Sino US economic and trade cooperation is not a zero sum game but a win-win situation.

Recently, the Information Office of the State Council issued the White Paper "Facts and China's Position on Sino-US Economic and Trade Friction", which combed Sino-US economic and trade relations comprehensively and systematically with a large number of facts and detailed data. Ye Fujing, director of the Institute of Foreign Economics, China Academy of Macroeconomics, said in an interview with reporters from the Economic Daily that Sino-US economic and trade cooperation is not a zero-sum game, but a win-win relationship. The United States has no basis for the Chinese government's accusation of compulsory technology transfer, and there is a huge logical loophole.

Ye Fujing believes that Sino-US economic and trade cooperation is mainly reflected in three aspects: First, the scale of bilateral trade and investment has been growing continuously, and has become an important and irreplaceable economic and trade partner. Trade and investment cooperation is a market behavior. Only when both sides benefit, can it continue to expand. The two is economic and trade cooperation to promote economic development and industrial structure optimization. Trade with the United States and attracting investment from American enterprises are important promotion for Chinese enterprises to improve their technology and management level, enhance their sense of competition and enhance their total factor productivity. Economic and trade cooperation with China is an important driving force for the sustained and stable recovery of the U.S. economy after the international financial crisis. It is also an important source for American multinational companies to obtain huge markets and rich profits. It is also an important basis for American enterprises to consolidate the high-end position of the global value chain. The three is economic and trade cooperation to promote the improvement of people's livelihood. In particular, China's economic and trade cooperation has played an important role in expanding employment, reducing inflation and improving consumer welfare in the United States.

There are 3 points to be clarified about the mutually beneficial and win-win relationship between China and the United States. Ye Fujing stressed that first of all, we should not be able to damage the fact that the overall benefit and mutual benefit can be negated by local interests. In the process of opening up, there are both cooperation and competition. In the process of industrial restructuring, it is inevitable that the interests of some industries and groups will be temporarily damaged, which is the inevitable cost of gaining huge benefits from opening up. The main way to solve this problem lies in improving domestic policies such as employment and social security, rather than infinitely exaggerating and unilaterally denying it and closing the door of economic and trade cooperation. Secondly, the trade deficit is different from the commercial loss. Deficit is not equal to loss. The US trade deficit in goods has lasted for more than 40 years. It has adapted to its development model and industrial structure, provided the United States with a large number of high-quality and low-cost goods, and has become an important channel for the US to export US dollars. Thirdly, Sino-US economic and trade cooperation is carried out within the framework of a series of bilateral and multilateral agreements, and in the process of China's gradual integration into the international economic system. It is based on rules, and there is absolutely no problem of China gaining benefits in violation of rules.

The United States has repeatedly accused China of compulsory technology transfer. Ye Fujing said the accusation was groundless. China's laws and regulations do not require any compulsory transfer of technology by foreign-funded enterprises. The Chinese government has repeatedly stressed that the compulsory transfer of advanced technology is strictly prohibited. At present, the vast majority of industries that restrict or prohibit foreign investment from entering are based on national security, protection of traditional culture and other factors, such as rice paper manufacturing, education, culture, medical treatment, social investigation, etc., which have nothing to do with technology transfer.

In fact, if the purpose of China's stock ratio restrictions on foreign investment is to force foreign-funded enterprises to transfer technology, the overall technical level of China is still significantly behind that of developed countries in Europe and the United States, and the industries in which China imposes stock ratio restrictions on foreign investment will never be education, medical and other industries, but will expand. To information and communication equipment, CNC machine tools, pharmaceuticals and other high-tech industries, and these industries as early as China's accession to the WTO soon after the realization of full openness. Ye Fujing pointed out that the United States did not give any direct evidence of the relationship between the share ratio restriction and the compulsory technology licensing of foreign-funded enterprises, but only by & ldquo; the existence of share ratio restriction or administrative licensing obstacles in an industry & rdquo; and & ldquo; the existence of technology importation from joint ventures by local enterprises in an industry & rdquo; and then deduced & ldquo; And the purpose of administrative licensing barriers is to introduce technology & rdquo; which has huge logical loopholes.

Ye Fujing said that the Chinese government should not encourage enterprises & ldquo; go out & rdquo; distort as a kind of government behavior to promote enterprises to acquire advanced technology through mergers and acquisitions. At present, in order to support the development of enterprises and enhance the level of internationalization, governments of all countries have given preferential measures to enterprises & ldquo; going out & rdquo; and given certain preferential measures, the support policies implemented by China are basically consistent with those of other economies, which fully conform to international practices. Under the background of technology-seeking cross-border mergers and acquisitions in global direct investment, Chinese enterprises are building R&D centers or conducting technology-seeking mergers and acquisitions overseas, which is entirely based on their own development demands, promoting the organic combination of their own market advantages and the technological advantages of their partners to achieve double cooperation. Winning behavior fully conforms to the general rules of international investment, not to mention the claim of the US side that “ seeking intellectual property rights under the support of the government ”.

Ye Fujing pointed out that China's attitude towards intellectual property protection is clear and firm. It has made unremitting efforts in legislation, law enforcement and judicial aspects, and the results are obvious to all. This is the inherent requirement of China's economic development, as well as the internal requirement of China to standardize international economic and trade rules and deepen reform and opening up. Improving the intellectual property protection system is a gradual process, which is closely related to the development stage, capacity-building and the whole society's intellectual property awareness.This is the objective law. It has been a long time since the establishment and improvement of intellectual property protection system in developed economies. Therefore, we should not blame China for a few deficiencies in the protection of intellectual property rights, let alone require China to reach the level of developed economies in one move, which may on the contrary inhibit development.It is not conducive to achieving stable and sustainable progress in the protection of intellectual property rights.