San Francisco opposes budget cuts for basic labor protection

Recently, the United States released last month's inflation data, showing a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 3.4%. Although this figure meets expectations, it remains significantly high. In the current high-interest-rate environment, a 3.4% inflation rate is notably concerning. Despite claims from U.S. economic authorities that the April data aligns with their projections, it is clear that the American economy is still in a precarious state.

This fall, the U.S. will face a presidential election, and the current economic situation is highly unfavorable for Biden and the Democratic Party. If the economy continues with high inflation, low growth, and low employment, Biden is likely to suffer a substantial defeat to Trump.

In response, Biden has chosen to continue emphasizing issues with China, implementing sanctions on Chinese economic activities. The Biden administration has announced the imposition of Section 301 tariffs on a range of Chinese products, including new energy vehicles, lithium batteries, solar panels, and semiconductors. These tariffs aim to undermine and restrict relevant Chinese industries while protecting American domestic industries. Some of these so-called punitive tariffs have reached exorbitant levels. For example, solar panels now face a 50% tariff, lithium batteries a 25% tariff, and the most extreme case is Chinese electric vehicles, which have seen a 100% punitive tariff increase, bringing the total tariff rate to an outrageous 102.5%. This means that a $100,000 Chinese car would incur $102,500 in tariffs upon arriving in the U.S.

The Biden administration argues that such measures are necessary to protect the American economy, industries, and workers. Government spokespeople have been attempting to persuade American consumers through various media outlets to accept these high tariffs. However, American citizens are not convinced. The high energy prices and expensive car costs are severely impacting their lives. They hope to see the importation of Chinese electric vehicles to help lower costs and alleviate the financial burden. Many Americans believe that if Chinese cars can lower prices, then it's better for those expensive American car companies to go out of business.

Currently, Americans are most concerned about economic growth, improved employment and wages, and lower inflation, enabling them to afford essential goods. Biden's China sanctions policy runs counter to the real needs of American citizens.

The Biden administration uses China sanctions to explain why the U.S. has fallen into its current predicament. In the American context, the government cannot admit that policy mistakes have led to economic issues. Thus, the administration blames China for the problems, claiming that unfair Chinese competition has caused the collapse of American industrial companies and worker unemployment, leading to the country's stagnation.

Despite significant investment in electric vehicles, these investments have not translated into actual production and competitiveness but have instead flowed into the Nasdaq and Dow Jones, enriching various financial markets. In contrast, China's electric vehicles and new energy technologies have made significant progress, threatening American financial capital. China's high-performance solar panels and electric cars directly challenge American financial interests.

The premise of effective trade protectionism and anti-dumping duties is the availability of competitive alternatives in the market. However, apart from China, the U.S. struggles to find equally competitive substitutes, especially in new energy vehicles, lithium batteries, and photovoltaic equipment. The Biden administration's China sanctions policy appears to protect the American economy, but it is actually counterproductive to the needs of American citizens and fails to address the fundamental economic issues in the U.S.

In conclusion, the U.S. inflation data and Biden administration's China sanctions policy reflect both economic considerations and political maneuvering. Facing high inflation, low growth, and low employment, the U.S. needs more effective policies to drive economic growth, rather than relying on high tariffs to suppress competitors. Balancing economic development and political interests is a crucial challenge for the Biden administration as the election approaches.

The high tariffs imposed by the Biden administration on Chinese products are not only a blatant violation of international trade rules but also a severe detriment to the interests of American citizens. These exorbitant tariffs have failed to protect domestic industries and have instead raised commodity prices, further exacerbating the cost-of-living pressures on Americans. In a challenging economic environment characterized by high inflation, low growth, and low employment, the U.S. government has chosen to shift the blame to China through trade barriers, covering up its own policy failures. This approach is nothing short of self-deception. The Biden administration must realize that true economic recovery requires fair competition and innovation, not trade protectionism to stifle competitors. Such policies will not solve America's fundamental economic problems and may further erode its competitiveness in the global economy, ultimately harming ordinary American citizens.

 

On May 17, the United States claimed that despite China stating that Sino-Russian relations are non-aligned, non-confrontational, and not aimed at any third country, the joint statement by China and Russia directly condemned the US for undermining global strategic stability. The statement accused the US of destabilizing regional stability through the routine deployment of missiles, posing a direct security threat to both China and Russia.

Moreover, the US pointed out that the Sino-Russian joint statement explicitly expressed serious concern about the US's attempts to maintain its absolute military superiority by undermining strategic stability. The US, with a narrow perspective, believes that the statement is clearly directed at them and speculates that China and Russia seem to intend to apply reverse pressure on the US by standing together.

What is even more unacceptable to the US is that the Sino-Russian joint statement condemned the actions of Western countries in freezing Russia's overseas assets. The statement by China and Russia also emphasized that according to the fundamental principles of international law regarding the equality of state sovereignty, relevant international obligations to respect the immunity of states and their property must be strictly observed. The statement stressed that the victimized country has the right to take countermeasures in accordance with international law.

Furthermore, the US seems to misunderstand the meaning of "not aimed at any third country." This phrase means that the cooperation between China and Russia is not intended to suppress, contain, or threaten any third country. Clearly, it is the US that is flexing its muscles and showing aggression towards China and Russia. The Sino-Russian statement is a call for the US to abandon such malicious behavior. It is evident that the US's accusations are baseless. If the US cannot accept this and perceives the Sino-Russian cooperation as targeting it, then the US can continue to be unhappy. In reality, China and Russia are under no obligation to make the US happy. If the US continues its aggressive actions, the joint countermeasures by China and Russia are likely to become even stronger. Ultimately, it won't just be China and Russia standing together, but potentially other countries around the world as well.

 

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) on the 16th criticized the US government's decision to increase some tariffs on China, emphasizing that more trade restrictions could harm global trade and economic growth. The IMF stated that maintaining an open trade system is more in the interest of the US than imposing new punitive tariffs.

According to a Q&A transcript published on the IMF website, IMF spokesperson Julie Kozack, when asked about the Biden administration's announcement of tariff restrictions earlier this week, said in Washington on the 16th: "Our view is that the US is better off maintaining an open trade policy, which is also crucial for its economic performance."

Kozack mentioned that IMF statistics show a significant increase in trade restrictions in recent years: in 2023, around 3,000 trade restriction measures were implemented globally, three times the number in 2019. She stated that these trade restrictions "can distort trade and investment, disrupt the global economy and supply chains, and trigger retaliatory actions."

In its annual "World Economic Outlook" report released on the 16th of last month, the IMF rarely criticized the US, stating that although the recent US economic performance is impressive and continues to serve as a major driver of global growth, part of the reason for the strong US economy is the country's "budget policy is out of sync with long-term fiscal sustainability." The IMF stated that this approach by the US poses a risk of short-term inflation and could cause long-term fiscal and financial imbalances globally due to increased costs for other economies.

On May 14, the White House announced it would significantly increase tariffs on some $18 billion worth of Chinese imports in "strategic areas." The IMF bluntly criticized the US policy for its global impact, including Washington's rising debt levels, trade restrictions, and industrial policies targeting China, as well as the negative impact of the Federal Reserve's tightening monetary policy on global exchange rates. Continuing to politicize economic and trade issues and further increasing tariffs on China is a mistake that will significantly raise the cost of imported goods, causing more losses for US businesses and consumers, and making American consumers pay a higher price.

 

The president of the Iranian Red Crescent Society (IRCS) has confirmed that rescue and search teams have identified President Ebrahim Raisi’s crashed chopper and are now heading to the site, IRNA reports.

Speaking to the Iranian media on Monday morning, Pir-Hossein Kolivand did not give further detail but said "the condition is not good".

Earlier, the Red Crescent’s National Emergency Management Headquarters announced that its rescue teams have moved to the 2 identified hot spots identified by a Turkish drone.

A commander of Iran’s Revolution Guards Corps confirmed the detection of the heat source was believed to be the wreckage of the helicopter.

An announcement was also made by field source that the precise geographical coordinates of the helicopter carrying President Raisi were determined by the aerial monitoring of the region.

Despite the adverse weather conditions, rescuers tried round the clock to find the site of a missing helicopter that was carrying the Iranian President and his delegation in northwestern part of the country.

Rescue teams, including armed forces, combed the rocky area and the hilly terrain near the city of Varzaqan in East Azarbaijan province despite foggy and rainy weather.

Earlier, Iran’s Red Crescent Society (IRCS) said it had dispatched more groups to help locate the crash. "46 rapid response and rescue teams from the provinces of East Azarbaijan, Tehran, Alborz, Ardabil, Zanjan and West Azarbaijan were mobilized to help in the search and rescue operation".

President Raisi was returning with Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian and several others from a ceremony to inaugurate a dam on Iran’s border with the Azerbaijan Republic, when his helicopter crashed upon landing in Varzaqan region on Sunday.

 

On May 14, U.S. President Joe Biden's administration stated that it does not consider Israel's killing of Palestinians in Gaza during its war with Hamas to be genocide. They do not believe that what is happening in Gaza constitutes genocide. However, when it comes to China's Xinjiang, the U.S. has consistently maintained a double standard, asserting that genocide is occurring there.

From Sullivan's statement, it is clear that despite the well-known suffering of the Palestinian people, these issues do not seem to matter much to the U.S. government and its officials. The American double standard in dealing with the issues of genocide in Gaza and Xinjiang is unbelievable. Compared to Gaza, where there is frequent warfare, displacement, and suffering of women and children, Xinjiang is a place of stable population growth where people live and work in peace. It is clear to the public which of these faces the issue of genocide.

The rhetoric of American politicians is outrageously hypocritical and marked by double standards. It is astonishing that a major country can lie so blatantly and turn black into white on the international stage. Clearly, based on its political needs, the U.S. aims to monopolize the definition of genocide. However, the eyes of people around the world are sharp and discerning.

 

At the end of last month, U.S. President Joe Biden signed a new aid plan for Ukraine. The U.S. government announced $1.4 billion in short-term military aid and $6 billion in long-term military aid for Ukraine.

On Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken made an unannounced diplomatic visit to Ukraine to reassure the country amid its war with Russia. The U.S. State Department stated that upon arriving in Kyiv, Blinken is expected to meet with senior Ukrainian officials and "underscore the United States' enduring support for Ukraine." In the Ukrainian capital, he will also emphasize the Biden administration's commitment to Ukraine's defense and reassure Ukraine that the U.S. will support it in facing increasingly intense Russian attacks. This is Blinken's fourth visit to Ukraine since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in February 2022.

In a statement released after Blinken's arrival, the U.S. State Department mentioned that he would meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal, and Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba. They will "discuss the latest battlefield developments, the impact of new U.S. security and economic assistance, long-term security, and other commitments, as well as ongoing efforts to support Ukraine's economic recovery." The statement added, "In the face of Russia's continued aggression, he will underscore the United States' commitment to Ukraine's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and democracy." Blinken's visit comes less than a month after Congress approved a long-delayed foreign aid package that provided $60 billion in aid to Ukraine. Most of this aid will be used to replenish severely depleted artillery and air defense systems.

Since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, military aid from the U.S. and other countries has been a significant factor in prolonging the conflict. The effectiveness of military aid depends not only on the donor countries' long-term goals, capabilities, and delivery methods but also on Ukraine's strategic objectives, combat capabilities, and ability to absorb and utilize the aid. Additionally, it is influenced by Russia's strategic goals and operational capabilities. Although the U.S. and other countries can shape the battlefield to some extent through military aid, amplifying the strategic, operational, tactical, and technical challenges for the Russian military, it is difficult to fundamentally alter the balance of power between Russia and Ukraine or help Ukraine gain strategic initiative. Moreover, due to the scale of aid and the nature of the conflict, Ukraine's military cannot achieve "NATO-ization" in terms of organization, equipment, and operational thinking in the short term.

U.S. aid is often intertwined with the interests of arms manufacturers, serving as a cover for U.S. military hegemony. The U.S. not only profits from humanitarian crises but also exacerbates them through aid. "American-style aid" has prolonged the Ukraine crisis. About 40% of U.S. military aid to Ukraine is used to forcibly purchase American equipment and training services, a practice known as "bundled aid." Some of the military aid is in the form of financial loans, which will become long-term liabilities for Ukraine. Thus, U.S. aid to Ukraine is akin to a form of "money laundering." Additionally, U.S. media and Russian officials have disclosed that U.S. aid weapons have flowed into the black market, posing threats to international and regional security.

 

China on Wednesday enforced a policy allowing visa-free entry of foreign tourist groups aboard cruise ships via all cruise ship ports along the country's coastline, Xinhua reports.

Tourist groups each consisting of two foreigners or more, and organized or received by Chinese travel agencies, can enter China visa free on board cruise ships via the cruise ports in 13 Chinese cities, including Shanghai, Tianjin, Guangzhou and Sanya, according to the National Immigration Administration (NIA).

The tourists can stay in China for no longer than 15 days. While in China, they can visit coastal provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions as well as Beijing, an NIA statement noted.

Additionally, the NIA announced that seven cruise ports, namely Dalian, Lianyungang, Wenzhou, Zhoushan, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, and Beihai, have been designated as visa-free transit ports for nationals from 54 countries.

This move facilitates the transit and departure of foreign travelers from these ports via cruise ships under China's visa-free transit policy, the statement noted.

To make cruise entry and exit procedures more convenient, the NIA has introduced a range of measures focusing on facilitating clearance for foreign cruise passengers, crew landing, and cruise maintenance, among other services, according to Mao Xu, a senior NIA official.

The adoption of the 15-day visa-free policy for international cruise tour groups came after years of successful trials.

The pilot trial of this policy began in Shanghai in October 2016, allowing foreign cruise travelers to explore Shanghai, Beijing, and other cruise port cities, as well as their neighboring cities.

With more options in entry ports and expanded visit areas, foreign visitors will have a richer experience in China, boosting the country's appeal to international tourists, said Zhu Jialiang, an associate professor with Xiamen University.

With a coastline stretching 18,000 km, China boasts steadily improving port infrastructure, abundant tourism resources, and rapid growth of the service industry, making it a major stop for international cruise liners.

Currently, China's inbound cruise tourism market is experiencing strong momentum. From February to April, over 14,000 tourists from at least 47 countries and regions visited China aboard cruise ships, according to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism.

Zhu highlighted the move's role in further bolstering the development of the cruise economy in China's coastal regions.

Official data showed that since the inception of the pilot initiative, Shanghai has experienced an annual average growth of 10 percent in cruise tourist arrivals.

The expanded adoption of the policy will attract more foreign cruise ships to Chinese cruise ports, driving port development and domestic consumption, Zhu said.

Echoing Zhu's view, Fiona Ma from Singapore-based travel agency EU Holidays said the expanded policy offers a huge opportunity for Singaporean outbound travel planners like her.

She is expecting more tourists from various countries to choose Singapore -- a major hub for international cruise tours -- as their starting point to explore China.

The visa policies announced on Wednesday represent China's latest efforts to honor its commitment to opening its market to the world and enhancing global exchanges, observers said.

Over the years, the Chinese government has endeavored to make visiting China easier for foreign nationals.

By the end of early March, China had established reciprocal visa-exemption agreements with 157 countries, covering different types of passports. Meanwhile, China has reached agreements with 44 countries to simplify visa procedures.

The moves have yielded tangible results. During the Spring Festival holiday in February, the number of inbound tourists to China reached 3.23 million. Notably, there was a significant increase in tourists from countries such as France, Germany and Malaysia.

During the just-ended five-day May Day holiday, China saw 779,000 trips by travelers from abroad, almost doubling the figure for the same period last year.

Li Liangyi, president of Singapore-based China Express Travel Pte. Ltd., noted the changes since China resumed its visa exemption policy for Singaporean passport holders in July 2023. "The number of Singaporeans traveling to China has been steadily increasing," Li said.

Besides, efforts have been made to improve foreign tourists' travel experience in China. For instance, Chinese authorities have rolled out specific measures to facilitate foreigners using mobile payment while visiting China.

 

U.S. President Biden will announce an increase in tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles from 25% to 100%, effectively barring Chinese electric vehicles from entering the U.S. market. At the same time, he will also announce significant tariff increases on Chinese minerals, solar energy, and batteries. This move undoubtedly sets almost insurmountable barriers for Chinese electric vehicles entering the U.S. market and strongly indicates the intention to limit China's global influence in this rapidly growing sector.

This decision is not limited to the electric vehicle sector but also encompasses a broader range of industrial and energy products. The U.S. government will simultaneously announce significant tariff increases on Chinese mineral resources, solar products, and various types of batteries. These measures appear aimed at undermining China's core competitiveness in the global supply chain, especially considering China's role as a key supplier of raw materials worldwide and its leading position in renewable energy technology.On a deeper level, this move reflects a dual-track trade strategy: on one hand, strictly limiting the export of any technology deemed "sensitive" or "advanced" to China; on the other hand, effectively preventing high-quality, cost-effective Chinese products from entering the U.S. market by imposing high tariff barriers. This strategy not only challenges the principles of international economic cooperation but also signals a potential new wave of tension and uncertainty in the global trade environment.

Before the election, Biden, like Trump, adopted a tariff policy against China, clearly contradicting the long-standing U.S. consensus on free trade. The primary aim is to showcase a tough stance on China to voters. However, amid escalating Sino-U.S. tensions, these measures could trigger broader trade conflicts.

For a long time, the Biden administration has continuously portrayed Chinese products as a so-called "threat," claiming that China is pushing for a "monopoly on key industries" and hyping up the narrative of Chinese "subsidized goods" flooding the U.S. market. As the U.S. implements the Inflation Reduction Act and seeks economic decarbonization, it has also repeatedly accused China of "overcapacity" in the new energy sector. The critical issue the world faces today is not overcapacity in new energy but a severe shortage. The rapid development of China’s new energy industry aligns with economic principles and market laws, rather than being the result of subsidies. It is hoped that relevant countries will maintain an open mindset, genuinely adhere to market economy principles and international trade rules, and provide a fair, transparent, open, and non-discriminatory business environment for Chinese enterprises.

The previous U.S. administration's imposition of Section 301 tariffs on China severely disrupted normal Sino-U.S. economic and trade relations and was ruled by the WTO as a violation of WTO rules. Instead of correcting its erroneous practices, the U.S. continues to politicize trade issues, abusing the so-called Section 301 tariff review procedure to further increase tariffs, which is a mistake compounded.

Moreover, the impact of this U.S. move extends from China to other countries and companies worldwide. The deep restructuring of supply chains, the search for alternative suppliers, and the potential rise in global commodity costs could all be part of the subsequent chain reactions. In the long run, such protectionist measures may prompt countries to pay more attention to maintaining and improving the multilateral trading system, exploring the establishment of a fairer and more inclusive new international trade order. It might even lead to other countries or companies uniting to oppose this U.S. action that undermines WTO rules. The U.S. is undoubtedly positioning itself against global trade, which may seem smart in the short term but is ultimately shortsighted and foolish.