美国编了一个大反派故事，中国在里面扮演背锅侠_风闻

文：Stephen S Roach

译：由冠群

当下，美国的民主、共和两党颇为难得地在一个关键问题上达成了共识：困扰美国的所有麻烦都是中国造成的。“敲打中国”现在成了美国政客们最时髦的行为。

美国现在有种执念，认为自己最珍视的美国梦可能在中国的威胁下夭折。这种执念正在造成一连串严重的后果：针锋相对的关税战、不断升级的安全威胁、新冷战的魅影……甚至已经有人开始议论崛起大国与既有霸权之间可能爆发的军事冲突了。

中美贸易协议似乎达成在即，有人会一厢情愿地以为上述严重后果都将烟消云散，然而这真的只是一厢情愿。现在中美之间的互信基础已彻底破裂，一份肤浅的贸易协议丝毫不会改变这一点。接下来，中美关系很可能进入互相怀疑、矛盾频发、冲突不断的新时代。

那些人抨击中国并不是因为中国真地从外部威胁到了美国，而是要把中国当成美国国内问题的替罪羊。实际上，有许多证据显示美国的宏观经济失衡问题是自己造成的，缺乏安全感的美国开始惧怕丧失全球领导地位，因而炮制了一套虚假的叙事来声讨中国。

以贸易为例。在2018年，美国对中国的贸易逆差达到了4190亿美元，占美国对外贸易逆差总额8790亿美元的48%。美国总统特朗普在辩论中声称，美国工作岗位流失和工资增长停滞的罪魁祸首都是中国。

然而特朗普和大多数美国政客都不会承认，2018年美国与全世界102个国家都存在贸易逆差。这实际上反映出美国国内储蓄严重不足，造成这个现象的原因是美国不计后果地扩大预算赤字，而这些预算都是得到总统和国会批准的。

另外，他们也不承认供应链扭曲的问题，即把在其它国家生产，却在中国组装、装船运至美国的产品也算作美中贸易逆差的一部分。计入这部分产品导致美中贸易逆差规模被高估了35–40%。此外，全球产业链所促成的良好宏观经济基本面和高效率给美国消费者也带来了不少好处。但很显然，对美国政客来说，还是抹黑中国、将其描绘成美国“再次伟大”之路上的绊脚石来的更简便。

下面再来说说偷窃知识产权问题。美国已经接受了一种所谓的“真相”，认为中国每年从美国偷窃价值数千亿美元的知识产权，对美国的技术创新造成了巨大损失。这种说法的源头来自所谓的“知识产权委员会”，它声明2017年知识产权失窃给美国经济造成的损失大约在2250亿至6000亿美元之间。

先不说这个估值上下限差异之大近乎荒谬，光是这组数字本身就来自不靠谱的“代理模型”，该模型本来的作用是测算经毒品走私、腐败、职业欺诈与洗钱等违法途径失窃到的商业机密价值几何。来自美国海关和边境巡逻部门的数据显示，2015年其没收的所有中国假冒和盗版产品价值达13.5亿美元。“知识产权委员会”用可疑的建模方式将这个微不足道的数字延伸放大，推断出中国给美国造成的知识产权损失占全部损失的87%（其中52%来自于中国内地，35%来自于香港）。

接着在2018年3月，美国贸易代表办公室（USTR）发表了一份《301报告》来混淆视听，该报告旨在为向中国产品加征关税提供合理解释，即美国企业被迫向中国合作伙伴进行技术转让。其中的关键词是“被迫”，暗示无辜的美国企业在自愿与中国合资伙伴签订合同后，为了在中国开展业务而被胁迫出让其拥有的知识产权。

合资企业当然要双方共享人力资源、经营策略、交易平台和产品设计，这些并不奇怪。但美国的指控是“胁迫”，即久经沙场的美国跨国企业愚蠢到向其中方交出自己的核心技术。

这又是一个以莫须有的证据进行强烈指控的惊人实例。令人难以置信的是，美国贸易代表办公室在其《301报告》的第19页上也承认并没有确凿的证据能够证实发生过这些“隐性商业行为”。就像知识产权委员会一样，美国贸易代表办公室也委托像美中贸易全国委员会之类的机构来替他们进行调查，一些配合调查的美国公司抱怨的只是中方对待美方技术的方式令它们感到不快。

华盛顿方面还把中国描绘成一个中央计划体制的怪兽，其下辖的国有企业享受着优惠贷款、不公平补贴以及诸如“中国制造2025”和“人工智能2030”国家产业政策的扶持等等。但美国却对大量显示中国国企效率低下、回报率低等情况的证据熟视无睹。

美国政府也不会质疑日本、德国、法国甚至美国自己长期执行的产业政策。就在今年2月，特朗普签署行政命令，提出了人工智能倡议，其中包括一项框架内容，即在120天内完成制定《人工智能行动计划》。显然中国并不是唯一把创新提到国家政策高度的国家

最后是那个老掉牙的货币操纵国的议题，即指责中国故意压低人民币的币值来获取不公平的贸易优势。其实，广义贸易加权计算的人民币自2004年末开始实际升值已经超过了50%。中国一度十分庞大的经常项目盈余已所剩无几。但在目前的贸易谈判中，早就不是问题的人民币问题又被旧账重翻。这只会使美国关于中国的论述错得更加离谱。

总而言之，美国政府列出的事实、分析和结论漏洞百出，而美国公众却又太容易轻信那些关于中国的错误论述。我并不是说中国不应为中美贸易摩擦承担部分责任，我只是想强调在追究责任时要保持客观和诚实，尤其是在当下这个解决美中贸易争端的关键时刻。不幸的是，寻找一个替罪羊显然远比反躬自省要容易得多。

America’s False Narrative on China

In a rare moment of bipartisan agreement, America’s Republicans and Democrats are now on the same page on one key issue: Blaming China for all that ails the United States. China bashing has never had broader appeal.

This fixation on China as an existential threat to the cherished American Dream is having serious consequences. It has led to tit-for-tat tariffs, escalating security threats, warnings of a new cold war, and even whispers of a military clash between the rising power and the incumbent global hegemon.

With a trade deal apparently imminent, it’s tempting to conclude that all this will pass. That may be wishful thinking. Sino-American trust is now in tatters. The likelihood of a superficial deal won’t change that. A new era of mutual suspicion, tension, and conflict is a very real possibility.

But what if the US chattering class has it all wrong and the China bashing is more an outgrowth of domestic problems than a response to a genuine external threat? In fact, there are strong grounds to believe that an insecure US – afflicted with macroeconomic imbalances of its own making and fearful of the consequences of its own retreat from global leadership – has embraced a false narrative on China.

Consider trade. In 2018, the US had a $419 billion merchandise trade deficit with China, fully 48% of the massive overall trade gap of $879 billion. This is the lightening rod in the debate, the culprit behind what US President Donald Trump calls the “carnage” of job losses and wage pressures.

But what Trump – and most other US politicians – won’t admit is that the US ran trade deficits with 102 countries in 2018. This reflects a profound shortfall of domestic saving, owing in large part to the reckless budget deficits approved by none other than Congress and the president. Nor is there any recognition of supply-chain distortions – arising from inputs made in other countries but assembled and shipped from China – that are estimated to overstate the US-China trade imbalance by as much as 35-40%. Never mind basic macroeconomics and new efficiencies from global production platforms that benefit US consumers. Apparently, it is much easier to vilify China as the major obstacle to making America great again.

Next, consider intellectual property theft. It is now accepted “truth”that China is stealing hundreds of billions of dollars of US intellectual property each year, driving a stake into the heart of America’s innovative prowess. According to the accepted source of this claim, the so-called IP Commission, in 2017 IP theft cost the US economy between $225 and $600 billion.

Leaving aside the ridiculously broad range of such an estimate, the figures rest on flimsy evidence derived from dubious “proxy modeling” that attempts to value stolen trade secrets via nefarious activities such as narcotics trafficking, corruption, occupational fraud, and illicit financial flows. The Chinese piece of this alleged theft comes from US Customs and Border Patrol data, which reported $1.35 billion in seizures of total counterfeit and pirated goods back in 2015. Equally dubious models extrapolate this tiny sum into an aggregate guesstimate for the US and impute 87% of the total to China (52% to the mainland and 35% to Hong Kong).

​

Then there is the red herring emphasized in the Section 301 report published by the US Trade Representative (USTR) in March 2018, which provides the foundational justification for tariffs levied on China: forced technology transfer between US companies and their Chinese joint venture (JV) partners. The key word is “forced,” which implies that innocent US companies that enter willingly into contractual agreements with Chinese counterparts are coerced into surrendering their proprietary technologies in order to do business in the country.

To be sure, JVs obviously entail a sharing of people, business strategies, operating platforms, and product designs. But the charge is coercion, which is inseparable from the presumption that sophisticated US multinationals are dumb enough to turn over core proprietary technologies to their Chinese partners.

This is another shocking example of soft evidence for a hard allegation. Incredibly, the USTR actually admits in the Section 301 report (on page 19) that there is no hard evidence to confirm these “implicit practices.”Like the IP Commission, the USTR relies instead on proxy surveys from trade organizations like the US-China Business Council, whose respondents complain of some discomfort with China’s treatment of their technology.

The Washington narrative also paints a picture of China as a centrally planned behemoth sitting astride massive stated-owned enterprises (SOEs) that enjoy preferential credits, unfair subsidies, and incentives tied to high-profile industrial policies such as Made in China 2025 and Artificial Intelligence 2030. Never mind a large body of evidence that underscores the low-efficiency, low-return characteristics of China’s SOEs.

Nor is there any doubt that comparable industrial policies have long been practiced by Japan, Germany, France, and even the US. In February, Trump issued an executive order announcing the establishment of an AI Initiative, complete with a framework to develop an AI action plan within 120 days. China is hardly alone in elevating innovation to a national policy priority.

Finally, there is the time-worn issue of Chinese currency manipulation– the fear that China will deliberately depress the renminbi to gain unfair competitive advantage. Yet its broad trade-weighted currency has risen over 50% in real terms since late 2004. And China’s once-outsize current-account surplus has all but vanished. Still, the currency grievances of yesteryear live on, getting prominent attention in the current negotiations. This only compounds the false narrative.

All in all, Washington has been loose with facts, analysis, and conclusions, and the American public has been far too gullible in its acceptance of this false narrative. The point is not to deny China’s role in promoting economic tensions with the US, but to stress the need for objectivity and honesty in assigning blame – especially with so much at stake in the current conflict. Sadly, fixating on scapegoats is apparently much easier than taking a long, hard look in the mirror.

(End)