Page 11 - The South China Business Journal
P. 11
ntteerrvviieeww wwiitthh
Myron Brilliant
It’s been over a month since the U.S. initiated its Section 301
investigation on imported goods from China. In this issue,
we have the honor to talk to Mr. Myron Brilliant, Executive
Vice President and Head of International Affairs of U.S.
Chamber of Commerce, to get a better picture of what the
recent issues really are about.
Q: It is often said that whether it is Myron Brilliant (L), Executive Vice President of U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
a military or trade conflict, it is a talks with Chinese Vice Premier Wang Yang (R) in Beijing, Jan. 8, 2018. (Xinhua)
lose-lose game. Both sides are going to
take losses. Question is who will take exports still contribute substantially to
the most losses and eventually give up. China’s GDP, and foreign investment
Which do you think will suffer more in remains an important driver of economic
these recent economic tensions between development. A conflict over trade and
Washington and Beijing? And who will investment would be highly disruptive.
benefit most from them?
If both countries engage in tit-for-tat
M: The answer lies in the first part of tariffs and investment prohibitions,
your question. Both sides would lose neither side would win. Both economies
in a trade and investment conflict. need stability and predictability in
the international economic system to
Indeed, the strength of both economies create jobs, strengthen innovation, and
is inextricably linked to trade and foreign grow their economies. The adverse
investment, and both countries stand to gain
significantly from cooperation. U.S. exports
to China contribute to American economic
growth, and Chinese investment into the
United States creates jobs. In 2016, China was
a top three goods export market for 39 states,
and the bilateral trade relationship supported
over 2.5 million jobs in the United States.
States like California and Washington as
well as farmers and ranchers throughout the
Midwest would gain nothing if trade tensions
result in tariffs and China retaliates. In fact
they stand to incur significant losses.
For China, even as its economic model is
shifting toward consumption-led growth,
South China Business Journal 9
Myron Brilliant
It’s been over a month since the U.S. initiated its Section 301
investigation on imported goods from China. In this issue,
we have the honor to talk to Mr. Myron Brilliant, Executive
Vice President and Head of International Affairs of U.S.
Chamber of Commerce, to get a better picture of what the
recent issues really are about.
Q: It is often said that whether it is Myron Brilliant (L), Executive Vice President of U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
a military or trade conflict, it is a talks with Chinese Vice Premier Wang Yang (R) in Beijing, Jan. 8, 2018. (Xinhua)
lose-lose game. Both sides are going to
take losses. Question is who will take exports still contribute substantially to
the most losses and eventually give up. China’s GDP, and foreign investment
Which do you think will suffer more in remains an important driver of economic
these recent economic tensions between development. A conflict over trade and
Washington and Beijing? And who will investment would be highly disruptive.
benefit most from them?
If both countries engage in tit-for-tat
M: The answer lies in the first part of tariffs and investment prohibitions,
your question. Both sides would lose neither side would win. Both economies
in a trade and investment conflict. need stability and predictability in
the international economic system to
Indeed, the strength of both economies create jobs, strengthen innovation, and
is inextricably linked to trade and foreign grow their economies. The adverse
investment, and both countries stand to gain
significantly from cooperation. U.S. exports
to China contribute to American economic
growth, and Chinese investment into the
United States creates jobs. In 2016, China was
a top three goods export market for 39 states,
and the bilateral trade relationship supported
over 2.5 million jobs in the United States.
States like California and Washington as
well as farmers and ranchers throughout the
Midwest would gain nothing if trade tensions
result in tariffs and China retaliates. In fact
they stand to incur significant losses.
For China, even as its economic model is
shifting toward consumption-led growth,
South China Business Journal 9
