Long and bitter technology war on its way
The condemnation of Huawei by Donald Trump symbolises the
escalation of the American-Chinese trade war into a technology war
between the two superpowers. Trump justifies his drastic
intervention by pointing to China’s unfair practices, in particular
China’s market-distorting trade policy and violation of intellectual
property rights. The Chinese transition to a technology-driven
economy, however, also relies on investment in innovation and
valorisation, at which China is rapidly outperforming Western
countries. In contrast to the trade conflict, for which a short-term
solution is possible, the technology battle will continue for a long
time to come. A leading role for China in the world economy is
written in the stars. Cooperation rather than confrontation is the
best guarantee for our long-term prosperity. But a more assertive
American and European attitude is needed to maintain a balance. So
at least this time, we should listen to Donald Trump.
The new China has arrived
China’s steep rise on the world stage went through a number of phases. The development of an export-oriented industry made China grow into the ‘factory of the world’. China was eager to make use of Western knowledge, acquired both through joint ventures and through the direct import of Western technology and machinery. The Chinese expansion created great opportunities for Western companies that could, on the one hand, supply their products and services to the Chinese market and, on the other hand, reduce their production costs by relocating their production. Few companies were concerned about this state of affairs, probably blinded by major short-term profit opportunities. In the longer term, we now see that China has been able to upgrade itself to a leading player in high-tech sectors with a higher added value, in accordance with the official Chinese objectives. The Chinese technological advance is therefore not a one-day wonder, but a structural trend that is causing global disruption. This was made painfully clear recently when it became apparent that no other company in the world besides Huawei could roll out the 5G network in an equally quantitative (in terms of production volume and speed) and qualitative (in terms of technological standards) manner. This observation caused a shock, both in the business world and on the political stage.
Huawei’s success is often quickly attributed to unfair Chinese
practices. The lack of respect for international protection of
intellectual property is seen as especially problematic. This
interpretation is correct, but incomplete. China has long left behind
the stage of achieving technological progress through imitation and
reversed engineering. Structural and substantial investments in
research and development have put China on the world’s technological
map. Figure 1 shows that research and development spending in China
(as a % of GDP) has increased significantly in recent years. China’s
research and development spending even matches that of the EU, which,
despite many policy intentions, has been barely increasing. The
objective of the Lisbon Agenda (2000) and Europe 2020 (2010) to invest
3% of GDP in research and development has proved unattainable even
after almost 20 years.
Figure 1 - Research and development expenditures, in % of GDP
China is not the only one to blame
It’s easy to point the finger at China. It would, however, be fairer to acknowledge that we are systematically lagging behind, certainly in Europe, but gradually also in the US. Especially the speed with which China is carrying out its technological upgrading is historically unprecedented. Research and development spending is certainly not the only measure of innovation, but it is an important one. Other indicators also show China’s strong technological expansion. When we look at the number of patents granted to foreign companies in the US, we see a huge percentage increase in China’s presence in the US technology market.
Not trade, but technology
The American stab at Huawei follows an escalation in the trade conflict. It is now clear that it is not trade, but technological and therefore economic leadership in the world that is dominating the American-Chinese tensions. During the recent negotiations on a trade agreement, it became clear that China was prepared to make concessions in the area of trade. But to deviate fundamentally from China’s strategy of becoming the leading economy and world power through technological leadership is a bridge too far for China.
Even if the US were to impose much tougher sanctions on Chinese technology players, it seems unlikely that the Chinese strategy could be undermined. Recently there has been talk of a new economic cold war. It is true that the American measures are hurting the Chinese economy. This is due to both the negative consequences of increasing protectionism and the drag from ongoing uncertainty. For the time being, the Chinese government can use fiscal and monetary stimulus to keep the Chinese economy on a soft economic landing path. Chinese economic growth in the first quarter of 2019 even surprised positively. Such stimulus is unsustainable in the longer term, not least because China’s total debt already stands at more than 250% of its GDP. However, it is wrong to think that the current aggressive US approach will convince China to change course. In addition to a large domestic market, China is now much more integrated with the global economy, thanks to international investment and intensive trade contacts. This makes China very resilient. In addition to increased resilience, China can also count on a very agile economy. Change can be implemented quickly and centrally, in contrast to the slowness of the Western, democratic market economies.
Yet an economic cold war is not a good thing for anyone. In the long
term, one should not underestimate how a free market offers the
ultimate stimulus for innovation and economic progress. Although China
is currently the technological leader, it remains to be seen whether
China can maintain that role within its current political and economic
model. The great potential of international cooperation between the
West and China lies in particular in bringing together two worlds: the
intrinsic incentive for lasting innovation that a market economy
brings with it, combined with the speed with which a centrally planned
economy can achieve things. Hopefully, our political leaders will soon
come to that conclusion. But it is more likely that this understanding
will not be forthcoming for some time to come, leading to a prolonged
and intense technology war.