The Remaking of a Reagan Era?

The Remaking of a Reagan Era?

The U.S. and the EU are working toward zero
tariffs. What does it mean for the U.S.-China trade
war? I believe, they will enter a stage of extremely
low, even zero-tariffs. That will be a disastrous suppression and
blow to China. Trump might go full force with China on trade. What is his endgame? He has greater visions, part of which are
never mentioned publicly. But his considerations have gone beyond trade
and economy. Can Russia and the U.S. be friends after all? Restoring the relationship with Russia would
help the U.S. to focus on its main threat. So during Trump’s first term, restoring
the relationship with Russia remains a great challenge. Welcome to Zooming In. I’m Simone Gao. The Western media has drawn numerous comparisons
between Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump, from their unconventional rise to presidency to
their unorthodox approaches in dealing with current affairs. On the surface, President Trump is not fighting
the same war that Reagan did. For Ronald Reagan, it was the Cold War. For President Trump, it is the ongoing trade
war. However, at the core of both wars is the unresolved
ideological difference between the free world and the communist regime. In this episode, we’ll draw a deeper comparison
by focusing on several deterministic factors for winning a war. What are these factors? In our view, they relate to U.S. strategic
global alliances, the American people, and the president’s willingness to seize the
day and make bold moves. Reagan did this and he made history. Will history repeat itself? Let’s take a look. In 2013, former first lady Nancy Reagan told
USA Today: “As prime minister, Margaret had the clear vision and strong determination
to stand up for her beliefs at a time when so many were afraid to ‘rock the boat.’ As a result, she helped to bring about the
collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of millions of people.” Donald Trump does not have an Iron Lady to
help him in his trade war against China. European nations are upset with him for imposing
steel and aluminum tariffs and for threatening to impose tariffs on auto exports. President Trump demonstrated his willingness
to single-handedly level the global trade playing field. On July 24 he tweeted, “we are the ‘piggy
bank’ that’s being robbed.” He is on a mission to end that
Europe took notice of his tenacity, similar to how they noticed Ronald Reagan’s tenacity
in pursuing his policy. History again repeated itself; On July 25,
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker met with President Trump. They agreed to work toward “zero tariffs”
and start a new phase for the U.S.-EU relationship. We agreed today, first of all, to work together
toward zero tariffs, zero non-tariff barriers and zero subsidies on non-auto industrial
goods. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We will also work to reduce barriers and increase
trade in services, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, medical products, as well as soybeans. Soybeans is a big deal. And the European Union is going to start,
almost immediately, to buy a lot of soybeans. They are a tremendous market. Buy a lot of soybeans from our farmers. When I was invited by the president to the
White House I had one intention, I had the intention to make a deal today, and we made
a deal. The latest change in the U.S.-EU relationship
shows that China’s strategy of rallying Europe against the U.S. failed. Right before that, the Chinese yuan depreciated
against the dollar. As of July 25, the yuan closed at 6.78 and
lost 6.9% in three months. What does all this mean to China? I discussed these questions with former Peking
University Professor of Economics David Xia. Do you think this new round of Renminbi depreciation
was a move of the Chinese communist regime? What impact has it had upon the ongoing U.S.-China
trade war? And Trump and the European Commission president
announced they would work towards zero tariffs. How will the Chinese regime deal with that? Over the years, the value of Renminbi has
been related to China’s real economy, its external economic environment, risks in its
financial system, and money supply. So, as I criticized, this approach of the
Chinese government — over-issuing currency — will certainly depreciate Renminbi significantly. This depreciation is a sure trend in both
the middle and long term. Right now it’s so obvious in the short term
that some doubt it is a move by the Chinese government. However, I don’t see much need for the regime
to do so. What it might do at most is leave the currency
uninterrupted. As we know, if Renminbi is depreciated too
much, the authorities may use its foreign exchange reserve, say, in large amounts, buying
Renminbi and selling U.S. dollars, to keep its currency stable and appreciated to a certain
degree. But right now, there’s no such need. Yes, generally, depreciation will contribute
to exports amid the U.S. trade war with China. However, we face a situation in which that
method might not necessarily bring about huge interests as expected. It’s known that America’s stance means
it will slap high tariffs on $500 billion dollars’ worth of Chinese imports. Therefore, China, by devaluing Renminbi, alone
cannot successfully promote its exports in a usual sense. More importantly, President Trump and European
Commission President Juncker issued a statement following their summit that both sides would
remove trade barriers, tariffs, and any subsidies, thus creating a free trade zone with “zero
tariffs,” and “zero subsidies.” Mind you, the total population of the two
regions is 830 million, nearly 12 percent of the world’s population. And their GDP combined consists of 50 percent
of the world’s. With such a titan free economy for free trade
zone, if added up with Japan and some other trading powers, the majority of global economies,
I believe, will enter a stage of extremely low, even zero-tariff. That will be a disastrous suppression and
blow to China. Therefore, the Chinese regime will never change
the dynamic, with such a minor scheme — depreciation. Coming up, what is China’s true economic
and political status? Does President Trump see an opportunity President
Reagan saw 32 years ago? China’s true economic and political state
is much more turbulent than what the Western world perceives. 32 years ago, when President Reagan gained
insight of how vulnerable the Soviet Union’s economy was, he didn’t hesitate to make
a decisive move to bring down the whole thing. Will history repeat itself? Let’s first revisit what happened in the
mid 1980s. In March 1983, Reagan announced the Strategic
Defense Initiative (SDI). SDI soon became the target of negotiations. In October of 1986, Reagan and Gorbachev met
in Iceland. Gorbachev proposed concessions in nearly every
area of arms control but under the condition that the U.S. would give up its SDI program. Reagan refused the conditions and walked away
with an important insight — that the Soviet Union feared his program. Reagan then tripled America’s SDI budget,
which soon brought the arms race to an end and led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Today, when President Trump put tariffs on
50 billion dollars of Chinese goods and then possibly 200 billion and then possibly the
total of 500 billion, does he see an opportunity similar to the one Reagan saw 32 years ago? In the West, we hear news about China on a
daily basis, but we still don’t see the turbulence building behind China’s Great
Firewall. On July 25, the yuan fell to its lowest of
the year after Beijing announced that it would pursue a more vigorous fiscal policy. Despite the policy-driven stock market bounce
in 2018, China’s economic thermometer — the Shanghai Composite index — has been trending
downward through June 2018. On the same day, a Reuters article revealed
that 4000 high net worth investors rushed to banks and occupied them. Management teams from four private equity
firms under Shanghai Fu Xing disappeared over the last month. As a result, investors cannot redeem their
investments. Fu Xing has $30 billion in assets under its
management, one of the largest players in the Chinese market. This is only the latest example of ownership
and management disappearing with investors’ money. A general observation is that China’s macroeconomic
status does not support the high-yield promises made by these private equity firms. The bubble will burst in the future. On July 13, news broke that many public places
took down Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s posters from their lobbies. By the following week, news spread that the
elites and some high CCP officials established an agreement to take down Xi Jinping from
his position. Although Xi embarked for Africa as scheduled,
indicating he is not in immediate danger of being deposed, the consensus is that he encountered
strong resistance within the party. Also in July, Chinese inspectors announced
Changchun Changsheng Biotechnology, China’s largest vaccine maker, had violated safety
standards. A rough estimate indicated that a quarter
of a million faulty vaccines had been administered to children. This news went viral on Chinese social media,
as news like this continues to erode public confidence on food and service safety. Desperately, parents in China took their concerns
to the U.S. embassy website to seek support. Public outcry and political rumors all point
to the mounting pressure the Chinese Communist Party faces. In fact, strong economic growth has been the
only source of legitimacy for the Communist Party’s rule. If the trade war undermines that, China could
go through drastic political changes. Is Trump facing the same situation that Reagan
did 32 years ago? Let’s hear from David Xia again. Now Trump is ready to place tariffs on an
additional $200 billion of Chinese imports. Do you believe he is likely to impose tariffs
on all Chinese products? If he does so, what would be his final goal? In fact, Trump has shown almost all his cards. The purpose of his doing so is to deter China
or give it a harsh warning, hoping China will not take any confrontational, retaliatory
responses. In that case, tensions will naturally ease
up. But, if China vows tit-for-tat responses,
a trade war will escalate so that both sides will endure significant losses. As I repeatedly stressed, America’s strength
wouldn’t be critically undercut. But China wouldn’t be able to endure consequences
of this war. Some have doubts: Given his background as
a businessman, does Trump only care about commercial interests? I don’t think so. He has greater visions, part of which are
never mentioned publicly. But his considerations have gone beyond trade
and economy. As an admirer of President Reagan, I’m convinced
Trump is no less capable when compared with any of his predecessors in terms of international
patterns and strategies. So, give him time and opportunity. And we’ll see he’ll come to greater accomplishments
in many fields. Because of pressure from Trump, Chinese authorities
repeatedly responded in a provoking manner. What’s Xi Jinping’s attitude towards the
U.S.-China trade war? Will Xi make a fundamental change under pressure,
both domestic and abroad? Well, Xi Jinping — it’s said — received
only an elementary education. He’s a fake doctorate degree holder. Further, his character is somewhat reckless,
unlikely to listen to others. So, he’ll be stubborn and stick to his ideas
until his collapse. Despite pressure, resistance or challenges
from within the party over his dictatorship or personality cult, he has renewed another
purging campaign and restored his grip on power. Recently, support for his personality cult
and dictatorship has resumed. He chose this moment to visit the Middle East
and African countries as scheduled, marking his confidence over his control of power. He had to make sure there’s no danger or
crisis in store for him before his visit. However, many hope that Xi will choose to
follow President Chiang Ching-kuo as an example towards constitutional democracy. Under huge pressure, domestic and abroad,
will he do it? My answer is very definite: Never. Coming up: How can improved U.S.-Russia relations
help the U.S. in its trade war with China? Amidst the escalating trade war between the
U.S. and China, President Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. Both leaders called it a success during their
joint press conference afterwards. But President Trump immediately faced criticism
from both Democrats and Republicans for his comments relating to Russia’s interference
in the 2016 election, where he said he “didn’t know why it would be” Russia that interfered. The next day, the president said he misspoke
and meant to say, “I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia.” He later tweeted, “I’m very concerned
that Russia will be fighting very hard to have an impact on the upcoming election. Based on the fact that no president has been
tougher on Russia than me, they will be pushing very hard for the Democrats.” Because of ongoing Russian cybersecurity threats,
many were surprised when President Trump invited Putin to the White House. In a July 16th interview on the Situation
Room with Wolf Blitzer, Sen. Rand Paul defended the president. I think that it is a good idea to have engagement. And I think that what is lost in this is I
think that there’s a bit of Trump derangement syndrome. I think there are people who hate the president
so much that — this could have easily been President Obama early in his first administration
setting the reset button and trying to have better relations with Russia. And I think it’s lost on people that they
are a nuclear power, they have influence in Syria, they’re in close proximity to our
troops in Syria, they are close to the peninsula of North Korea, and they have some influence
that can help us there. Another thing that’s lost — and people
forget this completely — the Russians tried to help us stop the Boston Marathon bombing. We actually did help them stop a terrorist
attack in St. Petersburg because of communicating and exchanging information. Indeed, resetting U.S.-Russia relations could
help the United States in a variety of areas, including Syria, Iran, and North Korea. But looking at it from a different angle,
it could also help the U.S. in its trade war with China. Although Russia still poses a threat to the
United States, the Chinese regime is a much bigger one. So what exactly is President Trump’s strategy
towards Russia and China? And can he accomplish it? I spoke with senior political commentator
Wen Zhao about it. What is President Trump’s purpose in restoring
relations with Russia? Would it give America any advantage in the
trade war? The Trump administration views China as its
primary opponent. Restoring the relationship with Russia would
help the U.S. to focus on its main threat. Although it’s still difficult to accept
Russia’s annexation of Crimea, from a global strategic perspective, Russia isn’t a real
opponent for the U.S. Russia has a population of 146 million, more than twice that of South
Korea. Its land area is 170 times that of South Korea’s. However, its economy ranked behind South Korea
in 2017. It’s difficult for Russia to make waves. For Russia to become a world power again,
it first needs to re-integrate all former Soviet Union countries. This will be difficult to accomplish during
Putin’s lifetime. So Russia has a long way to go before it can
be considered an equal to the U.S. But Russia is one of the five permanent members
of the United Nations Security Council. To push Russia to Beijing’s side is not
a wise strategy. Russia interfered with the U.S. election in
2016. The U.S. won’t let go of that even though
Russia would not admit or apologize for it. So during Trump’s first term, restoring
the relationship with Russia remains a great challenge. Could China and Russia become allies? Taking a long-term view beyond 10 years, China
and Russia lack strategic support to form an alliance. The main reason is that China will find it
hard to form close economic ties with Russia. Mutual benefits for China and Russia are only
restricted to a few political topics. Geographically, Russia’s neighbors are economically
weak, such as Mongolia and North Korea. Northeast China is slightly richer, but in
recent years, it is economically shrinking. The wealth level is far behind coastal provinces
and many inland provinces. Russia borders with many poor regions, which
means that they won’t stimulate economic growth in Russia. Recovery in Russia will continue to depend
on Europe. The trade relationship between China and Russia
is also very simple. China purchases energy resources from Russia. However, due to its shale oil technology,
the U.S. now is a large exporter of oil and natural gas. It becomes questionable from a cost-benefit
perspective for China to purchase energy from Russia. After the Crimean crisis, China and Russia
signed large contracts to purchase energy. Within China, though, there isn’t agreement
on this; some believe that purchasing more expansive energy from Russia, purely based
on political motive, isn’t really beneficial to China. Another key factor is population. Because of the long-term recession, the far
East population continues to flow to Europe. This causes anxiety for the government since
it’s difficult to control. So Russia remains suspicious of China, given
its growing population. Lastly, China continues to compete with Russia
to gain influence over the countries that became independent from the former Soviet
Union. All these factors make it challenging for
Russia and China to form a long-term stable alliance. Only 30 years ago, dictators who ruled over
the land and people of the Soviet Union sat at the opposite end of the negotiating table
with the U.S. They appeared strong and terrifying. Two years after the Cold War ended, the Soviet
Union dissolved. Reversing his predecessor’s détente foreign
policy, Reagan paved the way for the collapse of the behemoth communist regime of his day. Will Donald Trump achieve the same glory for
America again? This time, which side will Russia choose? How will the people choose sides in the making
of history? Thanks for watching Zooming In. I’m Simone Gao. See you next week.

3 thoughts on “The Remaking of a Reagan Era?

  1. You said : Communist China regime in replace of Chinese Government , This remained me as if Mr Trump didn't see China as a Formal state but is still an occupying area ?
    For Current China toke over from ROC,which was helped by Japan Empire to be established , but became occupied after the defeat of Japan Empire till now ?(Thai is why Current China still received officially help from Japan ?)
    And what Mr Trump , with ordered mood to have China to change, because of that is her occupying area ! Do you know this ?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *