CEO Content Series: American CEOs & Government Leaders On Doing Future Business In China
Without a doubt, after Covid-19 there’s a divergence between American business and foreign policy interests on doing future business in China
This story was put together in the aftermath of a recent meeting between CEOs and some US government leaders in California. Though, I am outlining the entire story, using a variety of the best sources to complete the full picture.
Before carrying on with this story I feel the need to share a little about myself. Because I lived in China for some years and went to Shanghai for the first time in 2013 — and I’m proud to have hit my 10-year anniversary this year!
I know a little about China’s economy, history, language and culture and politics, since I did a Master’s Degree in Shanghai on China Studies.
I also was one of the spokespeople about the Industry 4.0 push into China, also known as the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), particularly from a European-Chinese business partnership standpoint in 2018.
Now that I got that out of the way (and I hope you didn’t mind) let’s brush out the details of this story about American CEOs and government leaders on doing future business in China.
In response to the murder of CashAPP Founder Bob Lee, Elon Musk said: “Violent crime in [San Francisco] is horrific and even if attackers are caught, they are often released immediately.”
From his statement we can draw the conclusion that he is framing the issue around standards of crime and punishment. But how about the evolution between politics and technology and how their impact on society is fueling hatred between people and leaders?
Perhaps this is what the CEOs visiting with United States’ government officials in California should be discussing with one another in the high-level meetings being held this month.
But that’s absolutely not the case.
For instance, Representative Ro Khanna (D-California) told reporters about the upcoming meeting with CEOs and how it will focus on the agenda set forth by the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
In response to questions about the agenda, she said:
I would like to see more of our electronic production come here to the United States. For display screens, for micro-electronics, for semiconductors, for the component parts of our smartphones, and that is a conversation we’re going to have. How do we do it today? What do they need from the United States government to be able to do it
Khanna is framing the discussion around the electronics industry of the future. In other words — Who will control and profit the most from surging imports to the United States?
Chairman Mike Gallagher (R-Wisconsin) took it a step further, by indicating how China’s rise is a growing threat to United State’s national security interests, “We want to make sure that the power of the Chinese economy is not seducing certain companies into betraying American values.”
Mike Gallagher is chairman of the House Select Committee on China, wherein he is becoming one of the leading voices on Chinese censorship in American-produced films and entertainment. According to an interview wit LA Times, American studios in Hollywood are coming under pressure from government leaders to rethink the way they produce films for the Chinese market.
He took a serious tone when discussing the ideological competition between United States and China:
“It can promote anti-American messages. What we don’t want, but what the CCP ultimately wants, is for the CCP-approved version of the movie to become the only version and that’s a bright red line that we should work to enforce.”
Read the full story: A Disney meeting didn’t change this lawmaker’s mind on Chinese censorship.
On the subject of American CEOs and government leaders doing future business in China, I will outline some of the key messages conveyed by the latest public hearing on the national security implications of the US-China relationship. US Secretary Janet Yellen gave a speech about the United State’s current foreign policy objectives, with the main focus on its relationship with China.
The speech was held at the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) on 13 April 2023. Read the full transcript here.
As you can imagine, reporters, journalists and analysts of all kinds were madly writing on the subject before and after the speech. After reading through much of the content, it seems that most of them have agreed on three takeaways from the speech:
- prioritizing national security and defending human rights,
- promoting a healthy and fair economic relationship with China
- and cooperating with China to address global issues.
However, on the opinion side of things it gets a lot more complicated.
Like when Yellen said: “China’s economic growth need not be incompatible with U.S. economic leadership … We do not seek to ‘decouple’ our economy from China’s. We believe that the world is big enough for both of us.” This caused Robert Kuttner to believe that, since Yellen had denied targeting China’s economy, that the Biden administrations was seemingly playing what he called a “nice cop/bad cop strategy.”
For instance, by taking down China’s capabilites in advanced semiconductors, the Biden administration made a red line, that it would not tradeoff US national security concerns for the chip supply chain. Because of this, Kuttner concluded that the Biden administration still needs an effective China policy — e.g., “better coherence and coordination among U.S. allies — and inside its own house.” The American Prospect
CGTN is a Chinese media source. They wrote up their piece after the speech called “U.S. no decoupling from China’s economy”. Reporting for CGTN, Nathan King illustrated some of the Chinese media’s ambiguity on US foreign policy interests by discussing Yellen’s speech in tandem with the national security hearings with TikTok’s CEO. Like what Yellen said: “Even as our targeted actions may have economic impacts, they’re motivated solely by our concerns about our security and values. Our goal is not to use these tools to gain competitive economic advantage.”CGTN’s Nathan King responded with comments about the TikTok hearings: “some of those national security concerns are ill-defined and easily disputed…Actions speak louder than words and what Beijing will want to see concrete action…trade tariffs and some movement on all the embargos from chips to copper and beyond.” CGTN
But I must say that the opinion that got my attention the most was from Andrew Stuttaford. The journalist starts by giving the latest figures from the American and Chinese trade of exported goods. According to the figures, the US imported $536 billion from China, while exporting $154 billion to China. He notes that this trade margin is much higher than the one for Canada, Mexico and the European Union. For this reason, he asserts that decoupling is not happening in de-facto trade relations between the US and China.
Adopting a phrase of “conscious uncoupling” Stuttaford argues that the US should and must decouple from the Chinese economy in order to avoid future dilemmas posed by supply chain disruptions in the global economy. But he also carefully draws out the concept of “friendshoring” and what it should mean in the context of future US-China trade relations —e.g., “friendshored” could mean that China continues to manufacture plastic toys for the American market. National Review
While I was delighted to read this op-ed from National Review, my concept of this nascent “friendshoring” in making trade relations would not have anything to do with who gets to make plastic toys. As the world is immersed in the digital era, I don’t think plastic toys are going to be high on the minds of most American CEOs and government leaders on doing future business with China. I would question whether, in the near-future, if American children will even continue playing with toys at all. I have lived in both Asia and Africa and every time I have been struck with how insignificant toys play a role in these societies. Yet, every kid who has a phone watches videos and downloads apps like crazy!
To conclude, I will outline some of the key messages conveyed by the latest content writer’s team in the publication Areas & Producers about the business and foreign policy interests of United States and China.
Akmad Hanan wrote an in-depth piece about the growing relationship between Saudi Arabia and China, and what it all means for the United States foreign policy interests. He poses the dilemma right off the bat: “This has left the U.S. with a dilemma: how to balance its relationship with Saudi Arabia, a key partner in the Middle East, with its growing concerns about China’s rising influence.”
OilPrice.com begin an analysis about gold buying and oil futures with this question to readers: “Did you know that central banks bought more gold last year than any year in the past 55 years — since 1967?” This gold-buying spree from central banks around the world is not a new story. But the information swirling around about the Chinese Yuan is quite recent. This story has a lot to do with the pressing circumstances facing Middle East oil producers and their precious reserves of the world’s most valuable commodity. Could the Petrodollar be outsized by the Petroyuan in the near-future? That seems to be the overarching question around the high demand from Chinese oil importers. Geopolitics, however, could flip this scenario on a dime.
- Bow Down — The US Dollar Collapse Is A Political Hoax!
- How-To Guide: Install Auto-GPT on Your PC in 6 Simple Steps (Beginner).
Nima Asgari has been with Areas & Producers since the beginning. He’s a literary genius, using words to implicate but also drive conclusions that are unbiased and clear. He usually talks about cryptocurrencies, NFTs, and anything related to financial technologies and digital assets. But on the news of the US dollar coming under threat from a BRICS revival, he trims the discussion down to a rationale: “Now, while the BRICS countries are supposedly developing their own currency, this unborn currency has a long road ahead. In this article, we will go over some of the big reasons why the US dollar will not bow down to Chinese Yuan or even Bitcoin.” Nima Asgari is a wordsmith who drives conclusions that are both unbiased and full of clarity on complex details. I am so happy to have him as a writer on Areas & Producers. Bow Down is a classic ’90s rap jam by the West Coast supergroup Westside Connecton, with Ice Cube, Mack-10 and WC. I only wish that global superpowers could come together in the same way as those musical supergroups to get a grip on currency markets.
Rondel Coutain ⚡️provides a very detailed, technical content for the purpose of explaining a new technology. It’s amazing! It even has a variety of responses from the Medium community. If you need to be updated on ChatGPT and what it means for AI applications, then I suggest this one because it is a beginner’s guide. One thing is clear to me about the storytelling entertainment of the future — the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI applications for understanding consumer behaviors with data and analytics form a core part of future marketing campagins or metaverse strategy. I covered the story about Walt Disney’s CEO Transition explaining why CEO Bob Iger’s appointing a new Chief Branding Officer is a pivotal point in the company’s marketing campaign during the 100th anniverary of The Walt Disney Company. Clearly, ChatGPT has taken over the discussion about AI; the Metaverse will have to wait for its time to shine again. This doesen’t mean that a metaverse strategy would not complement the company’s uses of generative AI, such as ChatGPT, to produce more content for a wider audience of viewers in the future.
Isard Haasakker is one of the latest content writers to join Areas & Producers. I am very grateful to have him join the pub, because his content revolves around the discussion of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (aka: Industry 4.0). He defines this industrial revolution as: “the latest technology innovations, such as smart sensors and embedded computing, that enable businesses to create a more flexible and dynamic manufacturing process.” I have been working on topics related to 4IR, also known as Industry 4.0, ever since I realized its importance to the future while working with professionals in Shanghai, China. This was the main impetus for launching the publication on Medium.
Industry 4.0 is now at the core of Areas where multinational corporations (MNCs) or state-owned enterprises (SOEs) produce, operate and invest. The following two paradigms should be followed closely: how the specific issues affect a target community in a given area; as well as why governments are adapting to strategy in the global context of radical changes to industrial policies.
In my opinion, the world must re-conceptualize education, and stop looking for any angle and reason to criticize education’s value to future generations. Education indeed is the most important aspect to a successful and better world under Industry 4.0. That’s why I admire Isard Haasakker for writing this piece,“Investing in education is essential to creating a brighter future for all.”
Please follow the publication Areas & Producers to read more from these content writers. If you are an interested writer, then please let me know!
Curious About Culture, Intellectual About The World. Discover this publication’s content writers explaining scenarios/shifts related to geopolitics, future industrial policies and advanced technologies.
Sign up for The Weekend Brief (TWB) newsletter to stay on top of what’s happening with publicly-traded companies operating in global markets (including stock markets) at the nexus of tech, industrials and global commodities.
The latest TWB: Labor Was The Case That They Gave Schultz — Starbucks Takes On Union-Busting Accusations Against The Company’s Generational Employees.
