|

How do experts view financial conflict of top two economies? – The Global Times

The Global Times is out again in the past 24 hours with continued defensive rhetoric against the US and some other country's criticism of the Chinese regime. In an article for which purpose is to rebuttal some of the recent accusations in an escalation of a war of words between the US and China especially, the editors note goes as follows:

Editor's note

Some US politicians have been relentlessly pursuing an escalation in tension with China for the sake of short-term political interests, even at the cost of the US' leading financial position in the world.

With the Trump administration claiming to announce a "strong response" this week to intervene in China's domestic legislation, as well as recent US politicians' insults about Chinese companies listing on American stock markets, global investors are concerned that the US might start a "financial war" with China.

In interviews with the Global Times, two Chinese economists noted that although a comprehensive financial war is not likely, conflicts is inevitable due to US politicians' political schemes, which will hurt China but will also damage US financial sectors.

Dong Shaopeng, an adviser to the China Securities Regulatory Commission and senior research fellow at the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China, made some key points  as follows:

Financial conflict between China and the US is inevitable given that the coronavirus pandemic has weighed on the antagonistic atmosphere globally.

If the US starts a "financial war," it will only lead to damage for both sides.

The US' long-arm jurisdiction is not acceptable. Not to mention that trying to launch financial restrictions to achieve its political goals will only lead to deadlock and conflict.

Although China's financial sector has its shortcomings, it has now developed into a complete system to resist risks and serve its real economy. Defending itself from the US-initiated financial conflict would not be a problem.

Author's note: However, should there be a capital flight from Hong Kong and a collapse of the financial system and HKD, one has to ask where would that leave China which is heavily invested in Hong Kong? 

Xi Junyang, professor at the Shanghai University of Finance and Economics key notes:

There is still a risk that the US side may take extreme measures to heat up its conflict with China in financial sectors due to certain politicians' agendas. 

There's no denying that China is in a weak position in the global financial market and will be hurt by a financial conflict.

 Launching financial restrictions on China will not bring any benefits to the US. 

It is generally a political scheme by the US government and politicians trying to win an election by blaming everything on China and further stirring up an antagonistic atmosphere so as to misdirect public opinion.

China-US bilateral financial cooperation has been generating benefits for both sides.

If the US recklessly escalates the financial conflict, it is hard to forecast how far the US government will go, and extreme scenarios involving drastically reduced financial ties with China are possible.

It will be a lose-lose choice, but it will not hurt China's overall economy.

 It may be an opportunity for China to speed up the internationalization of its currency, the yuan, amid cooling relations with the US.

Authors note: Internationalization of the yuan is NOT on the USA's agenda. The US gains an exorbitant privilege from the dominance of the dollar for which has never mattered more than right now, ever since 2008, China has been promoting the use of the renminbi abroad. The then-Governor of the People's Bank of China, Zhou Xiaochuan, criticized the existing international monetary system when he called for a new international reserve currency “disconnected from economic conditions and sovereign interests of any single country.”

A missing part in all of these economists points of view is Hong Kong. HK plays a critical role in renminbi internationalization and this current situation will likely strip HK of its financial centre staus which would have a sizable effect on the global standing of the renminbi. 

More on this here: China's plan of national security law in Hong Kong puts Trump in an unwelcome spot with Xi and here: The Hong Kong Dollar, the next black swan?

As discussed in the following Chart of the Week analysis from the open of this week, US and Chinese tensions are at the forefront of markets.

Author

Ross J Burland

Ross J Burland, born in England, UK, is a sportsman at heart. He played Rugby and Judo for his county, Kent and the South East of England Rugby team.

More from Ross J Burland
Share:

Editor's Picks

GBP/USD flirts with tops near 1.3470

GBP/USD manages to regain composure and challenge the area of daily highs around 1.3470 on Friday. Cable picks up pace despite marginal gains in the Greenback in a context of swelling geopolitical tensions and rising global oil prices.

EUR/USD trims losses, back above 1.1500

EUR/USD picks up some pace and bouces off earlier lows, reclaiming the 1.1500 threshold and beyond at the end of the week. The pair’s modest pullback follows a persistent risk-averse market mood and renewed buying interest for the US Dollar.

Gold: The $4,000 mark holds the downside for now

Gold faces renewed selling pressure, falling sharply toweard the $4,000 mark per troy ounce as the US Dollar regains momentum. Escalating US-Iran tensions are keeping inflation concerns and expectations of further Fed rate hikes alive, weighing further on the yellow metal.

Bitcoin eyes 50-day EMA breakout, Ethereum consolidates, XRP steadies

Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Ripple trade near key technical levels on Friday as the broader cryptocurrency market pauses following last week's recovery. BTC is approaching the 50-day Exponential Moving Average while ETH continues to consolidate between two major EMAs.

Warsh needs to restore his reputation
We were glad to see our deeply negative reaction to the Warsh press conference was not some personal peculiarity. Just about everybody in the financial press felt the same way. The consensus is building it’s not the Fed in the dog-house but only Warsh. Today the WSJ changed it tune and blasted Warsh—"the honeymoon is already over..”
9-3: Is the Federal Reserve’s vote tally Warsh's new forward guidance?
The rate did not move. Neither did the statement, and that’s the more interesting fact. Set the July 29 Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) statement beside the one issued on June 17, and the two documents are identical apart from a single verb and a paragraph at the bottom naming three dissenters.