US-China Economic Summit (#286; Topic S)

By now, the first US-China Economic Summit meeting has come to a close. With such a high-profile delegation (#285, 12/14/06), the expectations are understandably high. What has been achieved? Well, CNBC's on-site reporter said, elegantly, "there is no list of deliverable tangibles". Using words I can understand, the answer may be shortened to one word in English, nothing -- or three in Chinese, 沒什麼. Oh, he tried his best and listed three "accomplishments." One, another meeting has been scheduled, in May 2007 in DC. This may be done, given that e-mail runs freely between the two countries, in two minutes flat, by an administrative-assistant secretary, not by a cabinet-level secretary. Two, both sides agree to work on "trade imbalances." It seems that imposing restrictions is not a one-way street -- today's Washington Post quotes Secretary Gutierrez as saying: "They would like no restrictions [on exporting US technology to China and on China's investing in USA], and we have restrictions, so there are certain things that they would like we can't give on." Three, China agrees to introduce more flexibility in its currency, renminbi (RMB). This has been going on for at least a year and half; indeed, last Saturday's Economist (12/9/06) has a graph showing a gradual -- but consistent -- revaluation of RMB, putting into practice a public statement by the Chinese government, more than 2 years ago, that the target of RMB revaluation is for it to move at about the same rate as interest rate -- the purpose is to discourage currency speculators (indeed, last Saturday's Economist cites one by name, who single-handedly wrecked the Thai currency market and whose presence in the Chinese currency market the government would not want to see. So, this high-level delegation is on its way back to USA. Already, there is displeasure: a long-term flexibility is inconsistent with US's orientation that strives for instant gratification. Well, after all, China has a 5,000-year history (Vice Premier Wu wrote a 20-page paer and gave a lecture on same to the US delegation yesterday); this lack of history is probably an important reason for US's harboring misunderstandings about China.