Opinion

China’s strategy: Growth, alliances, and tech acquisition

Despite the pause in the US-China trade war, the US and China are strategic competitors, and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future. China realizes that there is little room to settle long-term disputes and, as a result has shifted towards a strategy that focuses on sustaining growth at any cost, expanding alliances, and advancing its technology.

By: Date: February 27, 2019 Topic: Global Economics & Governance

A version of this piece was published on China-Us Focus

The truce agreed to by China and the US at the sidelines of the G20 meeting in Buenos Aires does not change the US’ ultimate goal to contain China. The reason is straightforward: the US and China have become strategic competitors and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future, leaving little room to settle any long-term disputes. China’s recognition of the structural features of the US-led trade war has also brought about a drastic change in its response to US policy. From tit-for-tat tactics based on retaliatory measures on trade, China has shifted to a three-pronged strategy: sustaining domestic growth at any cost, finding alliances externally, and accelerating China’s technological capacity.

First and foremost, China needs to cushion the deceleration in economic growth, especially after deceleration intensified in 2018 following the US-led trade war. So far, 2018 has seen an easing in monetary policy and a half-hearted attempt at a fiscal stimulus, but those have clearly not been enough to stop economic deceleration. In fact, the ¥1.3 trillion cuts in taxes do not seem to have been effective in stimulating the economy. Fiscal expenditure has not expanded, either, which may be related to the central government’s tighter controls on local governments’ investments and the clamp down on shadow banking, as well as the fear of Xi Jinping’s anticorruption campaign. On the monetary side, the liquidity injected by the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) for the purpose of lowering the cost of funding across the board has not been effective beyond the money market. In fact, private companies have not profited much from the reduction in the cost of funding.

Given the above, and the increasingly worrisome data on investment and even consumption, China has no choice but to pull out all the stops and attempt to stimulate the economy. On the fiscal front, China is coming back to a quick fix, specifically by increasing infrastructure investments and allowing local governments to take out larger loans. On the monetary side, the key for the PBoC is to improve the transmission mechanism of its monetary actions so that the private sector gets access to cheaper credit. In that regard, the PBoC is expected to do “whatever it takes” to support growth, which basically means pushing credit towards the private sector. Given the size of the stimulus, China should be able to achieve a stabilisation of growth or, at least a moderate deceleration in 2019. This will constitute the best response to US containment, but we cannot forget that the sustainability of such growth is the key question mark down the road. In fact, leverage can only increase, as the economy is stimulated through demand policies once again. The reason, beyond China’s structural and cyclical deceleration, is to stem off the trade war’s extremely negative impact on market sentiment, which has had rippling effects on investment and the consumption of durable goods.

Beyond growth, China has two key external objectives. First, it needs to embrace more alliances, especially with the larger economies of the world. The European Union (EU) is the most obvious target, as its economic size as a bloc, is comparable to that of the US or China. This explains China’s recent push to improve its economic relations with the EU, but also with individual member states. For example, the so-called “16+1” platform, composed of 16 Eastern European and Balkan countries, endeavors to deepen bilateral relations with the countries in that region. President Xi’s recent trip to Spain and Portugal also highlights China’s attentiveness to EU member states. The recently improved relationship with Japan is also indicative of China’s frantic quest for alliances. In any event, attempts from Europe or Japan to rebalance their strategic alliances in favor of a closer relationship with China will become increasingly unsuccessful, as the US may introduce constraints on its allies’ ability to engage with China. NAFTA’s “poison pill,” which requires countries to inform one another of intentions to enter into free-trade agreements with a nonmarket economy, is an obvious reference to China.

China’s second external objective is to achieve self-reliance by reducing its technology gap with the developed world, which could be achieved faster by purchasing technology abroad. This should push China’s merger and acquisition (M&A) activity to a new high, at least in the sectors targeted in China’s medium-term industrial strategy, such as China Manufacturing 2025. The increasingly wary attitude of the U.S administration makes the EU an easy partner, although protecting against China’s M&A is also on the rise in the EU.

All in all, competition with the US and the US’s push to contain China has led Chinese authorities to respond with an overarchingly vague strategy rather than with concrete, measurable tactics. This tension has characterised Sino-American bilateral relations since the beginning of the year. Now, China is focused on building external alliances, pushing domestic growth at all costs, and accelerating technological self-reliance.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint.

Due to copyright agreements we ask that you kindly email request to republish opinions that have appeared in print to communication@bruegel.org.

View comments
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

India in 2024: Narendra Modi once more, but to what end?

Even with the recent economic slowdown, India still boasts Asia’s fastest growing economy in 2018. But beneath the veneer of impressive GDP expansion, uneasiness about India’s economic model clearly tempers enthusiasm.

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Trinh Nguyen Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 17, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

What is in store for the EU’s trade relationship with the US ?

If faced with a resurgent President Trump after the next US election, the EU will have some difficult decisions to make as it is compelled to enter a one-sided negotiation. Failure to strike a deal will imperil the world’s largest trade relationship and contribute to the progressive unravelling of the rules enshrined in the World Trade Organization – although the changes required of Europe by Trump’s demands may ultimately turn out to be in the interest of Europeans.

By: Uri Dadush Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 16, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Director's Cut: Evolution of US-China relations amid trade-tariff conflict

Bruegel director Guntram Wolff and Bruegel fellow Uri Dadush welcome William Alan Reinsch, senior adviser and Scholl chair in international business at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, for a discussion of how China-US relations are developing in the context of unfolding trade war.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 14, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Implications of the escalating China-US trade dispute

If allowed to escalate, the trade dispute between China and the United States will significantly increase the likelihood of a global protectionist surge and a collapse in the rules-based international trading system. Here the author assesses the specific impacts on the Chinese and US economies, as well as the strategic problems this dispute poses for Europe.

By: Uri Dadush Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 14, 2019
Read article More on this topic

Opinion

Will China’s trade war with the US end like that of Japan in the 1980s?

The outcome of the US-China trade war is anticipated to be quite different from the experience of Japan in the 1980s and 1990s, due to China’s relatively lower dependence on the US and having learned from the Japanese experience.

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Kohei Iwahara Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 13, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Deep Focus: Reforming and rejuvenating Russia’s economy

Bruegel fellow Marek Dabrowski talks to Sean Gibson about the underlying causes of Russia's slow emergence from economic crisis, in an episode of the Deep Focus podcast series.

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 9, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Trade war: Is the U.S. panicking due to China's big hedge?

U.S.-China trade war has suddenly taken centre stage following Donald Trump’s unexpected announcement to ramp up tariffs if no deal is reached. U.S. is in desperate need for a comprehensive victory, and China is ready to make concessions, but not to the extent of transforming its state-led economic model into a market-based economy.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 9, 2019
Read article More by this author

Blog Post

Spitzenkandidaten visions for the future of Europe's economy

What are the different political visions for the future of Europe’s economy? Bruegel and the Financial Times organised a debate series with lead candidates from six political parties in the run-up to the 2019 European elections.

By: Giuseppe Porcaro Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Date: May 8, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

All eyes on the Fed

Last week the US Federal Reserve left the federal funds rate unchanged and lowered the interest rate on excess reserves. We review economists’ recent views on the monetary policy conduct and priorities of the United States’ central bank system.

By: Inês Goncalves Raposo Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 6, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

When facts change, change the pact

“When facts change, I change my mind,” John Maynard Keynes famously said. With long-term interest rates currently near zero, the European Union should reform its fiscal framework to allow member states to increase their debt-financed public investments.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 1, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Breaking up big companies and market power concentration

Senator Elizabeth Warren proposes the break-up of big tech companies. A report for the UK government presents another approach for regulating the digital economy. And IMF research serves as a reminder that concentration of market power extends beyond digital. This blog reviews the debate.

By: Konstantinos Efstathiou Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: April 29, 2019
Read article More on this topic

Opinion

Life after the multilateral trading system

Considering a world absent a multilateral trading system is not to promote such an outcome, but to encourage all to prepare for the worst and instil greater clarity in the mind of policymakers as to what happens if compromise fails.

By: Uri Dadush and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: April 25, 2019
Load more posts