Zhang: It doesn't make sense for us to ask China to import more agricultural products

Interview with the director of the National Development and Reform Commission foreign Economic Research Institute Zhang us to ask China to import more agricultural products no reason to open up imports will have a huge impact on Chinese farmers it is not in line with international moral Han Shujie the US has recently asked China to increase imports of U.S. agricultural products. Is this requirement reasonable? What impact will it have on our agriculture and farmers? How should our country respond?　　　　In response to these problems, the national Development and Reform Commission Director of the Institute of Foreign Economic Research, Zhang accepted this interview, the Sino-US trade issues in-depth analysis.　　Chinese agricultural products unable to compete with the US Q: What do you think of the recent U.S. Congressional Senators ' call for an investigation into China's export barriers to U.S. agricultural products and the US demand that China increase imports of agricultural products from the United States?　　A: The US demands that China increase imports of agricultural products unreasonable. First, opening China's imports of U.S. agricultural products will have a huge impact on Chinese agriculture and farmers. At present, China is in the critical period of urbanization, in another two or three years, our urbanization rate will be more than 50%, that is to say, more than 1.3 billion Chinese still have 50% or 650 million people living in rural areas, they rely mainly on agriculture. Compared with China, the United States has less population, more land and higher agricultural productivity, and Chinese agricultural products cannot compete with it. The U.S. agricultural population accounted for 2%, about 4 million people. U.S. lawmakers only consider his political needs and the interests of 2% of farmers, and we live on the same Earth need mutual benefit and win, 4 million of the interests of American farmers and the interests of 650 million Chinese farmers, from a human rights perspective how to weigh?　　If the benefits of 650 million Chinese farmers are sacrificed, it is a huge loss for the whole world. Second, to liberalize China's imports of American agricultural products is not conducive to crop diversity and genetic diversity. Some agricultural products in the United States now export a lot to China, such as soybeans. Is America's soybeans better than China's? Fact。 Although from the market and commercial point of view, our soybean competition is not the United States. But let us not forget the problem of crop diversity and genetic diversity. If our agricultural products are genetically modified, the highest amount of oil, the largest particles, the best economic benefits but biological is the worst, this is good for China? This is about maximizing the interests of farmers, but forgetting our environment and ecology. I found in the United States, the American fruit is very beautiful, but Apple does not eat apple flavor, pears eat pear taste. Chicken is cheap and good-looking, but it doesn't taste like chicken.　　Therefore, the highest efficiency of American agricultural products does not mean the best, from the choice of human beings, need to maintain biological diversity. Third, the issue of agricultural products is very sensitive to all countries in the world. Agricultural products are the most sensitive among the various trade agreements that have been signed by countries around the world.　　　　And it is not in the practice of nations and international morality for American lawmakers or governments to compel China to make substantial concessions on the most sensitive issues in the interests of their own country. Sino-US trade imbalance: an important basis for us to ask China to increase imports of agricultural products is the so-called Sino-US trade imbalance.Imbalance? A: First of all, the United States to solve the so-called Sino-US trade imbalance is a kind of hegemonism. The United States unilaterally asked China to further open the agricultural market to the United States, in fact, to expand agricultural exports to balance the Sino-US trade gap. We recognize that American agriculture is competitive, but is there only agriculture in America's competitive sector? The United States is the world's High-tech products and industries, why not use High-tech products to balance Sino-US trade, and the world's most sensitive agricultural products to balance trade? America's most advantageous products are not exported to China, while the most sensitive products to China and the world demand open markets, and said that the United States is fair and just, China is unfair injustice, this is not hegemonism? The root of hegemonism lies in the serious institutional defects of global governance.　　In other words, we have no effective management rules, procedures and systems in this Earth village, so this kind of purely unreasonable request will arise. Secondly, the so-called Sino-US trade imbalance is purely pseudo proposition. U.S. lawmakers and academics have suggested that, according to U.S. Customs statistics, China's exports of High-tech products to the United States surplus than the world's High-tech products surplus to the United States combined. So we use the American Research report to discuss, from 1995 to 2006, according to U.S. Customs statistics and American scholar Research conclusion, China's exports of High-tech products to the United States 90% are foreign-invested enterprises export, 95% is processing trade, that is to say, China's surplus to us High-tech products is actually a surplus between the internal trade of transnational corporations and the trade between multinational companies, which is not related to the so-called unfair trade behavior of China. It makes no sense to say that the surplus brought about by globalisation is an unfair trade action by China and therefore requires China to open its agricultural market.　　　　A US trade official has said that this is not an economic problem, but a political one.　　Trade should adhere to the principle of fair and reasonable: in the face of unreasonable demands of the United States, how should China respond? A: Since the reform and opening-up, our development direction and path are correct. China insists on opening-up and market-oriented economic reform has never wavered. China always insists on free trade and always insists on market economy.　　China always believes that the principle of fair and reasonable should be upheld in international exchange and international competition. The best way to solve the Sino-American problem is communication, coordination and cooperation. Do not blindly blame and unilaterally for their own interests to harm the interests of other countries.　　How to solve trade frictions and protectionism is also a new subject for China. Our response is clear. The so-called transformation of the way of economic development is to make our development impetus from more reliance on investment and exports, to rely more on consumption, this is a great change.　　On the other hand, we still have to be rational, advantageous, have a section, first to understand the truth, and then the opposite, finally resolve the friction and crisis between the two sides. The keynote of the two sides is to strengthen the common interests between China and the United States, strengthen bilateral cooperation in the process of globalization and strengthenBetween the United States in the international affairs, bilateral affairs of communication and understanding, and seek common ground, this is beneficial to the U.S., China, beneficial to the world.