Asia & the Pacific

1106 Items

Narvikk/Getty Images

Narvikk/Getty Images

Analysis & Opinions - Globe and Mail

The Currency Manipulation Game Is Afoot – but That’s Better Than a Trade War

| Aug. 13, 2019

The trade war between the United States and China is heating up again, with U.S. President Donald Trump abruptly announcing plans to impose a 10-per-cent tariff on the US$300-billion worth of imports from China that he had so far left untouched. The Chinese authorities then allowed their currency, the renminbi, to fall below the symbolic threshold of seven yuan for every U.S. dollar. The Trump administration promptly responded by naming China a “currency manipulator” – the first time the U.S. had done that to any country in 25 years. Pundits declared a currency war, and investors immediately sent global stock markets lower.

The European Central Bank building during sunset in Frankfurt, Germany

(AP Photo/Michael Probst, FILE)

Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security

The End of War: How a Robust Marketplace and Liberal Hegemony Are Leading to Perpetual World Peace

| Summer 2019

Liberal market-oriented states are in a natural alliance to preserve and protect a global order that is systematically buttressing states’ embrace of market-oriented norms and values.

Jeff Schwager, president of Sartori Cheese poses for in front of their plant

AP/Morry Gash

Analysis & Opinions - Project Syndicate

Power and Interdependence in the Trump Era

| July 03, 2019

President Donald Trump's manipulation of America's privileged international system will strengthen other countries' incentives to extricate themselves from US networks of interdependence in the long run. In the meantime, there will be costly damage to the international institutions that limit conflict and create global public goods.

Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Analysis & Opinions - Nikkei Asian Review

Where Will It End? The US-China Trade War and the Threat to the Global Economy

| June 19, 2019

Making sense of the U.S.-China trade war is difficult in itself. Making sense of how it may provoke a wider economic "decoupling," and impact the long-term strategic relationship between Beijing and Washington, is more difficult again.

 

Truck transporting coal on a smoggy day in Beijing

Hans-Peter Hein/Flickr

Analysis & Opinions - Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change

Key Challenges for China's Carbon Emissions Trading Program

| May 2019

China's national carbon emissions trading program is expected to become the world's largest carbon market and is critical for achieving China's domestic mitigation goals. But China's trading program is likely to face significant challenges, due to its large scale and high complexity. To address these challenges, we provide a series of policy recommendations, including capacity building from central to local levels, wise selection of allowance allocation methods to cope with changing economic realities, and deepening market-oriented reforms in energy sectors and SOEs.

Chinese President Xi Jinping

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Analysis & Opinions - Axios

Xi's Latest Leverage: U.S. Imports of Chinese Rare-Earth Elements

| May 22, 2019

Five days after Trump moved to cut off American components to Chinese telecoms giant Huawei, President Xi Jinping responded with a subtle threat to strangle America’s supplies of rare earths — the natural elements used in everything from computers to satellites. Xi’s threat demonstrates how the rivalry between a rising China and a ruling U.S. spreads from trade to technology to supply chains, touching every aspect of bilateral relations. The conflict risks massive spillover costs to the global economy.

A DF-15B short-range ballistic missile as seen after the military parade held in Beijing to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the end of WWII in 2015 (Wikimedia/IceUnshattered).

Wikimedia/IceUnshattered

Analysis & Opinions - East Asia Forum

China's Calculus After the INF Treaty

| May 08, 2019

It seems that the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty is coming to an end. The Treaty prohibits the United States and Russia from possessing, producing or testing land-based ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500–5500 kilometres, including both conventional and nuclear-armed missiles. On 1 February 2019, US President Trump said that he would suspend obligations under the INF Treaty and initiate the withdrawal procedure. After withdrawing, the United States might deploy conventional and nuclear missiles to the West Pacific against China. How would the potential deployment of each missile type impact China’s security?

Saudi Arabia’s Moment in the Sun

AP/Donna Fenn Heintzen

Analysis & Opinions - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Saudi Arabia’s Moment in the Sun

| May 07, 2019

As part of a high profile tour of China in February, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman (MBS) has overseen a range of multi-billion dollar pledges and MOUs with Beijing. This partly reflects Riyadh’s desire to diversify sources for investments and technology following the mass withdrawal of major Western business leaders from the Future Investment Initiative in October 2018, after the murder of Saudi Journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi Embassy in Istanbul. Yet cooperation with China on renewable energy, if successful, would realize a significant first step towards Saudi Arabia’s lofty ambitions for solar and wind power.

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks with Chinese Vice Premier Liu He about trade relations between their two countries, February 22, 2019.

Susan Walsh (AP)

Analysis & Opinions - The Washington Post

Even a Deal on Trade Won’t Paper Over the Widening Gap Between Washington and Beijing

| Apr. 24, 2019

The uncomfortable truth is that the United States and China countries face a deepeningdivergence of values and interests. The economic and military gap between them is narrowing, and both recognize that their mastery of high technologies of the future (of which artificial intelligence is but one) will ultimately determine their future claims to dominant superpower status. Given these realities, it is difficult to imagine a new bilateral relationship that will be based on policy principles substantive enough to prevent the two countries from gradually sliding in the direction of crisis, conflict or even war.