In reference
to Lyndon LaRouche's "New Bretton Woods" policy proposal.
This article appeared in the May
7, 1999 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
See other speeches delivered at the same seminar, by Lyndon
LaRouche and Prof.
Dr. Wilhelm Hankel.
by Prof. Qian Jing
[The following is part of the published proceedings of a conference
held on April 21, 1999 in Bonn-Bad Godesberg, Germany, sponsored by
Executive Intelligence Review.]
Anno Hellenbroich:I would now like to introduce our last
speaker in this session. Prof. Qian Jing is a member of the Chinese
Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing. He is an expert on Chinese
literature and philosophy. He is now working in an advisory capacity on
international affairs, and deals with regional economic development
projects in China. In the past, he has published articles on, for example,
"The Soros Phenomenon," and an internal memorandum on
"Analysis of Recent Globalization and the Chinese Financial
Crisis." Today he will speak on the topic, "The Path toward a
New, Just World Social, Political, and Economic Order: A Chinese
View." Professor Qian:
Introduction
I am sorry I can't follow the example of our Prime Minister Zhu
Rongji,
who can speak without a text.
First I want to say some words about the Kosovo crisis.
As you know, the attitude of our government toward the Kosovo crisis
has been restrained.
Among the common people, there is a lot of anger. For example, in
Shanghai, movie audiences demanded to see Yugoslavian movies, making many
phone calls to TV stations and also through the Internet, asking where
they can see movies about the anti-fascist war [Yugoslavia in the Second
World War]. So, the television has broadcast two movies, and even at a
late hour, people stay up to see them. Many Chinese people are going to
the Yugoslavian Embassy to donate money, food, medicine, clothing, and so
forth. You should understand our reaction. China suffered so many wars
during this century. We really love peace and are against war.
On the level of scholars, including military researchers, I can
summarize the conclusions as follows:
We understand very clearly that the so-called "air strikes"
are really a touch-stone for practicing the new role of NATO. Thus, NATO
is being made into a new tool for military tasks. The first aim, is to
take over a military policing role in Europe and to impose the so-called
new international order, particularly in the Balkans.
We should seriously ask the question: since NATO is being used as a new
tool, who is the real master of the tool? On the surface, you could say it
is America's tool. However, as Mr. LaRouche said, it actually is the tool
of the BAC, the British-American-Commonwealth group. When we recall the
history of this century, one of the deep lessons is, that when the
financial oligarchy group comes to an economic crisis, they always move
toward world war. We understand the meaning of the Kosovo crisis also in
this sense, that the British-Americans are trying to change the rules of
the game, replacing the Security Council by NATO as a tool from the Cold
War period. At the same time, the financial oligarchy is trying to turn
attention away from the financial crisis, and toward military conflict and
war instead. We see NATO as a new tool for them. The WTO [World Trade
Organization] as a trade tool, the IMF [International Monetary Fund] as a
financial tool, and NATO is a military tool. Yugoslavia is the first
sacrifice for testing that new tool and new rules. If the BAC is
successful, they will go further. Who will be next? Russia, Iran, India,
North Korea, even China?
Concerning ethnic conflict, I want to mention, that in China we have
many nationalities that live in one unified country. In Chinese we call
this gong he--republicanism. Now, everyone in the West knows the
Great Wall, but I would like to tell you a story about it. Generally
speaking, the Great Wall that tourists enjoy today was built up in the
Ming Dynasty (fifteenth century to seventeenth century). At that time the
purpose of the Great Wall was military defense, even though often without
success. In the eighteenth century, we stopped building up and maintaining
the Great Wall. Why? The reason is, in that new century our people created
a new concept: The military and racist prejudice associated with the Great
Wall disappeared, and a better relation was created between man and man,
between the Mongolian, Tibetan, Han, and other nationalities, of racial
equality. So, we are opposed to ethnic conflicts. We believe the different
peoples can and must live together in peace. So this one reason why the
Chinese people are very shocked about the NATO military action.
Air strikes, even ground war, won't solve anything. I would tell the
NATO leaders, if you want to solve the problem, you must prove to the
Yugoslavian people that you really don't want to destroy them. You must
offer real economic development for the whole region. This is the way to
make positive pressure, to transform the confrontation into a friendship.
The bombing just feeds hatred. If the Yugoslav people are convinced that
they can have a bright future in peace, and their neighbors, too, then
negotiation can be successful. The same principle should be applied all
over the world, to all regional conflicts. We cannot tolerate double
standards.
This morning I watched President Bill Clinton's speech on CNN, about
the shooting which occurred in a high school in Colorado. What Clinton
said was basically this: We should teach the younger generation to solve
their problems by words, not with weapons. I agree with him perfectly.
However, in this case I'll say to President Clinton: By your own actions,
please give a good example to the young people, not a bad example.
Now, I want to give a comment about the visit of our Premier to the
United States. In our view, Zhu Rongji's visit to the United States was a
major success. Under the given conditions, it was not so easy for Zhu to
go. In the past, like in the time of the Cultural Revolution, our
government would have at least cancelled the visit, and raised a wave of
anti-American propaganda. But now, we take a rational approach. Zhu was
able to show to the American people that he was very frank, very
outspoken, flexible and friendly, not like some bureaucrat. He was able to
show what China is, to many Americans who don't know, including many
Congressmen. I think this is a new attitude and style for dealing with
issues in the twenty-first century--to be constructive, not destructive.
The concrete result--for example, whether China joins the WTO or not--is
not so important. If all statesmen, like Zhu Rongji, or Lyndon LaRouche,
who is such a statesman of the United States, if all such statesmen can
discuss in this way, the world's future will be better.
The East Asia crisis did not surprise us so much, for two reasons.
First, we had our own internal economic crisis, from our own "bubble
economy," in 1993 and 1994. Our scholars gave serious warnings to the
government in 1993-1994. Our government, particularly Zhu Rongji, took
macroeconomic measures to control the bubble economy, to stop the
overheated speculative capital flowing into real estate, the stock market,
and development zones.
Secondly, we kept in contact with the Schiller Institute, from 1994
until today. Since 1994, Lyndon LaRouche's ideas began to be introduced
and spread in China. Our press gave growing attention to him and the
Schiller Institute, and even our very high-level officials of the central
government knew his main ideas and understood them.
Right now, our government's view could be summarized as follows:
First, to cure the problems of our own internal economy, for example by
reforming our state-owned enterprises, reducing the amount of bad debt in
our banking system, and speeding up the reform of the banking system.
Also, allowing some non-banking financial organizations to go into
bankruptcy, such as the GITIC in Guangdong Province. On the other hand,
after the outbreak of the Asian financial crisis, the Chinese government
introduced a new policy to stimulate the economy by big investment into
infrastructure projects. This policy has produced some success,
maintaining a relatively high growth rate in spite of the Asian and world
crises. In fact, the economic situation in China in 1999 may be better
than in 1998.
Second, to find the way toward reforming or reconstructing the
international financial system. Our experts pay attention not only to
financial security, but also to economic security. After the outbreak of
the Kosovo crisis, we have started to think about the connection among
economic security, political security, and military security.
We understand the point, that the virtual economy or speculative bubble
is always drawing money out of the real economy, and when the virtual
economy comes to a crisis, it pulls the real economy down. And the poor
people suffer. If we want to have social progress, we need a rational
financial order and a rational economic organization. Therefore, we
support the ideas of Lyndon LaRouche for a New Bretton Woods System. We
don't want to only discuss in general, but we want, that concrete
proposals for a New Bretton Woods be placed on the table for practical
adoption.
Some detailed experts' view on the Chinese
government's economic measures
The Chinese government has adopted many measures to stimulate our
economic growth (not lower than 7% in 1999) and has committed 100 billion
renminbi (RMB) for infrastructure projects involving railways, harbors,
highways, water facilities, and so forth.
It is true to say, however, that many problems still exist: For
example, a) the banking and non-banking financial system bad debts still
occupy a large proportion of the banks' capital; b) state-owned
enterprises as well as town-owned enterprises still show low efficiency
levels.
In this situation, government-lent money from banks actually was a huge
loan from the people's savings--it was their money which was put into
infrastructure projects. It is difficult for these loans to get a stable
guarantee of success.
One of the main reasons for this lack of financial security is
corruption at the local government level, which undermines the quality of
projects. An appropriate metaphor for the Chinese people is that such
projects are like dou fu [soybean curd, tofu]--if you touch the dou
fu, it is destroyed, broken, wrecked. This was evidenced most recently
by the Rainbow Bridge near Chong Qing city. A modern bridge was finished
late last year, but in February this year, it suddenly collapsed, with a
loss of life of more than 30 people.
Scholars' current thinking on financial security
-
The capital market should be open to the whole society, to allow
the public and individuals to invest in commerce and industry.
-
Concomitant with this opening of the market, is the need to
evaluate and improve the legal system in order to ensure the
protection of investors' interests.
-
The exchange rate should be adjusted flexibly and regularly to take
advantage of the situation and to protect our economic security.
-
There needs to be more control of financial debt, especially the
scale and types of investment debt. Such debt should be controlled to
fall within a reasonable range.
-
In order to enforce limited--I say limited--financial intervention
in the financial market, other relevant measures need to be taken:
First, establish long-term investment management companies.
Second, add heavier taxes to the speculators' capital flow.
Third, build up new companies, i.e., financial capital management
companies, as well as other companies, to ensure the protection of
peoples' savings.
Concerning China's entry into the WTO
Our government has made many important concessions in negotiations with
the U.S. The Chinese government really wants to improve the relations
between China and the U.S., which will remain a superpower in the next
century. So our government has tried to do its best to create a peaceful
and reasonable atmosphere.
But we have our own principles for international relations. On the
principal issues, we never made concessions that would threaten or sell
out our security or our sovereignty. We are not beggars. Without the WTO,
China will still be China. Perhaps we may encounter problems in the
future, but we can find a way out. Nobody can threaten us. So there is a
possible turning point, where sovereign states may ally to resist the
famous globalization which is being manipulated by the BAC.
1. In regard to the possibility of China joining the World Trade
Organization, obvious differences have appeared in the White House. [U.S.
Trade Representative Charlene] Barshefsky, [National Security Adviser
Sandy] Berger, and the CIA supported the signing of the agreement. Yet,
according to the Wall Street Journal, [Treasury Secretary Robert]
Rubin, and others, thought that the agreement needed to be concluded
later, in order to assuage Congress.
China recognizes the need for concessions. We have promised that to
open the Chinese market of agricultural products, e.g., for beef, we must
reduce the tariff from 45% to 12% in the next five years. For cheese, the
tariff will be reduced from 50% to 12%. China has agreed to open its
cotton and wheat markets.
2. Now, if the U.S.A. does not sign the agreement, China is likely to
turn toward European countries, to Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and
other countries instead. We will soon find out who is the loser and who is
the winner. Chinese scholars believe that China has reached its limits in
compromising, and that further compromise is not a possibility. If the
Clinton administration makes further demands, then we feel there is no
room for further compromise.
3. China joining the World Trade Organization is a method--a means to
an end. Our government's intention is to stimulate our domestic market, to
stimulate our state-owned enterprises, including China Telecom, and
commercial banks, and to improve the all-round capability of Chinese
enterprises so that they can stand up independently in a competitive
environment.
China's relations with Russia and India
Now, before speaking about the new "strategic triangle"
China-India-Russia, I want to make a few comments first on China and
Russia.
China and Russia have an established, sound political relationship
based on an equal, peaceful strategic partnership which provides a solid
basis of confidence in dealing with each other.
Some of the problems encountered in recent years between China and
Russia:
Some Chinese have stayed longer in Russia than permitted (this was
especially so in the Siberian area).
We still have not resolved the issue of the satisfactory settlement of
accounts between the two countries. Many Russian trading companies need
currency, especially hard currency. The Chinese side tried to meet this
demand, and to help reduce the reliance on barter, i.e., exchanging goods.
Establishing a stable settlement system will greatly encourage the growth
of trade. On the other hand, we acknowledge that under certain conditions,
barter can useful. So, a flexible approach can be used.
The transportation system between the two countries does not operate
efficiently, and deliveries are often delayed. This makes it difficult to
fulfill business contracts.
As a result, the following approaches are considered to be necessary:
-
Encourage big business in both Russia and China--big businesses
which have sound reputations and favorable credit conditions--to
increase their trade.
-
It is my personal opinion that large Russian companies should find
suitable Chinese partners in the areas of the Yangtze River Delta and
the Pearl River Delta.
-
Another suggestion which I wish to recommend, is that both
countries make strong efforts in the value-added industries and in the
energy industry. There are already several notable, successful, new
type enterprises in China--the Legend Computer Group and the Haier
Group in Qing Dao.
I think our success in improving relations between Russia and China can
give useful lessons for our relations with India and other countries.
On the China-Russia-India triangle
In combined population and territory, Russia, China, and India are the
giant countries in the world. They are neighbors and their economies are
complementary. Each has a long history and highly developed culture. Each
has fought bitterly for its sovereign rights against foreign invasions and
foreign occupation, in spite of big losses. These countries have a
tradition of pride and independence. Therefore, it is natural that they
should cooperate to create a rational economic order in the twenty-first
century.
There are many things we must do to improve the relationship among
these three countries. In my view these can be divided into several
levels: the government level, the enterprise level, the academic level,
and the media level. I want to make some remarks about the academic level.
Scholars can play an important role as a bridge.
I suggest that we should build up a special foundation. Its name could
be: "The New Triangle Foundation." Its function will be to bring
together experts from all three sides--China, Russia, and India--to design
an economic cooperation plan, and to prepare documents concerning:
-
How to speed up the trade among the three countries. For example,
we should consider a customs union to increase trade and technical
exchange.
-
Industrial cooperation. Also, cooperation on software and
information development.
-
How to promote and improve infrastructure construction, including
the whole network of the Eurasian Land-Bridge.
-
To cooperate on advanced technology, including military technology.
Very advanced technologies from the military area, can be very
efficiently spread to the civilian area and promote rapid economic
development.
-
How to set up a three-way credit mechanism. As a first step, to set
up an institutional mechanism to settle trade accounts and facilitate
trade.
We should conduct research about creating a new international financial
order around our three countries, as a first step.
In addition, form a new type of association: India-China-Russia, and
influence the mass media to educate mass opinion.
At the same time, we should work to make sure all three countries have
strong governments.
Conclusion
In the same way that Spring creates new life, it is my fervent wish
that we here can create new solutions for the future.
There is a Chinese saying, which is appropriate to leave you with:
"The new day begins with morning; the new year begins with
spring."
|