Mehmet Özay 23.06.2018
The relations that the United States of America, which is considered to be the pioneer of democratic-liberal values, has established with China, especially since Donald Trump assumed the presidency, reveals that there are strong indications that the eco-political understanding in the global context is heading towards a new formation. It is possible to say that democratic-liberal understandings and practices are not just a set of phenomena realized within the borders of one country, for example, the United States, but on the contrary, there is a strong will to spread them to the global platform starting from the post-World War II period.
At this point, there may have been a widespread belief that this peaceful and inclusive orientation and direction embraced by the United States was liberating for societies from different religious, cultural and political traditions, including the Islamic world.
Today, however, it is clear that the US has lost this 'emancipatory spirit' and is acting with a confrontational language and content of action that starts from its own country and gradually spreads across the world within the framework of its president's policies that prioritize America. President Trump's efforts to change the situation in favor of the US in trade relations with various countries, which he brought to the agenda on the eve of the elections, i.e. during the campaign period, in direct relation to the economic wealth of the productive sections of the American people, has taken the most visible place in this confrontational language.
There is no doubt that the 'privileged' position of China among the countries causing the US trade deficit is determined by the quantitative aspect of the relationship between these two global economic giants. Among the countries that contribute to the US administration's trade deficit are, for example, Japan and Malaysia, the first of which is a serious ally and the second of which is part of the alliance network to varying degrees depending on the circumstances. At this point, Japan may seem to have distanced itself from the US administration's squeeze for the time being, thanks to Prime Minister Abe's entrepreneurialism, with its solution of finding a solution to the unemployment hitting the US middle class through new investments on US soil.
But it is not only China that is covered by Donald Trump's recently announced restrictions on steel and aluminum imports. In addition to China, the US's number one rival in the global economy, the European Union and Japan are also included. While some exemptions have come to the agenda as a result of pressure from these two blocs (EU and Japan), which can be called the 'alliance' powers of the US, China seems to be left alone in the fight against the US at this point.
The Chinese government, on the other hand, is trying to justify its position with the statement of its Minister of Commerce Zhong Shan that there will be no winners in a possible 'trade war', on the contrary, the global economy will suffer as much as the countries involved. There is no doubt that the US administration's serious decision on the import of these two metals is based on the fact that it is the world's largest importer of crude steel, importing 35 million tons of crude steel annually (based on 2017 data).
Of course, what should be noted here is that the US, which has the task of exporting democratic-liberal values and free market economy globally, has turned to actions such as "economic protectionism" with the Trump administration, which contradicts the aforementioned values. At this point, it is not only China that is reacting to this trend. Representatives of the capitalist world are also opposed to the US administration's decision, fearing that it will harm global economic growth.
Another point to remember here is the relationship between China's declaration of acceptance of the rules set by the World Trade Organization in the early 2000s and its increasingly dominant position in global trade relations. Today, if China is subjected to an approach by the US administration that it is violating the rules of this organization in global trade, and if the US is preparing for a trade war - as the Chinese side argues - the position of other exporting countries within the framework of these global trade rules should also be questioned. At this point, if it is argued that there is not only a 'singular reality' of China's violations of trade rules, but that the US is also being subjected to such violations by countries with which it is allied, one could argue that the problem is much more comprehensive.
At this point, in the US administration's efforts to corner China, not only the quality and quantity of Chinese steel exports to the US, but also, and perhaps more importantly, the argument that the speed and scope of China's industrialization process has led to an increase in the production limits of this metal. If this is the case, then it is possible to say that the US, as the captain of global capitalism, is trying to limit China, which also wants to take a strong place in the global capitalist market, in this development process.
The discourse that democratic-liberal values are/will be the social and political reflection of the capitalist world's relations of production is clearly not justified in the process of China's capitalization, at least so far. The Chinese leadership, with its "communist political structure" While claiming that it can play the leadership role of global capitalism, it seems to have gained a remarkable 'momentum of success' so far. However, within the framework of all these developments, the question is also about how sincere the US is in its export of democratic-liberal values and how far it will fulfill this role in the coming period.
English and Indonesian versions translated with DeepL AI
