spanish.china.org.cn
China Criticizes US Investment Policy as Discriminatory
A Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson criticized the US's "Investing in America First" policy as discriminatory and a non-market practice, impacting normal economic and trade cooperation between Chinese and US businesses, and stated China will take necessary measures to protect its interests.
- How do US business associations view the potential implications of restricting US investment in China?
- The US move to tighten security reviews of Chinese investments will undermine Chinese business confidence in the US market, according to a Chinese spokesperson. This action is viewed as contrary to international norms and market principles, creating further barriers for bilateral investment.
- What immediate impact will the US's "Investing in America First" policy have on Sino-American trade relations?
- The US issued a memorandum titled "Investing in America First", which the Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson stated severely impacts normal economic and trade cooperation between Chinese and US businesses. The spokesperson criticized the policy as discriminatory and a non-market practice, broadening the definition of national security.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of this escalating trade dispute for bilateral investment and economic relations between the US and China?
- The Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson warns that the US's planned further restrictions on US investment in China will distort bilateral investment, potentially harming US businesses and giving competitors an edge. China will monitor and respond to protect its interests. This highlights escalating trade tensions and potential for retaliatory measures.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and introductory paragraph immediately frame the US policy as negatively impacting Chinese businesses. The article consistently uses language that emphasizes the negative consequences for China, reinforcing a biased narrative.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded language such as "grave impact," "discriminatory," "typical non-market practice," and "unreasonable." These terms present the US policy in an overwhelmingly negative light, rather than employing neutral, objective language.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the Chinese perspective and reaction to the US policy. It omits details about the rationale behind the US policy, any potential national security concerns, and counterarguments from the US side. This omission limits the reader's ability to form a fully informed opinion, presenting a biased perspective.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the situation as a simple conflict between US actions and Chinese interests. It doesn't explore possible areas of compromise or mutual benefit in the economic relationship.
Sustainable Development Goals
The US policy harms the normal economic and trade cooperation between Chinese and US companies, undermining business confidence and potentially leading to job losses on both sides. The statement highlights concerns about discriminatory practices and unfair market access.