Western Brands Under Attack! – Here’s Why Chinese Consumers Suddenly Boycott H&M And Nike Over Xinjiang Cotton
If you boycott Xinjiang cotton, we’ll boycott you – said an internet user. That angry Chinese consumer is just one of 1.4 billion consumers in China who has started a nationwide boycott of Swedish fashion giant H&M. However, the attack against the world’s second-largest clothing retailer was first started when the Chinese Communist Party’s Youth League posted a message on social media.
“Spreading rumours to boycott Xinjiang cotton while also wanting to make money in China? Wishful thinking!” – read the post, and all hell breaks loose. That post on Weibo, the Chinese micro-blogging website equivalent to Twitter, immediately gained half a million “likes” and shared 50,000 times while attracted 16,000 comments on Wednesday morning alone.
The hashtag – “I support Xinjiang cotton” – has gone so viral that it was read more than 1 billion times. In fact, one of the most-liked Weibo comments said – “H&M clothes are rags. They don’t deserve our Xinjiang cotton!” State broadcaster CCTV accused foreign brands of “earning big profits in China but attacking the country with lies at the same time.”
If you think this is just a naughty rhetoric from the communist party, think again. On the same Wednesday (March 24), H&M’s products disappeared from Alibaba’s e-commerce platform Taobao and JD.com. Two popular actors, in a show of patriotism, have cut ties with the Swedish multinational clothing-retail company known for its fast-fashion clothing for men, women, teenagers and children.
Actor Huang Xuan said on his official Weibo page he had terminated his contract as a representative for H&M. The 36-year-old Chinese actor said he opposed “slander and creating rumours”. Victoria Song Qian, a Chinese singer, dancer, actress, model and television presenter, said she no longer had a relationship with H&M and “the country’s interests are above all”.
Apparently, H&M said last year that it would not source cotton from Xinjiang and was ending its relationship with a Chinese yarn producer over “forced labour” accusations involving Uighur Muslims. H&M issued the statement after think tank – the Australian Strategic Policy Institute – released a report which listed H&M as potentially benefitting from forced labour.
Caught completely by surprise, H&M China promptly released a statement on Wednesday night, saying it “does not represent any political position” and remains committed to long-term investment in China. But the damage is already done. It is paying the price for boycotting Xinjiang cotton based on a report from a defence and strategic policy think tank funded by the Australian Department of Defence.
China is H&M’s fourth-biggest market with sales of 2.9 billion Swedish crowns (US$339 million) in the 12 months through Nov 2020. Global Times reported that only a few customers had gone inside the biggest H&M store in Sanlintun, one of Beijing’s major commercial areas. Another H&M store in a business district in Shanghai has increased security as boycott gains steam.
A Beijing resident surnamed Zhao said – “Boycotting H&M will not have any impact on people like me, because there are many alternative choices. Many domestic brands have good designs, and I shop on Taobao to buy clothes most of the time, where the styles and quality are much better and prices are much lower than these brands.”
Clearly, the old statement from H&M has come back to haunt the Swedish company after the European Union, together with the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, imposed sanctions against 4 Chinese officials on Monday. In a swift retaliation, China imposed sanctions against 10 European politicians and four bodies on the same day, shocking the EU.
The EU has accused the Chinese officials of “arbitrary detentions and degrading treatment inflicted upon Uighurs and people from other Muslim ethnic minorities”. Activists and U.N. rights experts claimed at least 1 million Muslims have been detained in camps in Xinjiang. The Chinese government has been accused of using torture, forced labour and sterilizations.
As Western countries seek to hold Beijing accountable for mass detentions of Muslim Uighurs, the U.S. has gone one step further – accusing Beijing of committing genocide. However, China says its camps provide vocational training and are necessary to fight extremism. The Muslim Uighur separatists had previously committed terrorism, including the hijack of Tianjin Airlines Flight 7554.
Hitting back with a similar sanctions, only on a broader scope, the China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has told the European Union to stop lecturing others on human rights and interfering in their internal affairs. Besides mocking the EU of being hypocritical and practising double standards, it has also warned of further actions. And those actions turned out as boycotts on Western brands.
Of course, H&M is not the only company being targeted in what seems to be a coordinated assault on the Western countries. Within hours, Nike, an American multinational corporation, suffers the same backlash from Chinese consumers over a statement it made previously that it was concerned about reports of forced labour in Xinjiang, and said it would not source textiles from the region.
Like H&M, which operates more than 500 stores in China, Nike had also reacted to the same report produced by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute that said Nike’s factory employed around 800 Uighur workers at the end of 2019 and produced more than 7 million pairs of shoes for Nike each year. Later, Nike said its Qingdao factory had stopped hiring new workers from Xinjiang in 2019.
While Xinjiang is the epicentre of minority Uighur Muslims whom the Western governments repeatedly alleged of being abused by the Chinese government, the province also produces vast amounts of raw materials like cotton, sugar, tomatoes, coal and polysilicon, as well as supplies workers for China’s apparel and footwear factories like U.S. sportswear giant Nike.
The boycott over the Nike statement was among the highest trending topics on Weibo, so much so that Wang Yibo terminated his contract as a representative for Nike. The 23-year-old Wang is a popular Chinese actor, dancer, singer, rapper, TV host, and professional motorcycle racer. He wrote to his 38 million followers on Weibo – “I firmly oppose any act to smear China,”
Similarly, 30-year-old actress Tan Songyun, who has 23 million followers on Weibo, also announced the termination of her contract with Nike. The Communist Youth League of China has also shortlisted Adidas, New Balance, IKEA, Calvin Klein, Ralph Lauren and Burberry as other Western brands that are members of the “Better Cotton Initiative”, which suspended the cotton sourced from Xinjiang in early 2020.
Some internet users said they would stop buying American brand Nike and instead support local brands such as Li Ning and Anta, while others told Adidas to leave China. Taking advantage of the situation, Anta Sports, the Chinese sneaker giant that owns the Fila brand, said it would continue to use cotton from Xinjiang. Even Japanese retailer Muji began to advertise products made with “Xinjiang cotton”.
The move by the government of President Xi Jinping was not only designed to punish Western businesses in China, but also to send a message – stop interfering in China’s internal affairs. The Commerce Ministry said – “Chinese consumers have acted in response to the so-called business decisions made by some companies based on false information”.
If there’s one war Beijing is cocksure of winning, it’s definitely the consumer boycotts fought on its own turf. This is not the first time China drove such campaign to punish foreign companies. Consumer boycotts are among its favourite tools of retaliation, simply because it works by leveraging on the country’s massive spending power to inflict economic damage on foreign brands.
South Korean conglomerate Lotte Group was forced to exit from China, following a political dispute between the two nations over Seoul’s installation of a US anti-missile system – Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) – in 2017. Italian fashion house Dolce & Gabbana, the NBA, the English Premier League, Apple and even model Gigi Hadid have suffered boycott in China.
Luca Solca, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein, said – “Companies caught in the crossfire can be heavily penalized, as they end up in China on the wrong side of consumer preferences, social media commentary, and e-commerce platforms. European mass fashion retailers are torn between this and having to stand on the right side of western consumers’ concerns.”
“Spreading rumours to boycott Xinjiang cotton while also wanting to make money in China? Wishful thinking!” – read the post, and all hell breaks loose. That post on Weibo, the Chinese micro-blogging website equivalent to Twitter, immediately gained half a million “likes” and shared 50,000 times while attracted 16,000 comments on Wednesday morning alone.
The hashtag – “I support Xinjiang cotton” – has gone so viral that it was read more than 1 billion times. In fact, one of the most-liked Weibo comments said – “H&M clothes are rags. They don’t deserve our Xinjiang cotton!” State broadcaster CCTV accused foreign brands of “earning big profits in China but attacking the country with lies at the same time.”
If you think this is just a naughty rhetoric from the communist party, think again. On the same Wednesday (March 24), H&M’s products disappeared from Alibaba’s e-commerce platform Taobao and JD.com. Two popular actors, in a show of patriotism, have cut ties with the Swedish multinational clothing-retail company known for its fast-fashion clothing for men, women, teenagers and children.
Actor Huang Xuan said on his official Weibo page he had terminated his contract as a representative for H&M. The 36-year-old Chinese actor said he opposed “slander and creating rumours”. Victoria Song Qian, a Chinese singer, dancer, actress, model and television presenter, said she no longer had a relationship with H&M and “the country’s interests are above all”.
Apparently, H&M said last year that it would not source cotton from Xinjiang and was ending its relationship with a Chinese yarn producer over “forced labour” accusations involving Uighur Muslims. H&M issued the statement after think tank – the Australian Strategic Policy Institute – released a report which listed H&M as potentially benefitting from forced labour.
Caught completely by surprise, H&M China promptly released a statement on Wednesday night, saying it “does not represent any political position” and remains committed to long-term investment in China. But the damage is already done. It is paying the price for boycotting Xinjiang cotton based on a report from a defence and strategic policy think tank funded by the Australian Department of Defence.
China is H&M’s fourth-biggest market with sales of 2.9 billion Swedish crowns (US$339 million) in the 12 months through Nov 2020. Global Times reported that only a few customers had gone inside the biggest H&M store in Sanlintun, one of Beijing’s major commercial areas. Another H&M store in a business district in Shanghai has increased security as boycott gains steam.
A Beijing resident surnamed Zhao said – “Boycotting H&M will not have any impact on people like me, because there are many alternative choices. Many domestic brands have good designs, and I shop on Taobao to buy clothes most of the time, where the styles and quality are much better and prices are much lower than these brands.”
Clearly, the old statement from H&M has come back to haunt the Swedish company after the European Union, together with the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, imposed sanctions against 4 Chinese officials on Monday. In a swift retaliation, China imposed sanctions against 10 European politicians and four bodies on the same day, shocking the EU.
The EU has accused the Chinese officials of “arbitrary detentions and degrading treatment inflicted upon Uighurs and people from other Muslim ethnic minorities”. Activists and U.N. rights experts claimed at least 1 million Muslims have been detained in camps in Xinjiang. The Chinese government has been accused of using torture, forced labour and sterilizations.
As Western countries seek to hold Beijing accountable for mass detentions of Muslim Uighurs, the U.S. has gone one step further – accusing Beijing of committing genocide. However, China says its camps provide vocational training and are necessary to fight extremism. The Muslim Uighur separatists had previously committed terrorism, including the hijack of Tianjin Airlines Flight 7554.
Hitting back with a similar sanctions, only on a broader scope, the China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has told the European Union to stop lecturing others on human rights and interfering in their internal affairs. Besides mocking the EU of being hypocritical and practising double standards, it has also warned of further actions. And those actions turned out as boycotts on Western brands.
Of course, H&M is not the only company being targeted in what seems to be a coordinated assault on the Western countries. Within hours, Nike, an American multinational corporation, suffers the same backlash from Chinese consumers over a statement it made previously that it was concerned about reports of forced labour in Xinjiang, and said it would not source textiles from the region.
Like H&M, which operates more than 500 stores in China, Nike had also reacted to the same report produced by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute that said Nike’s factory employed around 800 Uighur workers at the end of 2019 and produced more than 7 million pairs of shoes for Nike each year. Later, Nike said its Qingdao factory had stopped hiring new workers from Xinjiang in 2019.
While Xinjiang is the epicentre of minority Uighur Muslims whom the Western governments repeatedly alleged of being abused by the Chinese government, the province also produces vast amounts of raw materials like cotton, sugar, tomatoes, coal and polysilicon, as well as supplies workers for China’s apparel and footwear factories like U.S. sportswear giant Nike.
The boycott over the Nike statement was among the highest trending topics on Weibo, so much so that Wang Yibo terminated his contract as a representative for Nike. The 23-year-old Wang is a popular Chinese actor, dancer, singer, rapper, TV host, and professional motorcycle racer. He wrote to his 38 million followers on Weibo – “I firmly oppose any act to smear China,”
Similarly, 30-year-old actress Tan Songyun, who has 23 million followers on Weibo, also announced the termination of her contract with Nike. The Communist Youth League of China has also shortlisted Adidas, New Balance, IKEA, Calvin Klein, Ralph Lauren and Burberry as other Western brands that are members of the “Better Cotton Initiative”, which suspended the cotton sourced from Xinjiang in early 2020.
Some internet users said they would stop buying American brand Nike and instead support local brands such as Li Ning and Anta, while others told Adidas to leave China. Taking advantage of the situation, Anta Sports, the Chinese sneaker giant that owns the Fila brand, said it would continue to use cotton from Xinjiang. Even Japanese retailer Muji began to advertise products made with “Xinjiang cotton”.
The move by the government of President Xi Jinping was not only designed to punish Western businesses in China, but also to send a message – stop interfering in China’s internal affairs. The Commerce Ministry said – “Chinese consumers have acted in response to the so-called business decisions made by some companies based on false information”.
If there’s one war Beijing is cocksure of winning, it’s definitely the consumer boycotts fought on its own turf. This is not the first time China drove such campaign to punish foreign companies. Consumer boycotts are among its favourite tools of retaliation, simply because it works by leveraging on the country’s massive spending power to inflict economic damage on foreign brands.
South Korean conglomerate Lotte Group was forced to exit from China, following a political dispute between the two nations over Seoul’s installation of a US anti-missile system – Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) – in 2017. Italian fashion house Dolce & Gabbana, the NBA, the English Premier League, Apple and even model Gigi Hadid have suffered boycott in China.
Luca Solca, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein, said – “Companies caught in the crossfire can be heavily penalized, as they end up in China on the wrong side of consumer preferences, social media commentary, and e-commerce platforms. European mass fashion retailers are torn between this and having to stand on the right side of western consumers’ concerns.”
All temporary Bully Opera.
ReplyDelete5000 yo Bullyland Craves Taiwan but Boycotts it’s pineapples.
ReplyDelete5000 yo Bully tried to bully Taiwan over pineapples and 25 million Taiwanese promptly gave 1,400,000,000 a spanking they will not forget....ha ha ha...who needs jet fighters or missiles...Ong Lai will do....
Similarly 500 yo Bully, the EU and ROW can put 5000 yo Bully in its place over cotton. No issue.
QUOTE
Taiwanese buy entire year's worth of pineapple exports to China in 4 days.
By Keoni Everington, Taiwan News, Staff Writer
2021/03/03
On Friday (Feb. 26), Beijing announced it would ban all imports of Taiwanese pineapples, alleging that “harmful organisms” had been found in the fruit. Taiwan’s Council of Agriculture (COA) Minister Chen Chi-chung (陳吉仲) chastised China for its “unilateral decision,” which he deemed “unacceptable.”
According to the COA, 97 percent of exported pineapples went to China in 2020. Last year, Taiwan exported 41,661 metric tons of the fruit to China, worth approximately NT$1.5 billion (US$53.9 million).
The move prompted Foreign Minister Joseph Wu (吳釗燮) on Friday to launch a "Freedom Pineapple" campaign on Twitter. That same day, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) also took to Twitter, calling on the public to buy Taiwanese pineapples and writing that like with Australian wine, "China's unfair trade practices" were targeting Taiwan's pineapples, despite the fact that 99.79 percent of imported batches had passed inspection.
On Tuesday (March 2), Chen announced that as of noon, Taiwanese farmers had received pre-orders for 41,687 tons of pineapples from companies, e-commerce platforms, and consumers, already exceeding the annual quantity of exports to China, reported Newtalk. Of this quantity, over 180 companies ordered 7,187 tons of pineapples, 19 firms ordered 15,000 tons of processed pineapples, 14 beverage shops ordered 4,500 tons of the fruit, wholesalers and street market vendors ordered 10,000 tons, and exporters and overseas groups ordered 5,000 tons, according to the COA.
Chen said that given China's ban, Taiwan will work to develop new overseas markets, including Singapore, Malaysia, and Australia. Despite the impact of the pandemic, Chen said that pineapple exports to New Southbound nations increased 110-fold last year.
UNQUOTE
Australia is automatically not a market for pineapples as she has enormous pineapple plantations (for export). Sing and Malaysia, yes, but how much can these 2 nations buy? How long will Taiwan consume its own entire pineapple production?
DeleteSimple!
DeleteMake tons of their famed pineapple tarts to feed all the katak dwelling on the island as proclaimed by that big-mouthed Chen Chi-chung (陳吉仲)!
Wakakakakaka…
The blurred mfer of know-nothing been conned kawx2, unlike the other Taiwaneses, under that Formosa sophism uttered by 水炮！
远水不救近火 yet there r morons who actually believe in the fart that all the Taiwaneses would survive on rotten pineapples even if tons of preservatives would used to keep them last.
Like KT always like to say....42 tak boleh lawan 13......
Delete1,400,000,000 tak boleh lawan 23 juta....ha ha ha...
their own kind - want them killed?
DeleteA nation of Zombies, brainlessly marching to the tune of the CCP.
ReplyDeleteBeijing cocksure of winning consumer boycott on its own turf? Ha ha ha, here, have some bananas...since Taiwan won’t be sending you any pineapples....
ReplyDeleteCCP is earning Mega Billions of Dollars profits selling to USA but daily demonising USA.
ReplyDeleteBut there is Nothing the USA Government can do about it, because US consumers are not Government Zombies.
Chorus of blurred mfers, feeding on know-nothing Formosa fart!
ReplyDelete穷台 policy has just started.
U want to earn money from China & yet still want to fool around with the Chinese!
& who r the zombies marching to the call of their demoNcratic chants?
Taiwan pineapples?
How about H&M, Nike falling as ten pins in the steps of Dolce & Gabbana closing all their stores in China & retreated back to its demoNcratic West!
Wakakakakaka…
This Bully needs to be taught a lesson.....again and again....
ReplyDeleteIn 2010 Bullyland human rights activist Liu Xiaobao was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Bullyland promptly threw a Bully-Tantrum and boycotted Norwegian salmon. What childish behaviour.
In 2015 they banned it yet again, citing "virus" in the salmon, what Bully-Shit, like Taiwanese-Pineapples. As if fish from the polluted Yangtze are safer to eat and Bullyland got no virus....? Ha ha ha we know all about Bully-Virus don't we....wink wink....
Just a few years later Beijing quietly lifted the ban and Bully-consumers forgot their promise and bought clean Norwegian salmon in preference to polluted Yangtze river fish.....
Bully-Revenge_Buying....ha ha ha....must teach Bully salmon is good for Lou-Sang....soon H&M and Nike etc will be re-loved like never before....
Bully-Opera.
QUOTE
Norway's salmon exports to China seen tripling after restrictions end
By Lefteris Karagiannopoulos
OSLO, July 9 (Reuters) - China’s decision last week to lift a ban on some Norwegian salmon imports will triple the volume of the trade in the second half of 2018 and drive up prices, the Norwegian Seafood Council (NSC) said on Monday.
Imports of whole salmon from three major Norwegian areas, accounting for 40 percent of the country’s total output, were banned by China in 2015 over concerns about the presence of salmon anaemia and other variants of the virus.
Imports of partially processed salmon without heads, gills and entrails were allowed under the ban.
Lifting the restrictions on farmed salmon, Norway’s second-largest export after oil and gas, could add 1.4 billion Norwegian crowns ($175 million) to annual export earnings from the industry, NSC said.
“During the first half of 2018, Norway exported 7,000 tonnes of salmon to China. With the ban lifted, we have estimated the volume to reach 21,000 tonnes for the second half of 2018,” NSC’s China director Sigmund Bjoergo told Reuters in an email.
Combined with higher demand from China’s growing middle class, Chinese total salmon consumption could climb to 100,000 tonnes this year and 240,000 tonnes in 2025, he said, up from a previous NSC estimate for 2025 of 156,000 tonnes.
Based on NSC’s estimates, China would consume 12 percent of global salmon production by 2025, up from 4 percent in 2017.
Norway could secure 65 percent of China’s salmon market in the long term from below 30 percent expected this year, Bjoergo said, without giving precise date for achieving the higher market share.
Prices were likely to rise because Norway’s highly regulated salmon farming industry had little room to boost output, he said.
UNQUOTE
All Bully-Opera.
ReplyDeleteQUOTE
China Is an Economic Bully—and Weaker Than It Looks
The world doesn’t have to put up with Beijing’s attempts at economic coercion.
BY LUKE PATEY | JANUARY 4, 2021
For decades, the United States imposed punishing economic sanctions on Sudan, Iraq, and other states it branded as rogue. Outside of military invasion, trade, financial, and diplomatic sanctions became the primary tools for America and its allies to coerce foreign leaders “to start behaving differently” and disarm weapons programs, end support to international terrorist groups, and cease widespread human-rights abuses.
Now China wants advanced democracies around the world to behave differently, too. In 2017, Beijing blocked Chinese tourists from visiting South Korean island getaways after Seoul deployed an American missile defense system. Two years later, it placed trade restrictions on Canada’s agriculture exports to protest the Canadian arrest of a high-profile Chinese executive. After Australia called for an international investigation in the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic last year, Beijing responded with a barrage of tariffs and restrictions on its exports. More and more, Beijing is doling out its own punishment on countries that cross its political redlines. The West is learning what it is like to be on the receiving end of economic coercion.
In the face of billions of losses from China’s trade measures, some may see the value in meeting Beijing’s demands to stay quiet on its affairs in Xinjiang, Taiwan, and Hong Kong and stop blocking Chinese foreign investment deals in critical infrastructure. But rather than accept a future under China’s thumb, there are ways to survive and even put a stop to Chinese coercive diplomacy.
First, targeted countries should be careful not to exaggerate the impact of China’s economic coercion. International reporting often overdramatizes the economic damage done by China by not weighing the relative value of goods restricted with the targeted country’s total trade. But the reality is that Beijing, to date, applies only limited economic pressure.
Norway is a clear example. In 2010, after the Nobel committee in Oslo awarded the Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, a jailed Chinese intellectual and human-rights activist, Beijing placed a six-year diplomatic freeze on Norway and cut off salmon exports from the Scandinavian country.
Norway suffered an estimated decline of as much as $1.3 billion in its exports to China between 2011 and 2013. This was a lost opportunity for Norway’s fishing industry, but only amounted to an annual drop of a 0.3 percent in its total annual exports. Instead of experiencing economic hardship, Norway’s trade with China paradoxically reached new highs by 2015.
In response to the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou on an American extradition warrant in late 2018, Beijing detained two Canadian citizens and imposed trade curbs on Canadian canola, soy, peas, and pork exports. Canada’s exports to China fell by $3.5 billion in 2019, but the loss only represented a tiny fraction of Canada’s $447 billion total exports that year.
.....cont...
...cont...
ReplyDeleteEven for Australia, the damage done by China’s trade weapon has so far been minor. Beijing placed bans and high tariffs on selected Australian beef producers and barley, wine, and other exports. Yet, depending on how deeply Beijing’s ban on coal exports ultimately bites, trade measures to date only amount to 4 percent of Australia’s exports to China and 2 percent of its total exports.
Just as over two decades of American sanctions on Sudan exempted exports of gum arabic, essential for the production of Coca-Cola and other soft drinks, China also has trade and investments that it does not wish to upset through its economic coercion.
Beijing did not stand in the way when ChemChina, a state-owned enterprise, made the $2 billion purchase of a high-grade Norwegian silicon producer during its freeze in relations with Norway. Nor did China hesitate to lift pork restrictions on Canada in late 2019 as swine fever decimated China’s pig population and domestic demand needed satisfying. Beijing has also shied away from blocking Australia’s iron ore and natural gas, which are necessary to fuel its economic growth at home. And as researchers at the University of Technology Sydney have meticulously detailed, bans placed on Australian goods by China are often partial and short-lived.
And much like how Iraq circumvented international sanctions controlling its oil sales overseas, goods that China targets often manage to find their way into the Chinese marketplace. Norway’s salmon was rerouted through Vietnam during its long-running dispute with Beijing. Chinese importers used the United Arab Emirates as a backdoor to acquire Canadian vegetable oil.
So far, China’s trade weapon has inflicted more pain on individual companies and industries than entire economies. Beijing may be exerting self-restraint as part of a Confucian approach to foreign relations; demonstrating its displeasure through limited restrictions, but not hitting too hard in order to preserve the long-term relationship. Beijing knows too that even minor trade curbs can create a media spectacle and have a psychological impact on advanced democracies that provokes large multinationals and business associations to lobby their governments for foreign-policy change.
But under President Xi Jinping, China may be steadily diverting away from this approach. In the future, particularly if China is successful in its drive for economic self-sufficiency in critical industries, Beijing’s willingness to apply comprehensive pressure may increase.
.....cont
...cont...
ReplyDeleteThis is why governments must still act to diversify strong dependencies on China until its coercive behavior ends. Diversification does not entail decoupling, but pinpointing which industries are prone to Chinese pressure, and encouraging trade and investment across developed and emerging markets to decrease such strategic vulnerabilities.
China is the largest growth engine in the global economy, but it is far from the only one. Diversification strategies can lay the groundwork for capitalizing on future growth in India, Indonesia, Vietnam, and elsewhere. China’s relative economic importance in the world received a boost due to its quick suppression of the coronavirus at home, but its share of the global economy will likely top out by the end of the decade, and others in Asia will boast the fastest growing markets in the world. Thanks to growing demand from Saudi Arabia, Japan, and Southeast Asia, despite China’s tariffs, Australia’s total barley export volumes are expected to grow by 64 percent year-on-year.
To protect vulnerable companies and industries from China’s economic coercion, advanced democracies must find strength in numbers. They can support one another in cases against China in the World Trade Organization and push for reform in the international body to deter Beijing’s use of its trade weapon. Since this is a time-consuming process, they can also advance the short-term fix of creating a joint fund that compensates targeted companies and industries to mitigate the adverse effects of China’s economic pressure.
But before they can work together, advanced democracies must avoid profiting from one another’s misfortune to limit China’s options to play ‘divide and rule’. After Beijing banned Canadian canola in 2019, Australia experienced a surge in its own exports to China, and when Beijing blocked Australian barley in 2020, Canadian farmers reaped the benefits.
Over time, China may come to learn from the American experience that economic coercion, although it may be gratifying, rarely produces the sought-after policy outcomes. Resisted by even the weakest of states for decades on end, American-led sanctions cause unnecessary human suffering and breed deep resentment.
Beijing may have hoped that punishing Norway would serve as a warning for other advanced democracies to avoid crossing its political redlines. Yet in the years after, neither South Korea, Canada, nor Australia seem to have taken notice.
China may also soon find out that its targets can hit back. Jake Sullivan, President-elect Joe Biden’s national security adviser nominee, voiced support to Australia in face of its hostilities with China. The European Union is designing anti-coercion tools after Beijing threatened Sweden and the Czech Republic last year. Canada is in the preliminary stages of advancing a concerted effort to address Beijing’s so-called hostage diplomacy.
Ending China’s economic coercion is possible. It may come at a temporary financial loss, but independent foreign and security policy holds value too. If advanced democracies can find the political will to muster their collective economic strength, Beijing may soon find the response to its coercion to be resounding.
UNQUOTE
Still game on yr monkey Lego news c&p!
DeleteWhen EU ganged on to block m'sia palm oil products based on her spurious environmental claims. What have yr c&p skill been performed?
U see yr f*cked & indoctrinated western 'concern' for environment but u ignore the closer to home truth of stages progressive developments to uplift the lives of the people.
Yr western masters have long passed their rapes of nature to play god to condemn the minute & necessity activities of better living. Those people whom they condemned ain't people to enjoy progress!
China owes NO apologies to anybody for the hard earned progress. W/O her business growths & strong trading activities - the ONLY performing country, the world as a whole would be in dire economic despairs.
Blurred mfer, better sticking up to yr know-nothing c&p farts lah. Go organise a buy China last (oooop… don't buy anything China) campaign amongst yr favourite nations.
See how many of them would sing to yr chorus to their economic disasters!
Meanwhile the long planned 内需循环 throughout mainland China would keep China growth sustainable though in a slower pace. The China/Chinese have been to these economic phases, multiple times in history, that another cycle of hardship is just a blurp of hiccup.
But all those pampered western nations would definitely be suffering like hell.
Fucked Environment !
DeleteI have been to China, been to USA, ,been to Western Europe.
The air and water in Western Europe and USA definitely much, much cleaner than China.
Luke whatever Patey talking through his asshole, LOL. Creating a fund that compensates targeted companies and industries to mitigate the adverse effects of China’s economic pressure ? Haha haha haha. These wolves ripped into each other lickety-split filling up the Chinese orders at the expense of their so-called allies...with friends/allies like that, who needs enemies ? This asshole Patey with his useless sanctimonious advice, hehe...only a TipuAssholeTS would be lame enough to quote him here. TipuAss, just stick to local politics la...told you time and time again, sheesh...
DeleteThese Whiteface gangsters are obviously not used to get the receiving end of the stick, only know how to dish out but now that they are getting whacked, starts whining about 'economic coercion'.....that's damn rich, when they had literally ransacked and robbed a whole continent, a whole country, their colonial imperialism never actually ended, it still continues up to this day, this time using a sham front, stealing resources, by preaching fake cries of democracy and freedom.
i abhor the west but has to live in one.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.laprensalatina.com/hugo-boss-asics-will-continue-buying-xinjiang-cotton/
ReplyDeleteRelax.... Two major Western brands, Hugo Boss and Asics have openly stated they LOVE Xinjiang Cotton, and ask consumers to buy more, so that they can buy more of the wonderful Xinjiang cotton.
Many many too will stick with Xinjiang cotton, hehe. Japanese brand Muji now have placed huge placards outside their store fronts which said : WE USE Xinjiang Cotton.
DeleteHei, OCBCs bananas, taste the wrath of the Chinese consumers and eat your jealous hearts out, lol
Another failed campaign by the West to boycott cotton and tomatoes from Xinjiang. In fact, it backfired "bigly" on the Americans and their doggies hehe. Their moronic plan was to make the Uyghurs suffer from loss of jobs and businesses, to make them suffer, hoping that such sanctions will make the unhappy jobless Uyghurs to revolt against the Chinese government, a very typical tactic in the United Snake's playbook. Instead, the Uyghurs turned their anger towards these whiteface buggers. Their beautiful actresses and actors had immediately stopped their endorsements of these Angmos brands and millions of Chinese consumers refused to patronize their shops, with some shown on videos even spitting on their premises, hehe...don't play play with these aroused nationalism...it's like playing with fire which can get out of control. Bodoh la these kwailos...just like the Australians brouhaha, they fondly think they can just insult and slap the Chinese and yet expect them to shop with them, to remain faithful customers ! Bodoh lagi bodoh, wa ka ka ka
Nathan Rich weighs in here too :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdCiGsV9myA
5000 yo Bullyland has unleashed the "nationalistic genie", now cannot put back in bottle, the might of ROW will make them regret it.
ReplyDeleteThey may have to re-build The Great (Bully)Wall all over again, Dash-lines can't stop anyone...ha ha ha....
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/26/china/xinjiang-china-us-wolf-warrior-patriotism-intl-hnk/index.html
Katak-ised mfers of the fart filled well just like to feed on demoNcratic diarrhea of empty air!
ReplyDeleteChina is the second largest cotton producer and largest consumer in the world. She has to import cotton to meet her domestic demands. Majority of the imported cotton comes from US.
Xinjiang cotton can ONLY fulfill part of the domestic needs even though it has the biggest acreage of grown cotton.
So most of the western textile products have zilch Xinjiang cotton content! Those advertised claims r just marketing gimmick to entice the huge Chinese consumers.
Thus, BCI's 'human right debacle' on Xinjiang is just pure political move orchestrated by US - to preemptively protect yankee cotton growers, the biggest world exporters, via ASPI (oz think-tank financially supported by Yankee money!) spurious researches built on adrian zens's pure farts.
Indeed, the "nationalistic genie" awaken by this BCI fouled move, cannot noe be put back in bottle!
After exercising the punitive trade moves on Oz, the US cotton, the soybeans farmers would be the next victims. They better start to find alternative markets for their product buyers. Don't wait blur blur like the Oz dingos which don even know what hit them!
CCP Wolf Warriors now quarrel with USA, quarrel with Europe...
ReplyDeleteIn Asia CCP has only business associates, no real friends except North Korea, maybe Myanmar.
Vietnam ? Highly Suspicios
Japan ? Enemy
South Korea ? Frenemy
Taiwan ? Deadly Enemy
Thailand ? Suspicious
Malaysia ? Suspicious
Phillipines ? Dutarte slavish buddy, but ordinary Pinoys are extremely Suspicious.
Cambodia? Colony
Laos ? Colony
India ? Just a little short of shooting..
There are some 7 billion people in the world.
DeleteThe US+UK+Canada, three nations combined, takes up some 5.7%.
Five eyes, with Australia and New Zealand added, makes up some 6%.
Then, with EU nations counted in, some 11%.
China has some 1.4 billion, China alone, takes up some 20%.
And I don’t think, all, or most of the other 69% of the world’s population will side with the US.
“By the end of 2020, China had signed 203 cooperation documents with 138 countries and 31 international organizations to jointly promote the Belt and Road Cooperation.”
“In the face of enormous pressure on epidemic prevention and control, China has so far provided anti-epidemic assistance to more than 150 countries and 10 international organizations and has sent 36 teams of medical experts to 34 countries in need. As the largest producer of medical supplies, China has sent more than 220 billion masks, 2.25 billion pieces of protective clothing and 1.02 billion test kits.”
“According to preliminary statistics from Chinese authorities, from March 1, 2020 to January 10, 2021, through exports, donations and other means, China provided the United States with more than 42.02 billion masks, over 900 million pairs of surgical gloves, 780 million protective suits, 50.66 million pairs of goggles, 15,648 non-invasive ventilators and 257 invasive ones. Chinese provinces, cities, friendly groups, non-governmental organizations and companies also donated lots of medical supplies to the U.S. side.”
“China is a steadfast advocate for equitable vaccine distribution.
We have joined COVAX, under which China has undertaken to provide an initial 10 million doses for emergency use in developing countries.
So far, China has donated or is donating COVID vaccines to 69 developing countries in urgent need, and is exporting vaccines to 43 countries.
Responding to a UN appeal, we have donated vaccines to peacekeepers from various countries.
We are also ready to work with the International Olympic Committee to provide vaccines to Olympians.”
I do believe not all countries, not all peoples, would act like the US and some of the Americans, who are so ungrateful.
It would do you well, Mr Bigot, to heed the words of one your angmoh master here :
Henry Kissinger : "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." But he did once said this : "To be an enemy of America is dangerous. To be a friend is fatal".
Tau pun oang putih ni...they know themselves too well, hehehe
1. The White Man's first disease : the need to dominate, to inflict pain, suffering, and death
2. The White Man's second disease : everyone follows our examples
3. The White Man's third disease : we-are-better-than-everyone-complex
All Bully-Shit and Bully-Opera.
ReplyDeleteThere are 2,098 members of the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI). Nearly a quarter (493) are Chinese companies. So why boycott only the western ones that are merely stating what the group supposedly believes in ie producing cotton in an environmentally and socially responsible manner? Didn't the Chinese companies sign-on to these standards too?
Bully-Crap.
https://bettercotton.org/about-bci/
Cotton has unfortunate historical connections to slavery , forced labour, labour and human right violations including in the USA and European colonies.
DeleteWe cannot change the century-old past, but we can certainly do something to fight for change in the present.
I Support the worldwide movement for Ethical Cotton.
I Support the campaign for Worldwide Boycott of Slavery Cotton.
Funny our BDS champion bullshitter has fallen silent.
How self righteousness u can be?
DeleteYr uncle Sam is the biggest cotton exporter of the world.
While the cotton fields exist millions of litres of water been used to irrigating the crop.
U want to know how upstream water usage deplecting the downstream agricultural activities?
Here is a typical example of upstream cotton irrigation in US causing dried river beds in Mexico agricultural fields.
U support ethical cotton?
Mfer, stops buying any shirt/pants/jeans with American labels! Put words into yr mouth, don't buat tak tau!
Be a champion of yr words or u r just a BStter falling silent selectively.
Bully-Crap, indeed!
Delete"group supposedly believes in ie producing cotton in an environmentally and socially responsible manner?"
Go read about how US cotton field irrigation causing dried river beds in Mexico!
Chinese companies signing on to the BCI r just following their altruistic instinct of good business practice.
Concocted boycott MUST be fact based not fart based!
So what's yr point?
Uncle Sam's fart ain't no fart, no?
First, they try to destabilize Xinjiang with terrorism, separatism and extremism. FAILED.
ReplyDeleteThen, they try to slander China with “genocide”, rapes, sterilization, blablabla....…no evidence, no proofs up till right now, no Muslim nations followed their steps, only those five-eye allies and other EU nations who share “common values” are taking side with it to attack China. Not finished yet, but doom to FAIL.
Now they try to start a “war” on Xinjiang cotton, backed by an non-governmental association called Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) who is financially supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).Their obvious purpose is to devastate Xinjiang cotton. China is the second largest cotton producer, with Xinjiang produces some 87% of them, which are either exported, or used domestically, for various products, including for those foreign brands who have local factories here in China. If they succeed, Xinjiang cotton would not be exported or used for all those BCI members. W
You see the logic behind it now? The US now has to stoop to such low level since their first grand plan to rouse up the world labelling China of genocide is getting nowhere. They made the big mistake to use that so-called God-driven evangelical German "researcher and China expert" Adrian Zenz who simply loathes Muslims and he once said Muslims will burn in hell for eternity and that children should be spanked. Chinese prosecutors are now in deep preparation to sue him on behalf of the business people and the civil society of Xinjiang. Many are waiting for that day in court when the screws will tighten on this brazen, lying hand-for-hire whose flawed and manipulated "genocide" reports are now under careful scrutiny, the prosecutors going through them with a fine tooth comb.
Now it looks like this Xinjiang cotton 'forced labour' smear is blowing up into their own face; and what did they get for all their devilish effort ? Shuttered shops, huge revenue loss from massive boycott and brand names irretrievably damaged in their biggest market.
One does wonder what's the next evil stunt these Whiteface desperadoes will concoct from their ever noxious witch brew to bring yet another sting on China. Chinese undoubtedly do have incredible patience and endurance, but there is a limit to such relentless and merciless attacks. The Whiteface is not yet done with their mischief making. China has to brace itself further.
Good that you mentioned USAID.
DeleteEvery day there are hundreds of thousands of people in Sub-Sahara Africa, various disaster zones around the world, who would go hungry if not for food distributed by USAID.
The USA IS the world's largest donor of food.
CCP is missing, because there is. NO profit to be made from those poor starving people.
USAID!
DeleteU know that Yankee outfit?
1) USAID provides funds to a responsible grantee to carry out a program with little direct involvement.
2) Cooperative agreements: USAID provides funds to a partner but has more substantial involvement and contact with the partner during the life of the program.
In Venezuela, USAID funds Juan Guaidó, the disputed president elect (that partner/grantee) via both methods 1&2.
The political intervention which is outside USAID chapters causes part of the current solo crisis in this once prosperous SAmerican State!
China is missing bcoz China can only do what she can - ie not to interfere in the internal sopo of ANY countries of the world.
Old moneyed mfer, there r many more US 'aid agencies' doing the spurious humanistic works of destabilizing countries uncle Sam dislikes.
Keep digging. But font just scan the summary pages. Go alternative & search deeper - mmmm… a list effort for a western demoNcratic doggie looking only for good Samaritan US stories.