China
ADMM+ a plus for mitigating US–China rivalry
Author: See Seng Tan, NTU
The ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus (ADMM+) turns 10 years old at a time when the US–China rivalry is intensifying. With both China and the United States initiating competing and exclusive regional visions and diplomatic structures, ASEAN-centric platforms such as the ADMM+ are more relevant than ever before.
A decade after its establishment, the ADMM+ has arguably achieved greater cooperation than older, more established multilateral platforms in the region. But its coming of age takes place at a time when the region is at risk of being destabilised by discord between great powers.
US–China geostrategic rivalry has not only pressured ASEAN states to side with one or the other, but it has also reshaped Asia Pacific multilateralism. Nowhere is this more evident than in the formation of new, competing regional visions and institutional architectures such as the US-led Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) strategy and China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
The US–China rivalry has at times threatened to turn multilateral arrangements like the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) into battlegrounds where the two superpowers trade barbs and jockey for influence, rendering regional cooperation nearly impossible. At the 2010 ARF in Hanoi, the then Chinese foreign minister Yang Jiechi and his US counterpart Hillary Clinton crossed swords over the South China Sea issue as a ‘core interest’ for China and a ‘national interest’ for the United States.
At the 2014 ARF in Naypyidaw, their respective successors Wang Yi and John Kerry quibbled over China’s building and militarising of islands in the South China Sea. Another clash between the two countries at the 2018 APEC summit in Papua New Guinea contributed directly to the summit’s failure to deliver a joint communique for the first time in its history.
Yet this in no way makes ASEAN-centric arrangements any less relevant. On the contrary, ASEAN-based groupings assume even greater importance at a time like this because they remain platforms that both the United States and China are members of and regular participants in.
Despite claims that both the FOIP and the BRI are open and inclusive by design, the reality is that the US–China rivalry effectively turns those arrangements into exclusive platforms. China is neither part of the FOIP nor a member of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, just as the United States is not involved in the BRI. ASEAN-based arrangements are the only multilateral platforms that bring the two countries together.
Nowhere is ASEAN’s continued relevance to US–China ties more evident than in its stewardship of the ADMM+. ADMM+ members include the United States and China, the 10 ASEAN member states and 6 other regional countries — Australia, India, Japan, New Zealand, Russia and South Korea.
No longer just a ‘talk shop’, the ADMM+ is a veritable ‘workshop’ for cooperation in maritime security, humanitarian assistance and counterterrorism involving the armed forces of all 18 member states. The fact that both China and the United States insisted on conducting maritime exercises through ASEAN–China in 2018 and ASEAN–US in 2019 underscores the importance both countries place on their respective ties with ASEAN.
The present zeitgeist of rising nationalism, nativism and protectionism is unkind to multilateralism worldwide. And both the United States and China have in their own way hurt Asia Pacific multilateralism.
US President Donald Trump’s distaste for and dismissal of multilateral institutions is well known, while the trade war he precipitated against China all but undermines trade multilateralism. Chinese President Xi Jinping says the right things in support of globalisation and economic liberalisation, but Beijing’s aggressive conduct in the South China Sea threatens to divide ASEAN.
Strategic competition among big powers is an inevitable but uncomfortable reality of the international system. Where the US–China rivalry is concerned, what is worrisome is the tendency of both to talk at and act against each other by forming exclusive diplomatic constructs and architectures. Without opportunities for meaningful dialogue, it is more likely than not that misunderstandings, disagreements and tensions will escalate.
For all their flaws, ASEAN-centric platforms provide the United States and China opportunities to engage in bilateral dialogue. The multilateral setting of ASEAN-based platforms also furnishes opportunities for the United States and China to hear the views and concerns of…
China
China’s November 2024 Economy: Navigating Mixed Signals and Ongoing Challenges
In November 2024, China’s economy exhibited mixed results: industrial production rose by 5.4%, while retail sales grew only 3%, below forecasts. Fixed asset investment also faltered. Policymakers are anticipated to introduce measures to stimulate domestic demand and combat deflation.
China’s economy showed mixed performance in November 2024, with industrial production and exports showing resilience, while retail sales and fixed asset investment underperformed, amid ongoing challenges in the property sector. Policymakers are expected to implement targeted fiscal and monetary measures to boost domestic demand and address deflationary pressures.
The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) has released China’s economy data for November 2024, revealing a mixed performance across key indicators. Retail sales grew by 3 percent year-on-year, a significant slowdown from October’s 4.8 percent growth and well below the 4.6 percent forecast. Industrial production, however, showed resilience, rising by 5.4 percent and exceeding expectations of 5.3 percent growth.
The property sector continued to drag on the broader economy, with real estate investment contracting by 10.4 percent for the January-to-November period, further highlighting the challenges in stabilizing the sector. Fixed asset investment also fell short of expectations, growing by 3.3 percent year-to-date, down from 3.4 percent in October.
In November, China’s industrial value added (IVA) grew by 5.4 percent year-on-year (YoY), slightly accelerating from the 5.3 percent recorded in October. This modest improvement reflects continued recovery in key industries, supported by recent stimulus measures aimed at stabilizing the economy.
The manufacturing sector led the growth, expanding by 6.0 percent YoY, while the power, heat, gas, and water production and supply sector grew by 1.6 percent. The mining industry posted a 4.2 percent YoY increase. Notably, advanced industries outpaced overall growth, with equipment manufacturing and high-tech manufacturing rising by 7.6 percent and 7.8 percent YoY, respectively, underscoring the resilience of China’s innovation-driven sectors.
Key product categories showed robust output gains in November:
From January to November, IVA increased by 5.8 percent YoY, maintaining steady growth over the year despite headwinds from a slowing property market and external uncertainties.
This article was first published by China Briefing , which is produced by Dezan Shira & Associates. The firm assists foreign investors throughout Asia from offices across the world, including in in China, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Singapore, and India . Readers may write to info@dezshira.com for more support. |
Read the rest of the original article.
China
Ukraine war: 10% of Chinese people are willing to boycott Russian goods over invasion – new study
Since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, some Chinese citizens express dissent through potential boycotts of Russian goods, reflecting a complex relationship despite government support for Russia.
Since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the Chinese government has been criticised for its refusal to condemn the war. In 2024, the economic and diplomatic relationship between the two nations appears stronger than ever.
Because of strict censorship and repression imposed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), it is difficult to know the extent to which the general public shares their government’s support of Putin’s regime. But a newly published study I carried out with colleagues found that more than 10% of Chinese people surveyed were willing to boycott Russian goods over the war in Ukraine.
This is a surprisingly large figure, especially since existing surveys indicate that Chinese people hold a broadly positive view of their neighbour. We used a representative sample of 3,029 Chinese citizens for this research, to dig into public attitudes to Russia. The survey was done in 2022 after the Ukraine invasion.
We were aware that due to widespread censorship, our participants might not be willing to give honest answers to questions about Russia’s actions in Ukraine. They might also not feel safe to do that in a regime where disagreement with the CCP’s position is often met with harsh punishment. This is why we asked them to tell us if they would be willing to boycott Russian products currently sold in China.
We felt this question was a good indicator of how much the participants disapproved of Russian foreign policy in Ukraine. More importantly, we were also curious to find out whether Chinese citizens would be willing to take direct political action to punish Russia economically for its aggressive behaviour.
In our study, we split respondents into the three different ideological groups in China: “liberals”, who support the free market and oppose authoritarianism; “the new left”, who sympathise with the policies pursued in China under Mao Zedong; and “neo-authoritarians”, who believe the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is an extension of the rivalry between authoritarian China and the liberal United States. These groups were based on the main political beliefs in China.
We found that liberals were most likely to say they were willing to boycott Russian products. Liberals believe that China should work with, rather than against, western democracies. They also place a high value on human rights and democratic freedoms. Because of their beliefs, they are likely to think that Russia’s actions against Ukraine were unprovoked, aggressive and disproportional.
Chinese and Russian economic and diplomatic relations seem closer than ever in 2024.
American Photo Archive/Alamy
The new left and neo-authoritarians we surveyed were more supportive of Russian products. The new left see Russia as a close ally and believe that Nato’s expansion in eastern Europe was a form of aggression. Neo-authoritarians, on the other hand, believe that supporting Russia, an allied autocracy, is in China’s best interest.
Boycotting Russian goods
Asking Chinese participants if they are willing to boycott Russian products might seem like a simple matter of consumer preferences. However, our study reveals a great deal about the way in which regular citizens can express controversial political beliefs in a repressive authoritarian regime.
Boycotting products of certain companies has long been studied in the west as a form of unconventional political action that helps people express their beliefs. However, in the west, boycotting certain products is simply one of many ways people are able to take political action. In a country such as China, boycotting a Russian product might often be the only safe way to express disagreement with the country’s actions.
This is because citizens do not have to tell others they chose not to buy a product, and their actions are unlikely to attract the attention of the authorities.
Since Russian goods are readily available to Chinese consumers and China is encouraging more Russian exports to reach its market, the Russian economy could be significantly affected by an organised boycott campaign in China. The considerable level of support for a boycott expressed by some of our participants, as well as previous acts of solidarity with Ukraine in China, suggest that such a campaign could already be taking place in the country.
This could harm Russia because it regularly exports a number of different products such as meat, chocolate, tea and wine to China. These goods made up 5.1% of China’s total imports in 2023 – and this figure is likely to increase if Russia becomes more isolated from the west, and therefore more dependent on China for its trade.
While 5.1% of the Chinese market might seem like a low figure, China is home to over 1.4 billion people. In this context, even a small boycott could result in a serious loss to Russian companies.
Our research shows that Chinese citizens don’t always support the official position of the communist party. It also shows that many people there will express even the most unpopular political opinions – if they can find a safe way to do it.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
China
Australia Can Enhance China’s Credibility in the CPTPP
In early 2024, China sought to join the CPTPP, potentially offering modest economic benefits to Australia. Key reforms include limiting state-owned enterprise subsidies, enhancing data flows, and banning forced labor.
China’s Interest in the CPTPP
In early 2024, China expressed a keen interest in joining the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), a trade agreement involving eleven Pacific Rim economies and the United Kingdom. This move is anticipated to yield modest economic benefits for Australia. However, it also opens the door for vital reforms in areas such as the control of subsidies for state-owned enterprises, allowing free cross-border data flows, and prohibiting forced labor practices.
Economic Implications for Australia
A May 2024 report from the Australian Productivity Commission indicated that China’s accession to the CPTPP might raise Australia’s GDP by only 0.01%. This modest gain isn’t surprising, given Australia’s existing preferential trade arrangement with China through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. Nonetheless, the CPTPP encompasses more than just tariff reductions, focusing on broader trade principles and standards.
Reform Commitments Required from China
For China to become a CPTPP member, it must demonstrate adherence to high-standard rules initially developed with the country in mind. This commitment will help alleviate concerns among member nations like Japan and Canada, particularly regarding China’s economic practices and geopolitical tensions, such as those with Taiwan. Membership would necessitate reforms, including limiting SOE subsidies, enabling freer data flows, and banning forced labor, with significant penalties for non-compliance.
Source : Australia can encourage China’s credibility in the CPTPP