After going to China to make a big fuss, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who redefined "overcapacity", continued to shout that "all means are on the table" after returning to China, and put on a tough posture of "if China does not solve the production capacity problem, it will fight a trade war". At the same time, after Yellen's arrogant remarks, she made a gesture that she wanted to "help China". According to the Observer, citing the Hong Kong media "South China Morning Post", Yellen was interviewed on the 16th and once again hyped up the so-called "China's overcapacity".
As if realizing that her previous remarks on China were too "outrageous", Yellen, in order to prove to the world that the United States still abides by the rules of the market economy, also "found another way" and changed her claim that "solving overcapacity and macroeconomic imbalances will help China's economic development". However, the fact is that for a hegemony like the United States, which has never accepted emerging countries to catch up with and surpass itself, "being happy to see the development of other countries" itself is a false proposition. Therefore, when Yellen once again used "overcapacity" to promote the "China threat theory", the mainland embassy in the United States quickly responded. It is reported that Liu Pengyu, spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in the United States, clearly pointed out in the face of the media that China's achievements in electric vehicles, lithium batteries and photovoltaic products are the inevitable result of the global division of labor and market demand.
Liu Pengyu emphasized that the balance between supply and demand is often relative, and imbalance is the norm. The spokesman said that if we want to properly solve these problems, we must adjust them in accordance with the law of value in the market economy. There is no doubt that the response of the spokesperson of the mainland embassy is to publicly reject Yellen's "good intentions" and euphemistically remind the Biden administration that when attacking China's industrial policy, it is better to use the most basic economic theory as its own basis, rather than artificially creating the "overcapacity" argument that violates economic common sense. At the same time, we should also note that Yellen, as the leader of the United States in formulating macroeconomic and financial policies, has recently frequently overstepped her responsibilities and replaced Raimondo in public statements on trade issues. Raimondo and Tai Qi, who are really in charge of specific affairs, have begun to talk less about Sino-US trade in public.
Behind this strange "division of labor" reveals the dilemma of the Biden administration in the face of the current situation. The latest U.S. inflation data was higher than expected, which directly hit the Fed's willingness to cut interest rates, and continuing to maintain the current financial policy will inevitably affect U.S. inflation in turn. At the same time, the U.S. election will inevitably put the economy at the top of the list, and Biden, who is in power, is likely to come under the most intense attack.
In this case, the introduction of cheap goods can immediately reduce the pressure on the lives of the American people. But the problem is that today's Washington can no longer look at "Made in China" with normal eyes, but it can't come up with a replacement plan for itself. Therefore, Yellen was pushed out to fight a war of words with the mainland on industrial policy, on the one hand, based on political considerations, in order to shift the blame in this way, so that voters can ignore the incompetent governance of the Biden administration and project more anger on the imaginary enemy of "China".
On the other hand, it is "soft and hard", hoping that China will be able to "raise its hand" in areas where the United States still has the possibility of competition. As for "all the means on the table", I am afraid that even Yellen, who said this, does not have much confidence in her heart, if the United States really has the means to solve the current problems, then the Biden administration will no longer need to force China to make concessions by threatening China. The current global economic downturn is an indisputable fact, and the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine and the Middle East has further exacerbated the uncertainty of global trade.
If the United States cannot change its thinking and concentrate on improving its core competitiveness, and only knows that it will hinder China's progress by "stumbling up", it will not be able to make itself great again, nor will it be able to undermine the rhythm of China's industrial upgrading, but will be seen through by the international community and lose its core leadership position in the global market.