#精品长文创作季#
All statements in this article are based on reliable information, and the sources are detailed at the end of the article
On April 9, Fitch, an international rating agency, announced that it had downgraded the mainland's sovereign credit rating to negative, and coincidentally, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen left for China on the same day.
A week later, Fitch announced that it had downgraded the credit ratings of six state-owned banks in mainland China from 'stable' to 'negative', citing the so-called 'linkage adjustment'.
At the same time, 37 central enterprises and some large private enterprises were also implicated.
On the one hand, the United States is trying its best to show a posture of frank exchanges in the hope of managing the differences between China and the United States, and on the other hand, it is accustomed to using the so-called "pan-national security concept", "three anti-investigations" or "overcapacity theory" and other excuses to contain and suppress the mainland.
How should we prudently respond to this financial war unilaterally provoked by the United States?
First, the game between China and the United States is exhausted
During her visit to China from April 4 to 9, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen raised concerns about overcapacity in the mainland's "new three things" (electric vehicles, lithium batteries, and solar energy industries).
It is widely believed that Yellen's remarks are aimed at deliberately creating international public opinion so that so-called "restrictive measures" against China can be taken in the future.
Sure enough, on the day Yellen ended her visit to China, the international rating agency Fitch announced that it would downgrade the outlook of the mainland's sovereign credit rating from "stable" to "negative".
On April 10, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced that it would add six Chinese companies that violated the so-called relevant sanctions principles to the "export control list".
In less than 48 hours after Yellen reiterated that "the United States has no intention of decoupling from China," the United States has taken intensive policy repression against China for varying reasons.
Throwing out questions and concerns at the negotiating table in advance, and then wantonly introducing restrictive policies after returning to China, regardless of the facts, is this what the US side says about managing Sino-US differences? Or is this the US side's practice of saluting first and then soldiering?
A week after Yellen's visit to China, senior U.S. government officials in charge of China affairs came to China for work communication.
The outside world believes that this is a precursor to US Secretary of State Blinken, who is about to visit China.
It is reported that the focus of Blinken's visit to China is to express the concerns of the United States on the issue of Sino-Russian cooperation, and at the same time reaffirm the mainland's position on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
Also a week after Yellen's visit to China, Fitch announced that it had downgraded the credit ratings of six large state-owned banks (industry, agriculture, China, construction, communications, and postal services) to negative from "stable".
Fitch also said in a statement: "There is a lot of uncertainty about China's transition from a growth model that relies on real estate to a model that the government considers to be sustainable. ”
First of all, Yellen threw out the so-called "overcapacity theory" at the Sino-US meeting, which concocted an excuse for the United States to suppress mainland new energy companies.
Subsequently, the U.S. Department of Commerce added Chinese companies to the "export control list" on the so-called pan-national security issue.
Fitch then downgraded the outlook of the mainland's sovereign credit rating and the credit outlook of large state-owned banks and corporations by playing up the so-called "risks of China's economic transition".
After the US side has beaten this combination of punches, where can it take into account what to manage the differences between China and the United States?
In the game of Sino-US relations, we must be soberly aware that the United States will never easily change its strategic policy of containing and containing China.
At the same time, we must also be vigilant that the US is constantly concocting "new grounds" in the process of suppressing the mainland's development.
Second, the Fed's hawkish exchange rate is under pressure
On 16 April, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell expressed a cautious view of the current inflation situation in the US when talking about interest rate cuts.
In his opinion, as long as domestic upward pressure on commodity prices persists, it is necessary for the Fed to continue to maintain the stability of interest rates.
In other words, the US CPI of 3.5% in March has exceeded the Fed's expectations, and the Fed will most likely not start the rate cut cycle until the domestic inflation level in the US reaches an acceptable range.
After Powell's "hawkish" remarks, international financial markets generally predicted that the Fed was unlikely to start an interest rate cut cycle in June this year.
As a result, some international investment institutions have chosen to enter the European bond market to avoid the risk of U.S. bonds.
Powell's remarks affected not only the international investment market, but also the international foreign exchange market, which also fluctuated violently on the day.
Relevant data showed that the offshore RMB exchange rate against the US dollar reached a minimum of 7.2831 on April 16.
As for the onshore RMB exchange rate against the US dollar, the lowest exchange rate against the US dollar reached 7.2422, and as of the close of 7.2396, it was still in a state of falling below the 7.2 mark.
On the one hand, the Fed is "gritting its teeth" and delaying the reduction of US bond interest rates, and on the other hand, the mainland banks are slowly pushing for interest rate cuts, and the gradual widening of interest rate differentials between the two will obviously put serious pressure on the RMB exchange rate.
Of course, monetary policy is only one of the reasons that affect international exchange rates.
Moreover, the Fed is under tremendous pressure to pay interest while maintaining high interest rates, and the driving force of the country's economic development is the key factor affecting the currency exchange rate and attracting external investment.
According to the data, China's GDP grew by 5.3% year-on-year in the first quarter of this year, and the resilience of China's economy can have a hedging effect on the interest rate gap.
3. The impact of bank downgrades
The Ministry of Finance expressed regret over Fitch's decision to downgrade the credit outlook ratings of six large state-owned banks in the mainland.
It also pointed out that Fitch did not fully consider the positive impact of "moderate strengthening, quality and efficiency" in driving economic growth and stabilizing macro leverage when assessing the relevant issues.
However, now that the ground is in place, we must fully consider the possible impact of a downgrade in the credit outlook of banks.
In terms of negative impacts, the most direct impact of a shift in the outlook of a bank's credit rating to "negative" is the weakening of the bank's international financing capacity and business operation.
This is obviously a shock to China's economy, which is in a period of industrial development and transformation.
The banking sector is one of the indicators of the stability and potential of national economic development, and the downward rating outlook means that the investment market has certain concerns about the mode of China's economic transformation and development.
Last year, Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank of New York broke out one after another "run bankruptcy".
The reason behind this is the "risk anxiety" caused by the Fed's excessive interest rate hikes, and Fitch did not downgrade the credit ratings of these banks even before their collapse.
It can be seen that the credit rating process of international institutions can often choose to magnify the potential risks of economic development, while at the same time covering up many problems.
In this process, it seems difficult for the "independent body" to avoid the influence of political factors.
On the positive side, Fitch's announcement to downgrade the outlook of large state-owned banks in mainland China is also a wake-up call for these banks.
After all, in the critical period of domestic economic transformation, it is difficult to adapt to the development and changes of the current domestic society in the past model of relying on large-scale profits.
If banks want to continue to operate steadily, they must take the initiative to change the underlying business logic and promote the transformation from "quantity" to "quality".
Last year, during the turbulent period of the changing international financial environment, the six state-owned banks on the mainland still achieved positive year-on-year growth in net profit.
This proves that China's economy has strong resilience to changes in the complex external environment, but the domestic banking industry is indeed facing a new round of major reshuffle.
Fourth, prudently respond and accurately respond to the counterattack
Fitch's announcement of the downgrade of the credit rating outlook of mainland banks has indeed put some pressure on the RMB exchange rate, but this high interest rate differential will not change the positive view of international investors on the accelerated recovery of China's economy in the future.
As the U.S. presidential election approaches, it is unlikely that the Fed will raise interest rates further.
Compared with the fluctuation of the exchange rate market, we need to be more vigilant against the various so-called "sanction reasons" concocted by the United States.
It is reported that during his next visit to China, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken will express the so-called "US concern" on the issue of Sino-Russian cooperation.
Moreover, he has repeatedly infiltrated relevant positions in public, and we have reason to suspect that the US may be preparing a new round of sanctions against China.
Some time ago, the mainland imposed sanctions on US companies directly involved in arms sales to Taiwan and restrictions on the entry of enterprise managers on visas in response to the US arms sales to Taiwan.
In the next step, the mainland will continue to take effective countermeasures against the sanctions unilaterally adopted by the United States.
In response to the aggressive "double standard" approach of the United States, what we need to do is to prudently handle the trade dispute with the United States.
We should firmly follow a development path that suits us and retain official communication channels with the US side to avoid miscalculations on both sides.
Of course, in the face of the unilateral sanctions imposed by the US against China, we must resolutely counteract them to safeguard our legitimate rights and interests in development.
At the same time, we should also actively integrate into the international market and gradually reduce our dependence on "dollar foreign trade."
epilogue
From Yellen's visit to China on April 4 to express concerns about the so-called "overcapacity of China", to the sanctions imposed by the US Department of Commerce on Chinese companies, to Blinken's upcoming visit to China to express US concerns on Sino-Russian cooperation.
Behind the frequent suppressive actions taken by the US against China. Actually, it's a clear signal.
That is, at the sensitive moment when the scale of the federal government's debt is 'at the top', the United States is sparing no effort to transfer pressure to the mainland, and we are not the only ones facing the 'sickle' of the United States.
Fitch's announcement of the downgrade of China's sovereign credit and the outlook for state-owned banks at a sensitive period ostensibly is a concern about the uncertainty of China's economic transformation and development, but in fact it is in line with the US efforts to contain and suppress the mainland's industrial transformation.
At a critical time when the global financial market is tense and tense, international rating agencies can easily become a political tool for economic suppression.
Resources:
"The central parity of the RMB exchange rate against the US dollar was depreciated below the 7.1 mark yesterday"
http://finance.ce.cn/bank12/scroll/202404/17/t20240417_38972455.shtml China Economic Net
"Preluding Blinken's Visit to China: After Yellen, the US Announces Again Two Senior Officials Will Visit China"
https://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_27032941 The Paper
"China's 6 largest state-owned banks are all downgraded by Fitch!"
https://user.guancha.cn/wap/content?id=1216782 Observer.com
"Release the Bombshell Signal! Powell Speaks Out"
https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1796537924336295609&wfr=spider&for=pc China Fund News