Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China’s “Nuclear Option”
contentions ^ | 8.9.2007 | Gordon Chang

Posted on 08/09/2007 9:33:21 AM PDT by Contentions

In the past few days two Chinese officials have threatened to employ the “nuclear option” against the United States: selling dollars and U.S. Treasury obligations to retaliate against possible American legislation. Congress is now considering bills meant to counter Beijing’s tight control of the value of its currency, the renminbi. China possesses somewhere in the vicinity of $1.3 trillion of foreign exchange reserves. Analysts believe that the Chinese government holds about $900 billion in dollar assets.

“I personally believe we have so many foreign exchange reserves that we should be smarter in setting the issues,” said Xia Bin, one of the officials, at the end of July. “It should at least be a bargaining chip in talks.” This is the first time that a senior economic adviser to Beijing publicly has suggested using China’s reserves for political leverage. He Fan, the other official, wrote in the China Daily on Tuesday about Beijing’s causing “a mass depreciation” of the greenback.

(Excerpt) Read more at commentarymagazine.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: china; commentary; contentions; gordonchang
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

1 posted on 08/09/2007 9:33:22 AM PDT by Contentions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Contentions

Who are they going to sell to?

More nonsense noise. They got to sell TO someone.

At which point we can simply ban their imports and destory their economy.


2 posted on 08/09/2007 9:36:26 AM PDT by MNJohnnie ("Todays (military's) task is three dimensional chess in the dark". General Rick Lynch in Baghdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Contentions

All right...let’s call their bluff. I’m more than happy to see the price of Chinese goods go through the roof...are they?


3 posted on 08/09/2007 9:38:58 AM PDT by econjack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Its a world economy now plenty of buyers. Our leaders should be ashamed of trusting commies.


4 posted on 08/09/2007 9:39:12 AM PDT by Orange1998 (4 Real)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Contentions

5 posted on 08/09/2007 9:41:17 AM PDT by wastedyears (Freedom is the right of all sentient beings - Peter Cullen as Optimus Prime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

This is puffery.

China’s ecconomy is SMALLER than the increase in our ecconomy.


6 posted on 08/09/2007 9:43:08 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Contentions

The basic truth is that China now needs the West more than they are needed by the West. They’re getting a crash course in capitalism, and there will be some hard lessons in there.


7 posted on 08/09/2007 9:46:50 AM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Contentions
We goin' NU-KREAH on you ass, roundeye!!


8 posted on 08/09/2007 9:49:45 AM PDT by stm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Contentions
I always wondered at these types of comments ... suppose the devaluation target, started buying the seller’s currency. Wouldn't that drive their currency higher to the point were their goods were VERY much more expensive overseas? Wouldn't this have a far more damaging impact to an exporting country?
9 posted on 08/09/2007 9:49:55 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Contentions

I make it a habit to avoid Chinese goods. I paid an extra $5 for a knee brace for my son (hockey related) that was made in America.

In fact, the Chinese item was, IMO, inferior in materials and design.

Like it says, the “Made In China” label should be considered a “Warning Label”!


10 posted on 08/09/2007 9:51:07 AM PDT by airborne (Proud to be a conservative! Proud to support Duncan Hunter for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
SHHHHHHHH! Ret dem rearn resson hahd way!!!!
11 posted on 08/09/2007 9:52:46 AM PDT by stm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Contentions

Little green slips of paper are not a sound basis for a monetary system, and it’s going to end up badly.


12 posted on 08/09/2007 9:52:49 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Trails of troubles, roads of battle, paths of victory we shall walk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stm
Whooops .... sorry, did not realize that the logic was on the down low.

[grin]

13 posted on 08/09/2007 9:57:18 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Contentions

We should call 100 billion in everytime they pull this bluff. We have the resources.


14 posted on 08/09/2007 9:58:01 AM PDT by GulfBreeze (Support America, Support Duncan Hunter for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
Who are they going to sell to?

Would that be the problem? When billions of dollars are up for sale and no one wants it, they have no value, globally.

15 posted on 08/09/2007 10:01:26 AM PDT by Realism (Some believe that the facts-of-life are open to debate.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Contentions

Threats like this should tell the rest of us how China really feels about us. If we stand up to them, they want to bury us.....or try. What they don’t understand is that the American people can ruin their economy.....or at least have a major impact on it. Stop buy anything from China and see what happens. If they get pissed, so be it. The government in China is strong, their people weak. Our government is weak and our people strong. They don’t understand this.


16 posted on 08/09/2007 10:03:07 AM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Orange1998
There are always buyers, but the question is at what price. If you start selling off any asset in large quantities in any market, you're going to cause the price to tank. So sure, they could sell off their dollar-denominated assets, but that would cause the dollar to tank. That, in turn, would cause the dollar price of their exports to the US to skyrocket, choking off demand and throwing their heavily export-dependent economy into a tailspin.

Of course, it would hurt us too by increasing inflation and real interest rates, which if bad enough, could drive us into a recession. But I don't see any reason to think it would hurt us any worse than it would hurt China.

Hence I don't think this is a credible threat. They're just blustering.

Still, I do think we're borrowing way too much. We've got to get our deficit spending under control, and individuals need to save more. Relying on foreigners to finance our massive consumption binge is just plain not healthy.

17 posted on 08/09/2007 10:05:23 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Contentions

How about we:

1) tell the Congress to stop messing in foreign policy by threatening China;

2) tell the Congress to reign in spending and allow us to run surpluses starting in a few years (I know, not counting Social Security) so that there will be, over time, less and less bonds out there to be dumped by ANY country;

3) organize a very informal, but steadily growing, private boycott of Chinese goods. Put pressure on stores to stock more American goods, or at least goods from genuinely friendly countries.

IOW, prevent a catastrophe now by not pissing them off, and gradually turn the screws on the Chinese with market forces.

Oh, and if they want a pissing contest, they’re going to get a lot wetter than us. We don’t have to go to the Olympics or buy their crap (and if they collapse the dollar not only will their sub-standard goods cost more, but the average Joe will be royally ticked off). They need us more than we need them, that’s the bottom line.


18 posted on 08/09/2007 11:15:23 AM PDT by Ancesthntr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Contentions
The only way the Chinese can dump their US-based financial assets is by destroying their value, a process that hurts them at least as much as it hurts us.

But in reality, when China holds US currency and US debt instruments, they do not hold them in some value in China. They are held in their correspondent account in a US Bank. If the US Treasury or Federal Reserve had any serious evidence that China was contemplating such a move, the US could block the sale of these assets thus preventing their value from being damaged.

19 posted on 08/09/2007 11:51:24 AM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
China’s ecconomy is SMALLER than the increase in our ecconomy.

I'm afraid that's untrue. The increase in China's economy in the most recent quarter was bigger than the increase in the US economy. (That's a blip, of course, due to the sub-2% US growth rate and the double digit Chinese growth rate). The US economy is 5 times the size of the Chinese economy. For the increase in the US economy to be bigger than the entire Chinese economy - at its present size - the US economy would have to grow 20% a year. That's just not very likely for a developed economy that doesn't have the benefit of copying somebody else's innovations.

20 posted on 08/09/2007 1:29:58 PM PDT by Zhang Fei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson