Lead:

On the issue of the renminbi exchange rate, it is unreasonable and meaningless if some people in the United States use the basis that China has a surplus and the United States has a deficit, and that the US economy has not yet recovered, and that the US economy should develop. In fact, the trade surplus is not a reason to force the renminbi to appreciate, the trade surplus is a result of globalization, a phenomenon, and a structure that will persist. Behind the dispute over the appreciation of the renminbi is the intricate international economic wrestling. Among the many pressurers, the leader is undoubtedly the United States.

At present, the trade friction between China and the United States is heating up. On March 15, 2010, 130 U.S. lawmakers signed a letter urging Obama to designate China as a "currency manipulator" in his foreign exchange policy report, which will be released around April 15. If so, the U.S. Department of Commerce may find that China has engaged in "exchange rate dumping, thereby imposing retaliatory or punitive tariffs on Chinese exports" on "exchange rate manipulation." U.S. lawmakers also urged that after designating China as a "currency manipulator," the U.S. should also work with the IMF and other countries to open talks with China on the mechanism for the formation of the renminbi exchange rate, and if negotiations fail, Obama** should consider appealing to the WTO. On March 18, U.S. Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman delivered a speech at Tsinghua University, again pressuring China to "increase exchange rate flexibility" for the renminbi.

In September 2010, 93 members of the U.S. Congress called on the House of Representatives to vote on a bill that would severely punish China's so-called "currency manipulation." In the past two days, the relevant committees of the Senate and House of Representatives of the US Congress have held hearings on the issue of the renminbi exchange rate. As a result, on the eve of the US midterm elections, the topic of the RMB exchange rate has once again become a "scapegoat" for US domestic politics. However, it is worth noting that this time, although the voices of the whole Congress against sanctions against China were loud, at the congressional hearing on the 15th, the four members of the House of Representatives who testified split into two factions with different views. Second, 36 U.S. Chambers of Commerce organized a joint letter to the House of Representatives expressing their opposition to punishing China.

Behind the controversy over the appreciation of the renminbi is the intricate competition of international economic strength. Among the many pressurers, the leader is undoubtedly the United States, and the voice of Europe is more complicated. The chairman of the Eurogroup visited China and tactfully demanded that the renminbi appreciate. On March 16, British Foreign Secretary Miliband said that China should not be pressurized. EU Ambassador to China Amber also said that putting pressure on China's exchange rate is not a good strategy.

In the face of frequent attacks from the United States, China has repeatedly stated its position: the renminbi is not undervalued. China opposes all kinds of trade protection measures. The renminbi will adhere to a "managed floating exchange rate system based on market supply and demand". If Obama implements the above-mentioned trade protection measures, it will have a greater impact on China's export enterprises, which in turn will affect China's employment situation. In this regard, Chinese enterprises need to be more "united", strengthen cooperation to deal with protectionism, actively respond to lawsuits through normal dispute resolution mechanisms, and accelerate product transformation and upgrading.

The exchange rate is supposed to be an economic issue, and there has never been a consensus in the economic community on whether the RMB exchange rate will cause the main cause of the Sino-US trade imbalance, whether the RMB is undervalued, and how much it is underestimated, and different economists have come up with completely different answers from different theoretical models. Today, however, the principle of economics is no longer the primary factor in determining the course of events. Whether the Chinese want it or not, the RMB exchange rate is once again held hostage by politics.

The reason we have a lot of dollars in our hands is because we export more goods to the United States and import less goods from the United States, so why don't we also import American goods?

Because, on the one hand, the United States has long adhered to a technological blockade against China, refusing to sell goods with scientific and technological content, especially high-tech content, to China; On the other hand, the United States is a country dominated by high-tech and service industries, for example, Wall Street executives are engaged in the service industry, and the wages of labor are particularly high, and the United States does not produce labor-intensive goods with little technology content at all, and cannot afford to produce them at all, such as textiles and other daily necessities. If the U.S. were to start producing those labor-intensive goods, the producers would not even be able to pay their workers. Therefore, since the second half of the last century, the United States has consciously transferred the production and processing of these labor-intensive products with low technological content, high energy consumption, and high pollution to foreign countries, while China has undertaken a lot of them, so much so that it has become the "world's factory."

On the issue of the renminbi exchange rate, if the United States always bases China with a surplus and a deficit, and stresses that the US economy should develop on the basis that the US economy has not yet recovered, it will be unreasonable and meaningless. In fact, the problem of trade surplus is not a reason to force the renminbi to appreciate, but the problem of trade surplus is a result of globalization, a phenomenon, and a structure that will persist. If China has a deficit with South Korea, Japan, and some developing countries, should we also introduce a similar currency bill to sanction these countries?

We hope that when the United States overcomes the impact of the crisis and revitalizes its economy, it should become an advocate of free trade rather than an obstacle, and that it should not only consider its own interests and expand exports, but demand that other countries' currencies appreciate, which is a manifestation of self-interest. Even so, we will further expand imports from various countries. With the expansion of domestic demand and the maturity of the domestic market, China should be said to have huge market potential. Politicizing the exchange rate issue will not help all parties to respond to the global economic crisis in a coordinated manner.