Video: Niall Ferguson on the Likelihood of a China Hard Landing

Video after the break.

As Predicted U.S.-China Economic War Heating Up

Another prediction which is coming in right on schedule: this Presidential political season the one thing Republicans and Democrats can agree upon (the generally conservative Senate voted 79-19) is that China is manipulating the value of its currency to make its exports more price competitive.

We're still in the early rounds of the latest Congressional flare-up over China's currency policy, so stay tuned.

The Xinjiang 13 and Chinese Appeasement

A disturbing report from Bloomberg about several elite U.S. universities not standing up to Chinese suppression of academic research freedom and free speech:

They call themselves the “Xinjiang 13.” They have been denied permission to enter China, prohibited from flying on a Chinese airline and pressured to adopt China- friendly views. To return to China, two wrote statements disavowing support for the independence movement in Xinjiang province. 

They aren’t exiled Chinese dissidents. They are American scholars from universities, such as Georgetown and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who have suffered a backlash from China unprecedented in academia since diplomatic relations resumed in 1979. Their offense was co-writing “Xinjiang: China’s Muslim Borderland,” a 484-page paperback published in 2004. 

“I wound up doing the stupidest thing, bringing all of the experts in the field into one room and having the Chinese take us all out,” said Justin Rudelson, a college friend of U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and former senior lecturer at Dartmouth College, who helped enlist contributors to the book and co-wrote one chapter.
The sanctions, which the scholars say were imposed by China’s security services, have hampered careers, personal relationships and American understanding of a large, mineral- rich province where China has suppressed separatist stirrings. Riots and attacks in Xinjiang in July left about 40 people dead.

In the race to embrace China's riches the leaders of elite U.S. academic institutions (who should know better) seem to have forgotten that China is run by a brutal, freedom-suppressing dictatorship. Yet Stanford, the University of Chicago, Duke and NYU have or are in the process of building branch campuses in mainland China. Have many of the U.S.'s best universities forgotten that history has not looked kindly on those who have cozied-up to regimes like China's current one?

The Xinjiang 13 incident also smacks of the same problem in academia which Oscar Winning Director Charles Ferguson documented in his must-watch film Inside Job. Has the academy not learned anything about the importance of professional ethics these past few years?

Full article on the Xinjiang 13 here.

Video: Niall Ferguson - The West and the Rest (Chatham House Talk/Q&A)

Video: U.S. Debt Limit Cartoon

Podcast: Joseph Nye on the Future of Power

Link to audio here.

Joseph Nye is a long-time analyst of power and a hands-on practitioner in government. His concept of "soft power" has been adopted by leaders from Britain to China and "smart power" has been adopted as the bumper-sticker for the Obama Administration's foreign policy. In this lecture, drawn from his new book The Future of Power, Nye outlines the major shifts of this century: new transnational challenges such as the financial crisis, global epidemics, and climate change facing an increasingly interconnected world; a changing global political and economic landscape, including the rise of China and India; and the increasing influence of non-state actors. Nye explores what resources now confer power, and argues that, in the information age, it might be the state (or non-state) with the best story. Joseph S. Nye, Jr. is University Distinguished Service Professor and former Dean of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. He has served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, Chair of the National Intelligence Council, and a Deputy Under Secretary of State. The author of many books, he is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the British Academy, and the American Academy of Diplomacy.

Chimerica or Chindia: Who Will Dominate the 21st Century?

A good read from Evans-Pritchard which covers several of the main issues which will determine which nation(s) will prosper the most in the 21st century.

Some of the key pieces of data highlighted in the article:

• Demographic trends (e.g., China's 1.2 males/female ratio suggest social instability)

• China’s workforce peaks in absolute terms in four years

• Birth rates: Beijing and Shanghai are 1.0, Korea is 1.1, Singapore 1.2, Germany 1.3, Poland 1.3, Italy 1.4, Russia 1.4 with the U.S. coming in around the population replenishment rate of 2.1

• Environmental catastrophe: China's growth rate of 10% is outstripped by 13.5% in GDP equivalent eco-damage)

Video: Niall Ferguson on The Political Economy of the Cold War

18 October 2010 (Part 1 in the lecture series)

At its heart the Cold War was a competition between two economic systems. Despite having in common a "military-industrial complex", they were profoundly different in the degree of freedom they offered their citizens, the living standards they were able to achieve and the pace of technological innovation they could sustain. In this first lecture, Niall Ferguson compares and contrasts the United States and the Soviet Union in the Cold War and asks how far the outcome of the Cold War was economically determined from the outset. In particular, what role did commercial and financial globalization play in enhancing U.S. power in the world? And how serious a threat did inflation pose to the United States in the 1970s?

Video: Niall Ferguson on The Third World's War

24 November 2010 (Part 2 in the lecture series)

Although never a "hot" war between the superpowers, the Cold War was waged partly through a series of proxy wars in Third World countries from Guatemala to Korea to Vietnam. Although a great deal of attention has been devoted to a select number of U.S. Interventions in the Third World, there is an urgent need to see the "Third World's War" in perspective, showing how successful the Soviet Union was in pursuing a strategy of fomenting revolution and how consistently successive U.S. administrations behaved in response.

Video: Niall Ferguson on The Grand Strategy of Détente

18 January 2011 (Part 3 in the lecture series)

'Nixon goes to China' shattered the façade of Communist unity and dug the United States out of the hole it found itself in at the end of the 1960s. Critics have seen Nixon and Kissinger's policy as morally compromised, but was it actually the key to America's victory in the Cold War?

Video: Niall Ferguson on China's Fundamental Problem

More clips from Professor Ferguson's Big Think interview can be viewed here.

Video: Exporting Propaganda - China's New Charm Offensive

Spin, manufactured in China

A friendly, gentle depiction of the People's Republic may soon be coming to Americans and Europeans via their television screen and newspapers (see today's International Herald Tribune and its cleverly disguised paid-for-but-looks-like-news insert) .

Yes, this bought and paid-for China is the same country which has banned its citizens from using Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and most recently Skype. As noted by the NY Times, China's rulers are "obsessed with the threat posed by the Internet".

From the article:

Li Changchun, a member of China’s top ruling body, the Politburo Standing Committee, and the country’s senior propaganda official, was taken aback to discover that he could conduct Chinese-language searches on Google’s main international Web site. When Mr. Li typed his name into the search engine at google.com, he found “results critical of him."

A Chinese person with family connections to the elite (said) that Mr. Li himself directed an attack on Google’s servers in the United States 

In the wake of the overthrow of Tunisia's government, other dictatorships (e.g., Mubarak's monarchy in Egypt) are now following China's lead.

I can only imagine how the Politburo Standing Committee's discussion over China's international image problem went down: "China is the world's greatest exporter, and propaganda works pretty well here, so why not package the two together?"

U.S.-China Currency War: Should America Fight Back by Defaulting?

A little less handshaking, a little more action?

China-U.S. relations have dominated this week's headlines with Hu Jintao's official state visit to America. And there is much to talk about with respect to what is arguably the world's most important bilateral relationship.

'Bleeding-hearts' types will no doubt want to focus on human rights issues, such as China's not so secret effort to wipeout Tibetan civilization and the ongoing imprisonment of China's recent Nobel Peace Prize winner, Liu Xiaobo.

As the NY Times opinion page put it, "how can one Nobel Peace Prize laureate be silent when meeting the man who imprisons the next?"

And those concerned with the military balance of power can point to concerns about Chinese espionage, secret development of sophisticated weaponry like a Chinese stealth fighter, and China's navy contesting free navigation in the South Sea.

The Renminbi Runaround

There is also the matter of U.S.-China economic relations. As far as the U.S. is concerned, the big one is the exchange rate of China's currency, the renminbi (yuan). It is widely agreed that China's currency is undervalued by as much as 20-40%, providing China with an unfair trade advantage. Much has been written about this issue previously here.

Former Secretary of State and and National Security Advisor, Henry Kissinger, appeared on Charlie Rose this week to discuss relations with China. Not surprisingly, Kissinger argued for a diplomatic solution to the renminbi. While acknowledging that he is not economist, Kissinger believes there should be some way to bring the Chinese around on revaluing the renminbi by offering something in return. My question is hasn't the U.S. already tried that ad nauseam?

Throughout modern history the world's trade and currency order has always followed a set of explicit and implicit 'rules of the game', so to speak. Over the last two decades China has benefitted significantly from first having access to the world's markets and later gaining entrance into the World Trade Organization. While WTO rules do not cover exchange rate manipulation, one of the hallmarks of our current semi-free trade system is floating exchange rates. China exercises heavy control over its exchange rates in a manner completely unlike other major trading powers, such as the U.S.

The key question, put simply, can be expressed as follows: why is there one set of currency rules for China, and another set for everyone else?

Continue reading the full article published on SeekingAlpha here.

Video: Niall Ferguson -- Will the Financial Crisis Lead to America's Decline?

Courtesy of FORA.tv, a July 2010 panel discussion with David Gergen, Mort Zuckerman and Niall Ferguson at the Aspen Institute broken out in subject chapters in the links below.

01. Introduction      05 min 08 sec
02. Financial Crisis Accelerated West to East Power Shift     07 min 50 sec
03. American Business Culture Is Healthy     06 min 44 sec
04. Threat of Rapid Decline    03 min 53 sec
05. Complexity Theory and National Strength    02 min 30 sec
06. Debt and Stimulus    03 min 22 sec
07. Innovation Only Helps by Creating Domestic Jobs    02 min 59 sec
08. Growing Education Gap    02 min 38 sec
09. A World Without a U.S. Superpower    04 min 55 sec
10. Q1: U.S. Headed Toward Capitalism or Socialism?    02 min 48 sec
11. Q2: What Happened to Budget Surplus    02 min 00 sec
12. Q3: Coping with China Graduating Thousands of Engineers    02 min 37 sec
13. Q4: How to Manage the Deficit    05 min 05 sec
14. Q5: Low Birth Rate in China    02 min 52 sec
15. Q6: Federal Reserve and Treasury Contribution to Crisis    03 min 26 sec

Timing the Inevitable Decline of the U.S. Dollar

One of the most heavily debated macro topics is the future of the world's reserve currency, the seemingly almighty U.S. Dollar.

Neither the fact that scores of prognosticators have been predicting its demise for decades, nor that when the financial going gets tough (as it did during the 2008-2009 financial crisis) everyone wants it, has dissuaded today's dollar bears from taking a dim view of the greenback's future.

America's Exorbitant Privilege

Barry Eichengreen

Berkeley Professor Barry Eichengreen’s new book, Exorbitant Privilege, explains the U.S. Dollar's historic rise from international monetary obscurity prior to World War I, to surpassing British pound sterling in importance by 1924-25, to its dominant post-World War II position which it continues to occupy today.

Professor Eichengreen opens with the point that while we now live in a multi-polar economic world the financial system and monetary order still revolve around a single currency (the U.S. Dollar).

Some might be surprised to learn that approximately 75% of all $100 bills circulate outside the United States. The reserve currency holdings of the world's central banks are largely in U.S. Dollars or U.S. Dollar denominated assets (e.g., U.S. Treasuries).

What precisely is the 'Exorbitant Privilege' conferred on the United States by the special role its currency plays in the global financial system?

Professor Eichengreen calculates that the U.S. dollar’s status as the world's reserve currency is worth 3% in U.S. national income per year. In other words, having the world’s dominant reserve currency allows the U.S. to run an annual $500 billion current account deficit.

Some may remember Vice President Cheney's quip that "deficits don't matter", or Nixon Treasury Secretary Connally's response to foreign governments, critical of the U.S.’s profligate Vietnam and Great Society spending, on how the U.S. Dollar was "our currency, your problem". It is this 'Exorbitant Privilege', a term coined by French leaders in the 1960s who railed against the fact that American paper currency could be exchanged for "real stuff", which Professor Eichengreen views as unsustainable.

Are Reserve Currencies Analogous to Computer Operating Systems?

Economists explain the U.S. Dollar's rise and dominance through a principle called 'network externalities' (or 'network effect'). Similar to how significant interoperability advantages in computing can be achieved through the adoption of a single operating system (e.g., Microsoft Windows), the widespread use of a single currency (the U.S. Dollar, and previously British pound sterling) can lead to mutually beneficial economic efficiencies.

However, in a world where 'Currency Converter' is one of the Top 10 most downloaded smartphone apps, determining exchange rates and making currency conversions can now be performed quickly and simply by a vast number of people. Just as the computing world is moving towards multiple operating systems (i.e., Windows, Mac, Linux, Google, iOS, etc.), Eichengreen believes the world will transition to three principal reserve currencies: the U.S. Dollar, the Euro, and the Chinese Renminbi (Yuan).

The Euro and the Renminbi: Assessing the U.S. Dollar Bridesmaids

On the currency topic du jour, Eichengreen believes that "euro gloom and doom is overdone". Just as a default by Los Angeles County won't spell the end of the U.S. Dollar, a default by Greece and/or Ireland won't bring about an end to the euro.

Germany is the one country, in Eichengreen's view, which could afford to abandon the euro without suffering catastrophic economic consequences. However, Eichengreen sees this as unlikely. Germany's next generation of leaders, while not having been around for the birth of the EU, are nevertheless heavily wedded to the European Project. Further, Germany benefits from a weaker euro via more competitive exports. If Germany were to leave the euro then the reintroduced Deutsche Mark would shoot up in value and risk choking off the German export led economic renaissance currently underway.

When it comes to the Chinese renminbi becoming a reserve currency, Eichengreen acknowledges that China needs to make significant changes. For starters, the renminbi will need to become freely convertible. China will also need to develop deep, liquid capital markets and make fundamental changes to its overall development model.

However, these and other changes may come quicker than many expect. A short time ago there were basically zero Chinese companies settling international transactions in renminbi; now 70,000 do so. Two U.S. multinational companies, McDonald's and Caterpillar, have issued renminbi-based bonds. Currently most of these changes are occurring in "China's financial petri dish" (Hong Kong), but China has set a target of making Shanghai a preeminent world financial center by 2020.

Timing the Decline of the U.S. Dollar?

Eichengreen assigns a very low probability to a sudden collapse of the U.S. Dollar. But could it happen? In short, the answer is yes.

A spat over Taiwan or rising tensions in the Asia Pacific over China building its first world class navy in 600 years could cause China to suddenly stop funding U.S. deficits. A more confident and assertive China is likely to continue to flex its newfound muscles, a subject I previously covered in more detail here.

However, what Harvard’s Larry Summers termed "The Financial Balance of Terror" is likely to prevent a catastrophic scenario from unfolding. Similar to how President Eisenhower threatened to dump the U.S.'s vast British bond holdings during the 1956 Suez crisis if British forces didn't leave the peninsula immediately (which they did), Eichengreen believes that China and U.S. officials will attempt to work out their differences through diplomatic back channels as opposed to openly fighting it out in financial markets.

A more likely scenario would be a sudden loss in investor confidence, like the one experienced by Greece last spring, in the U.S.'s ability to get a handle on government spending. Eichengreen notes how the ratio of U.S. federal debt (a relatively high 75% of GDP) vis-à-vis tax revenues (a relatively low 19% of GDP) is rapidly approaching the danger zone.

From an investment perspective, investors should continue to expect currency volatility under the current U.S. dollar dominated international monetary system. Further, the U.S. Dollar will continue to be the world's safe haven currency in times of crisis for the foreseeable future. However, according to Eichengreen a change in the international monetary order is all but inevitable within a decade.

Chimerica Rap Video: U.S.-Sino Currency Rap Battle

U.S.-China Financial Relations Explained by Saturday Night Live

Bank of Japan Intervention: What Happened Last Time? What's Next?

On Tuesday the yen traded at ¥82.88 yen per dollar, its highest level since May 1995. As predicted the Japanese government decided it had seen enough and instructed the Bank of Japan (BOJ) to 'intervene in the currency market' (aka print money). This caused the yen to quickly fall back to ¥85 per U.S. dollar level.

The BOJ also confirmed that its intervention -- reported to be in the ¥300-¥500 billion range ($3.61-$6.02 billion) -- will go unsterilized, which means that the BOJ will not seek to withdraw the new yen it has 'printed'.

Currency Traders Now Have an ¥82 Yen Bullseye

Via Bloomberg, Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku communicated two very important pieces of information:

1. ¥82 yen per dollar is "the line of defense to prevent currency strength from harming the economy"
2. "The government is seeking to gain the understanding of the U.S. and Europe for the intervention"

We now know the Japanese government's pain point (¥82 yen per dollar). Providing the market with an exact target -- not unprecedented for Japan (see below) -- could prove to be a mistake.

We can also infer from the "seeking to gain the understanding" comment that the BOJ's intervention was not only uncoordinated, but also without the consent of other central banks. It would be surprising if the Fed and ECB signed off on the BOJ's intervention. Europe, the U.S. and other nations are mired in a slow recovery and seeking export led growth. Japan's currency intervention makes U.S. and European goods more expensive in Japan.

What Happened Last Time the BOJ Intervened?

It was six years ago when the Bank of Japan last intervened in the currency market. In 15 months through March 2004, the BOJ sold ¥35 trillion yen ($421.7 billion) for dollars. What was the BOJ trying to accomplish? As noted back then Economy Trade and Industry Minister Takeo Hiranuma said "a dollar at ¥115.00 is the ultimate life-and-death line for Japanese exporters".

Two comments:

Is a U.S.- China Economic War On Its Way?

The tone of U.S.-China relations, as evidenced by General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt's provocative “colonization” remarks, are deteriorating rapidly and signaling trouble ahead. Given the importance of this relationship it is important to understand what's at stake and how events may play out.

Sizing Up the Sino-American Relationship

The U.S. has the world's largest economy and the U.S. Dollar is the world’s reserve currency. China has the world’s fastest growing large economy, and it has proven comparatively resilient in the wake of the ‘Great Recession’. China recently passed Japan to become the world's second largest economy, and Goldman Sachs has forecasted that China will overtake the U.S. by 2027.

While the export of manufactured goods to countries such as the United States has been a key driver of China’s growth story, benefits have accrued on both sides of the Pacific. Large U.S. government deficits have been underwritten in part by the thrifty Chinese, and U.S. consumers have snatched up voluminous quantities of low cost Chinese imports.

This seemingly symbiotic relationship, which Harvard Professor Niall Ferguson has termed ‘Chimerica’, avoided close scrutiny during the credit boom years. But amid high U.S. unemployment and a mounting public debt Chimerica is now under a microscope.

China’s “Unfair” Currency Policy

China has been accused of manipulating its currency by pegging the renminbi to the U.S. dollar at an artificially low rate, thereby allowing China to gain an unfair trade advantage. Critics point to China’s more than $2 trillion in largely U.S. dollar denominated foreign exchange (forex) reserves as prima facie evidence that the renminbi is grossly undervalued. Market participants have speculated that if the renminbi were allowed to freely float it would appreciate by 20-40% against the U.S. dollar.

Emerging market and EU officials have joined the U.S. in criticizing China's currency policy. Under pressure, China’s recent announcement that the renminbi would be allowed to float was initially greeted with widespread enthusiasm. However, since the announcement the value of the renminbi has moved within a narrow 0.5% range, remaining effectively unchanged. This has led some critics, such as NY Times columnist Paul Krugman, to accuse China of “playing games”.

A U.S.-China Economic War?

One of history’s unfortunate reoccurring themes is the tendency on the part of political leaders to create foreign scapegoats, particularly when faced with challenging economic times and an uncertain electoral environment. From this perspective surging, recalcitrant China makes for a nearly ideal political target.

Candidates for office can blame the U.S. unemployment problem on “unfair” China competition and the undervalued renminbi. China's large U.S. treasury holdings (estimated at up to $1 trillion, or roughly 20% of all foreign holdings) will also make a convenient target for fear mongers pointing at foreigners as the source of the U.S.’s troubles. Expect increasing criticism of China (reminiscent of 1980s Japan bashing) from politicians, labor groups, talk radio, etc. through this November's mid-term elections and through the next presidential election cycle.

What is the likelihood that the U.S. will go beyond rhetoric and take action? Seeing the renminbi revalued upwards is one of the few policy areas with bipartisan support. President Obama may feel pressure to appear strong and stand up to foreign powers to preserve the American economic way of life. Calls to “do something” will only grow louder in the face of the projected slow employment recovery. In short, formal trade action against China cannot be ruled out.

How would China respond to overt moves by the U.S.? The Chinese government detests foreign pressure. At the same time China's leadership, emboldened for example by the failure of The West to prevent the financial crisis and Google's recent blink, is growing more confident. Looking to flex its new economic and geopolitical muscles, China would almost certainly retaliate in some fashion against any U.S. trade action.

Looking Ahead

Both the U.S. and China possess numerous incentives to avoid a serious breakdown in relations. The economic and political consequences would be devastating for both countries and the rest of the world. The central question is will the U.S. and China be able – or willing – to find a path towards compromise which is also congruent with their respective interests?

It is human nature to underestimate the probability of seemingly unlikely, large-scale events like a U.S.-China trade and currency war. However, students of history know this to be an all-too-frequent mistake.

In considering whether such a conflict can be successfully avoided it is important to remember that policymakers often fail to properly diagnose and head-off the really big problems, such as war and financial crisis. Assurances by officials shortly before the near collapse of the financial system that the subprime problem was "contained" is but one recent example.

What could lead to a more serious escalation of tensions? A WTO ruling, U.S. Congressional action, China’s sale (or further purchases) of U.S. Treasuries, or an Asia Pacific geopolitical event (i.e., Taiwan, North Korea, etc.) are just a few of the possible triggers.

With China in the U.S.'s political crosshairs investors would do well to continue to closely monitor the world’s most important bilateral economic and political relationship. And given the stakes, let us hope that the current U.S.-China trade and currency war doesn't escalate further, for even a mild economic war could be devastating.

Tea Party success, M3 shrinking, whiffs of deflation equal a chink in Gold's armor?

In the time that has passed since Tea Party candidate Rand Paul & Co.'s wakeup call victories I have been keeping an eye and ear open for perceptible changes in the political discourse.

Fresh out of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue earlier this week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today spoke about managing the U.S. debt problem as key to the country's ability to project power and influence abroad. Now, it would be surprising if former candidate Clinton did not opine on just about any topic under the sun. But it is somewhat unusual for a Secretary of State to weigh in on a U.S. debt problem.

The European debt crisis cast a large shadow over the annual Chimerica talks. While no official announcement was ever made China's growing unease over the European sovereign debt crisis and the possible implications contagion poses for China's massive investment in U.S. treasuries was a hot topic.

One potential outcome of the Tea Party's results is the effect it could have on further government largesse. Mid-term elections are just around the corner. Vulnerable incumbents must be thinking twice about casting even more votes that can be criticized for putting the federal government on the path to bankruptcy.

But is it too late for incumbents to change their ways? This evening may have provided a hint as Congress was unable to pass a $200 billion tax and unemployment benefits extension. Benefits for hundreds of thousands of Americans will now expire on June 2. This is especially surprising given that very pro-unemployed Democrats control both houses of Congress.

Should these political trends combined with inflation rising at the slowest pace since the 1960s and the U.S. money supply declining at the fastest pace since the 1930s be giving gold investors, like myself, reason for concern? Is the current case for gold, contrary to what "all-in" billionaire gold investor Thomas Kaplan woud have us believe, not bulletproof?