這是正式的：中國稱霸全球的時代已經結束 (3/3)

Recently Business Insider carried the following article:

It’s official: The era of China’s global dominance is over (3/3)

Linette Lopez – Business Insider

Mon, October 16, 2023 at 2:22 a.m. GMT+8

(continue)

A new, more dangerous era

The idea that Chinese policymakers connect political stability and economic growth is dogma in the West, but what we're witnessing now suggests that's not the case — at least not in practice. Beijing has not spent money on — or talked about raising money for — social programs for its aging population, nor has it made any attempts to tackle the cost of living for young families. If economic modernization was the most important thing, these would have been on the docket years ago. But they're not. Policymakers don't want an implosion, but they're not pushing for warp-speed development anymore either.

"All the policies are now determined by Xi Jinping himself, and his priorities are spending money to engage in a technology and national-security race with the US," Shih explained.

China's President Xi Jinping

President Xi Jinping has shifted China's priorities from economic growth to what one experts calls a "technology and national-security race with the US."Lintao Zhang

Once upon a time, infrastructure and property were the big beneficiaries of Beijing's largess, now it's the military. US government estimates put China's annual defense budget at about $700 billion, much higher than independent NGO estimates of about $290 billion and just shy of what the US spends on defense annually, $800 billion.

"If we're talking about the economic relationship between the US and China, there just isn't that much going on," China Beige Book's Miller told me over the phone. "The worry we have is not that Chinese consumers will do even less. It's that all the global supply chains are intermixed in industries like pharmaceutical and green tech. If things get too tense, it's potential supply-chain snarls that coil and screw up US business."

Miller told me that multinational corporations are not only unsure of where to go next, they also lack full transparency as to where China impacts some supply chains. "It's not just that we have a problem," he said, "it's that we don't even know how big the problem is."

China has never been a big consumer of American imports, but certain sectors will get hurt as our trade relationship is reset. A faltering Chinese economy will suppress demand for commodities like oil seeds and grain, hitting US farmers especially hard. It will also eat into corporate profits for companies such as Nike and Starbucks that made large bets on Chinese consumers. US restrictions on technology exports — created to counter new national-security concerns — threaten the more than $50 billion of revenue that US chipmakers generate selling to China. Wall Street doesn't have to go home, but it can't stay here. The WSJ reported that foreign executives are jittery about visiting China, afraid they'll never be allowed to leave. The great traveling circus that is hot money and adventure capitalism is already scouring the world for its next opportunity in countries like Mexico and Vietnam. These are forces bigger than Beijing.

Earlier this month, the House Select China Competition Committee held a hearing in New York City, calling on witnesses to describe what risk looks like with a Chinese Communist Party that's less committed to the free flow of capital and more concerned with flexing its muscles within its region. In her testimony, Anne Stevenson-Yang, the founder of J Capital Research, said that the US — especially its Midwest industrial heartland — isn't invested in China because of market demand. It's invested there for the outsourcing of mechanical goods and labor. For the US economy, China as a workshop is much more important than China as a consumer. Companies will need to scour their supply chains for potential vulnerabilities and consider their exposure accordingly. When Beijing is focused on national security, rules can change at the drop of a dime. Foreign businesspeople who once sought efficiencies going in may find it cumbersome to get out.

"The biggest risk there is the currency," Stevenson-Yang explained. "As companies make more money and want to move it to the US, they run into currency controls and they might not be able to get dollars out."

It's time to imagine a future where China does not become rich but may remain powerful — building its army and continuing to develop its domestic technological capabilities. History has shown that economic privation need not impede China's technological achievement. During the depths of the Maoist purges, the CCP was still able to develop the atomic bomb, the hydrogen bomb, and its own intercontinental ballistic missiles. Xi has warned China to prepare for "great struggles" on the road to glory. Now that China's economic supercycle is over, that may be the cycle we're about to witness. It will be a painful adjustment.

Translation

（繼續）

一個新的、更危險的時代

中國決策者將政治穩定與經濟成長聯繫起來的想法在西方是教條，但我們現在所看到的情況表明情況並非如此 - 至少在實踐中並非如此。 北京並沒有花錢或談論過為人口老化的社會計畫籌集資金，也沒有嘗試解決年輕家庭的生活成本問題。 如果經濟現代化是最重要的事情，那麼這些問題早在幾年前就已經被列入議程了。 但他們不這樣做。 政策制定者不希望出現內爆，但他們也不再推動超速發展。

Shih解釋說: 「現在所有的政策都是由習近平本人決定的，他的首要任務是花錢與美國進行技術和國家安全的競賽」。

中國國家主席習近平

習近平主席已將中國的優先事項, 從經濟成長轉向一個專家 (Lintao Zhang)所說的「與美國的技術和國家安全競賽」。

曾幾何時，基礎設施和房地產是北京大灑金錢的最大受益者，現在是軍隊。 美國政府估計中國的年度國防預算約為 7,000 億美元，遠高於獨立非政府組織估計的約 2,900 億美元，略低於美國每年的國防支出 8,000 億美元。

中國褐皮書的 Miller 在電話中告訴我: 「如果我們談論美國和中國之間的經濟關係，那就沒有甚麼可以推進」。 「我們擔心的不是中國消費者會買得更少。而是所有全球供應鏈都在製藥和綠色科技等行業中混合在一起。如果事情變得過於繃緊，潛在的供應鏈混亂就會纏繞起來, 並搞垮美國商業。”

Miller告訴我，跨國公司不僅不確定下一步應該何去何從，對中國對某些供應鏈的影響也缺乏完全的看通。他說: “我們不僅是遇到了問題”; “而且是我們甚至不知道問題有多大。”

中國從來都不是美國進口產品的大消費國，但隨著貿易關係的重組，我們某些產業將會受到傷害。 步履蹣跚的中國經濟將抑制對油籽和穀物等大宗商品的需求，對美國農民的打擊尤其嚴重。 它也將侵蝕Nike和星巴克等在中國消費者身上投入巨資的公司的利潤。 美國為因應新的國家安全擔憂而制定的技術出口限制, 這威脅到美國晶片製造商向中國銷售產品所產生的超過 500 億美元的收入。 華爾街不必返回老家，但它亦不能留在這裡。 《華爾街日報》報道稱，外籍高層對訪問中國感到緊張，他們擔心永遠不會被允許離開。 由熱錢和冒險資本主義組成的龐大的巡迴大隊已經在墨西哥和越南等國家尋找下一個機會。 這些力量比北京還要大。

本月早些時候，眾議院的選擇中國競爭委員會 在紐約市舉行了一場聽證會，呼籲證人描述中國共產黨所面臨的風險，因為中國共產黨不太致力於資本自由流動，而更關心在其在區內展示其實力。 J Capital Research 創辦人 Anne Stevenson-Yang 在證詞中表示，美國 -尤其是中西部工業中心地帶 - 由於市場上的需要, 並沒有在中國投資。 它在那裡花費於外判機械產品和勞動力。 對美國經濟來說，中國作為工廠比中國作為消費者重要得多。 企業需要檢查其供應鏈是否有潛在的漏洞，並據此考慮其風險敞口。 當北京專注於國家安全時，規則可能會瞬間改變。 曾經追求效率的外國商人進入後可能會發現退出是很麻煩的。

Stevenson-Yang 解釋: 「最大的風險是貨幣」。 “隨著公司賺更多的錢並希望將其轉移到美國，他們會遇到貨幣管制，他們可能無法將美元取出。”

現在是時候想像一個未來中國不會變得富裕但可能保持強大 - 建立軍隊並繼續發展國內技術能力。 歷史表明，經濟貧困不一定會阻礙中國的技術成就。 在毛派清党最嚴重的時期，中共仍能發展出原子彈、氫彈和自己的洲際彈道飛彈。 習近平警告中國要為走向輝煌的「偉大鬥爭」做好準備。 現在中國的經濟超級週期已經結束，這可能是我們即將見證到的週期。 這將是一個痛苦的調整。

              So, this article’s headline is quite eye-catching. The article mainly focuses on the deteriorating economic situation in China. According to the author, President Xi Jinping has shifted the CCP's focus from economy to national security. Getting rich is not China's big project anymore; the project now is power. Xi Jinping’s priority is “spending money to engage in a technology and national-security race with the US." 

The article concludes that it is time to imagine a future where China does not become rich but may remain powerful, and that now China's economic super-cycle is over. I think China is a very resilient country and only time will tell whether the era of China’s global dominance is over.