart and brain of the winning platform.

A copy of the original algorithm was supplied to US investors, and China’s Bytedance owns just under 20% of US Tiktok – yet is entitled to 50% of US profits. US negotiators must have realised that was the most they could get from China’s tough bargaining position and accepted it.

China has introduced new restrictions on rare earth exports, launched an antitrust probe into US chip giant Qualcomm, and will raise port fees for US ships in return. In virtually every sector China is fighting back through tit-for-tat action and new policies.

If there is still any doubt that China is leading the charge of what remains of the trade war, its use of carrots and sticks to access the US market confirms it. Beijing has offered more than a trillion dollars (RM4.2 trillion) of investment in the US through Chinese companies admitted there.

These could include Chinese electric vehicle companies, which Trump last year said he would invite to the US to provide jobs. Only the stronger economy can dish out inducements of such proportions to the relatively subordinate economy.

Such is the substance of a negotiated trade peace. Ultimately, Trump is less concerned about what actually makes a trade victory than what can be interpreted and portrayed as his personal triumph.

He is anxious to gain snatches of a win between trade skirmishes, however fleeting or questionable, and China is only too happy to provide them to win the trade war. More of this can be expected at next year’s summit.

Meanwhile, Louis Gave of Hong Kong’s Gavekal Research has declared China’s trade war victory. South-east Asia should likewise flip the old script to its favour.

Asean countries are not just collateral economies subjected to the whims of a trade conflict. When China takes a beating, South-east Asia was assumed to be beaten also.

But the US still hopes to obtain from this region what it failed to get from China. To do this it needs to keep up appearances that it is winning over China as the centre of global supply chains.

Asean can call that bluff to protect itself.

Repated posts|:

• 

  US GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

    https://bbc.com/news/articles/crrj1znp0pyo Anthony Zurcher North America correspondent  and James FitzGerald   Watch: What could happen du...
• 
  

Call for contingency plans in face of US govt shutdown

 

US revises tariff rate to 19%

 However, nation must urgently diversify its export destinations

PETALING JAYA: Malaysia’s revised tariff rate of 19% on exports to the United States offers a temporary competitive edge in the region but underscores the urgency for export diversification amid signs of growing US protectionism, economists warn.

Prof Emeritus Dr Barjoyai Bardai said the revised rate, down from 25% previously, positions Malaysia on par with neighbou­ring countries such as Thailand, Indonesia, Cambodia and the Philippines.

ALSO READ: Malaysian industries can breathe easier now

He said the rate is still more favourable than those imposed on Myanmar (40%), Vietnam (20%) and Taiwan (20%).

“We seem to be able to compete with our neighbouring countries. But we are far behind Singapore at 10%, as well as Japan and South Korea at 15%.

“With India at 25%, we are in a better position,” he said when contacted. What we really want to see is that the tariff imposed on Malaysia is as low or better than that of countries that are our competitors because we are exporting to the United States.

“So, if those countries have equal or higher tariffs than us, then our ability to compete remains intact,” he added.

However, he said that certain Malaysian exports may be vulnerable, especially low-­margin products such as solar panels, and electrical and electronic goods.

On the trade balance with the US, he said it depends on whether Malaysian imports from the US increase significantly, especially luxury goods, following the government’s decision to scrap the luxury tax.

“Although the luxury tax has been included in the expanded SST, the rate is still low,” he added.

He said Malaysia must urgently diversify its export destinations, as the US moves towards a more self-sufficient economy.

Barjoyai said semiconductors should be directed to countries with growing demand, such as China, India and Europe.

CLICK TO ENLARGE

For other items like solar panels, he said Malaysia should consider Latin America, Canada and Europe.

“There are still many untapped markets. In the long run, the United States will become a domestic-driven economy where they will seek to reduce imports.

“Today, they are already about 80% self-sustaining,” he added.

Echoing similar concerns, Bank Muamalat Malaysia Bhd chief economist Dr Mohd Afzanizam Abdul Rashid said the tariff adjustment signals that the United States remains open to dialogue, but the economic implications for Malaysia remain.

“As a result of recent discussions, the previously imposed retaliatory tariffs of 25% have now been reduced to 19%.

“Consequently, the negative impact on Malaysia’s economy is expected to be slightly mitigated.

“In this regard, Bank Negara has revised its GDP forecast for 2025 to a range of 4.0% to 4.8%, down from the earlier projection of 4.5% to 5.5%,” he said.

Afzanizam also highlighted the potential global impact of US ta­riffs.

“The 19% import tariff is expected to impact American consumers’ purchasing power.

“This may, in turn, dampen economic momentum in the US, which is the world’s largest econo­my. It poses a potential risk to glo­bal economic growth in the coming years,” Afzanizam said.

He also called for a balanced approach to foreign relations and economic strategy.

“It is crucial to preserve strong bilateral ties with the United States, while simultaneously exploring new opportunities with countries in Europe, the BRICS bloc, and strengthening economic and diplomatic cooperation within Asean.

“At the same time, efforts to boost productivity, build capacity and enhance economic resilience must be intensified to safeguard Malaysia’s economic sovereignty.

“These measures will reinforce investor and business confidence, underpinned by pragmatic policies and the government’s proactive response to emerging challenges,” he added.

Centre for Market Education chief executive officer Carmelo Ferlito, meanwhile, said the tariff revision reflects a political strategy rather than a pure economic measure.

“The reciprocal tariff on Malay­sia to 19% is the proof of what I have mentioned earlier,” he said, adding that US President Donald Trump was not interested in ta­riffs per se, but to reopen negotiating tables.

He said this is to show that the United States is the biggest consumer in the world and force countries to get closer to the United States as well as grant commercial facilitations.

Ferlito criticised the use of ta­riffs as a policy tool, arguing that they hurt both consumers and workers.

“Tariffs are bad, not just for Malaysia, but for the world,” he said, adding that ultimately, ta­riffs reduce trade opportunities.

“This means less choice for consumers, but also job losses, on both sides,” he added.

Related stories:

• Malaysian industries can breathe easier now
• US tariff cut signals global trust in Malaysia, says Nga
• Tariff cuts for 11,000 US products
• ‘Absolutely no compromise on halal standards’

Related posts:

Economic highlights of the 13th Malaysia Plan 2026-2030 

Manus AI's 'de-China playbook is a trap

 

Rebranding bid: The website for the Manus AI agent arranged on a computer in Hong Kong.Manus is doing everything it can to sever any ties to the mainland while its parent company Butterfly Effect reportedly eliminated all its China-based jobs last week. —Bloomberg

WHEN Chinese startup Manus previewed an artificial intelligence (AI) agent earlier this year, it went mega-viral. It came on the heels of DeepSeek, when global excitement over China’s AI breakthroughs was at a fever pitch, and nobody wanted to miss out on the next surprise hit.

Now, Manus is doing everything it can to sever any ties to the mainland. It relocated its headquarters to Singapore, and its three co-founders have made the move abroad as well.

Butterfly Effect, the company behind Manus, reportedly eliminated all its China-based jobs last week.

It has also scrubbed content from domestic social media platforms Weibo and Xiaohongshu (also known as RedNote), despite maintaining an active presence on X.

Users in China trying to access the site this week were met with the message that it’s “not available in your region,” a departure from a previous memo stating that the Chinese version was under development.

It’s the choice these tech firms are forced to make in the current geopolitical climate: stay in the hyper-competitive domestic market or go for more lucrative growth overseas. You can’t have both.

Moving abroad means going through the arduous process of trying to “de-China” the company’s origins.

It’s a shame given this background is what drove so much hype about Manus in the first place.

Chinese firms have also traditionally had an edge in consumer tech, with access to a vast pool of affordable engineering talent and a hardworking culture. Plus, dubious identity rebrands almost never work.

Manus’ decision to recast as a Singapore company follows the furore that emerged in the United States after prominent Silicon Valley venture capitalist (VC) firm Benchmark (an early backer of the likes of eBay Inc and Uber Technologies Inc) announced it was leading a US$75mil funding round in Butterfly Effect.

Fellow VCs accused Benchmark of “investing in your enemy” and equated it to backing Russian efforts during the space race.

The plans have also come under US Treasury Department scrutiny over new rules related to investments in certain Chinese technology.

It will be very hard for Manus to ever rid the China label from its story, especially after all the attention it received.

Co-founder Ji Yichao was on the cover of Forbes China more than a decade ago, as one of the 30 under 30 entrepreneurs in the country. State-backed mouthpieces have also celebrated Manus’s rise, so trying to cleanse its Chinese-ness risks domestic backlash.

It’s not the first time this has happened. ByteDance Ltd’s TikTok has gone to great pains to rebrand as an American and Singaporean company and assuage Washington’s fears about its Beijing origins. But none of this stopped the United States from passing a law last year requiring the parent company to divest from the app that doesn’t even operate in the mainland, or be banned due to perceived national security concerns. This doesn’t bode well for Manus.

The AI sector has become a lightning rod for China hawks in the United States, who view any consumer-facing application using the tech from its geopolitical nemesis as a threat.

AI video startup HeyGen Inc garnered investment and a raft of US customers after making the move from China, yet was still singled out by lawmakers over potential ties to the Communist Party.

Its co-founder said it’s been “disappointing” to see his heritage treated as something he should “be ashamed of.”

Wrapped up in national security worries is more than a hint of xenophobia.

Targeting consumer tech firms based on the national origins of their founders is an ineffective strategy.

US concerns about potential threats that data could leak to China or that the CCP could influence algorithms should implement more comprehensive rules to mitigate these risks.

When it comes to buzzy new technology like the Manus AI agent, industry-wide standards are overdue.

Tools that are designed to allow software to take on increasingly complex tasks on their own carry unique risks, including who is liable when things go awry and how much control should be ceded to machines.

Global policymakers should address these concerns regardless of where the AI agent comes from.

Icing out the best and brightest tech minds risks leaving Silicon Valley blind to innovation happening elsewhere. It’s in America’s interest to do more to support these founders by bringing their talents and breakthroughs to the United States. —Bloomberg

By Catherine Thorbecke,  is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia tech. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.