There is no sign that the United States is distancing itself from the World Trade Organization, and negotiations are underway to avert a global trade war, WTO Director-General Roberto Azevedo said in a BBC interview broadcast Wednesday.

U.S. President Donald Trump has launched a series of tariff-raising moves, upsetting allies and rivals alike.

Trump is also vetoing the appointment of WTO judges, causing a backlog in disputes and threatening to paralyze what is effectively the supreme court of trade. Some trade experts have begun asking whether Trump wants to kill the WTO, whose 164 members force each other to play by the rules.

“I have absolutely no indication that the United Sates is walking away from the WTO. Zero indication,” Azevedo said in an interview on the BBC Hardtalk program, according to excerpts released early by the BBC.

Last month, Trump called the WTO a “catastrophe” and complained the United States had only a minority of its judges.

Correction

The next day, Azevedo gently set him straight, noting that the United States had an unusually good deal, since it had always had one of the seven judges.

Asked whether the WTO should be thinking about a Plan B without the United States, Azevedo told the BBC that he had not heard anything to suggest that such a situation was in the cards.

“Every contact that I have in the U.S. administration assures me that they are engaging,” he said.

The question of whether U.S. tariffs were legal could be settled only by a WTO dispute panel, but the damage from such unilateral actions would be felt much more quickly as other countries retaliated, leading to a global trade war, he said.

“I don’t think we are there yet, but we are seeing the first movements towards it, yes,” he said.

Nobody believed it was a minor problem, including those in the U.S. administration, and people were beginning to understand how serious the situation was and what impact it could have on the global economy, Azevedo said.

“There are still negotiations ongoing. … We want to avoid the war, so everything that we can do to avoid being in that situation, we must be doing at this point,” he said.
…

There is no sign that the United States is distancing itself from the World Trade Organization, and negotiations are underway to avert a global trade war, WTO Director-General Roberto Azevedo said in a BBC interview broadcast Wednesday.

U.S. President Donald Trump has launched a series of tariff-raising moves, upsetting allies and rivals alike.

Trump is also vetoing the appointment of WTO judges, causing a backlog in disputes and threatening to paralyze what is effectively the supreme court of trade. Some trade experts have begun asking whether Trump wants to kill the WTO, whose 164 members force each other to play by the rules.

“I have absolutely no indication that the United Sates is walking away from the WTO. Zero indication,” Azevedo said in an interview on the BBC Hardtalk program, according to excerpts released early by the BBC.

Last month, Trump called the WTO a “catastrophe” and complained the United States had only a minority of its judges.

Correction

The next day, Azevedo gently set him straight, noting that the United States had an unusually good deal, since it had always had one of the seven judges.

Asked whether the WTO should be thinking about a Plan B without the United States, Azevedo told the BBC that he had not heard anything to suggest that such a situation was in the cards.

“Every contact that I have in the U.S. administration assures me that they are engaging,” he said.

The question of whether U.S. tariffs were legal could be settled only by a WTO dispute panel, but the damage from such unilateral actions would be felt much more quickly as other countries retaliated, leading to a global trade war, he said.

“I don’t think we are there yet, but we are seeing the first movements towards it, yes,” he said.

Nobody believed it was a minor problem, including those in the U.S. administration, and people were beginning to understand how serious the situation was and what impact it could have on the global economy, Azevedo said.

“There are still negotiations ongoing. … We want to avoid the war, so everything that we can do to avoid being in that situation, we must be doing at this point,” he said.
…

A growing American economy and passage of a Republican tax overhaul appear to be helping President Donald Trump lift his approval ratings from historic lows, according to a new poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Trump remains unpopular with the majority of Americans, 58 percent. But 42 percent say they now approve of the job he’s doing as president, up seven points from a month ago. That’s a welcome change in trajectory for a White House that has been battered by chaos, controversies and internal upheaval.

The poll suggests that at least some of the president’s improving standing is tied to the economy, which has steadily grown and added jobs, continuing a trajectory that began under President Barack Obama. Nearly half of Americans surveyed — 47 percent — say they approve of how Trump is handling the economy, his highest rating on any issue. When it comes to tax policy, 46 percent of Americans back Trump’s moves.

For Republicans, that offers a glimmer of hope as they stare down a difficult midterm election landscape and a surge of Democratic enthusiasm. With few other legislative victories from Trump’s first 14 months in office, GOP lawmakers have largely pinned their hopes for keeping control of Congress on middle-class voters feeling the impact of the tax law.

‘Fortunes will rise and fall’

“Our fortunes will rise and fall with the economy and specifically with the middle-class tax cut this fall,” said Corry Bliss, executive director of the Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with House Speaker Paul Ryan. Bliss urged Republican candidates to view the law as “an offensive, not defensive weapon.”

One of the GOP’s challenges, however, will be keeping the economy and tax overhaul in the spotlight through the fall given the crush of other matters roiling the White House and competing for Americans’ attention. At the White House Monday, the daily press briefing was dominated by questions about the president’s alleged affair with adult film star Stormy Daniels, a relationship he denies. Each week has seemed to bring a new departure among the president’s closest advisers. And many days, Trump is more inclined to use his Twitter megaphone to try to discredit the investigation into possible campaign contacts with Russia than promote the tax overhaul. 

Republican operatives acknowledge that even if they can break through the clutter, they still have a ways to go when it comes to explaining the $1.5 trillion tax plan to Americans. Democrats have aggressively cast the measure, which permanently slashes the tax rate for corporations and reduces taxes for the wealthiest Americans, as a boon for the rich that offers comparatively little for the middle class.

The Democratic message does appear to be breaking through with voters. Among those Americans who are familiar with the new law, 77 percent believe it helps large corporations and 73 percent say it benefits the wealthy, while 53 percent say it helps small businesses. Americans are evenly divided on whether the measure helps the middle class.

Republicans argue Democrats risk overreaching by downplaying the impact that even a small windfall from the tax bill can have for a family and individual. According to the AP-NORC poll, nearly half of those who receive a paycheck — 46 percent — say they’ve seen an increase in their take-home pay as a result of the tax law.

Heather Dilios, a 46-year-old social worker from Topsham, Maine, is among them. Dilios, a Republican, estimates she’s now taking home between $100 to $200 more per paycheck as a result of the new tax law, more than she expected when Trump signed the legislation.

Dilios said it’s more than the dollar amount that’s driving her support for the law.

“It’s more about being able to keep what is rightfully mine rather than giving it to the government,” she said.

Overall, taxes and the economy are the brightest spots for Trump, who gets lower numbers from voters on a range of other issues, including his handling of North Korea (42 percent), trade (41 percent), gun control (39 percent) and the budget deficit (35 percent).

Trump has benefited from an increasingly healthy economy that has boosted consumer and business sentiment. The 4.1 percent unemployment rate is the lowest since 2000 without the same kinds of excesses that fueled that era’s tech bubble.

Continuation of momentum

While Trump attributes the gains to his tax cuts and deregulation efforts, many economists say conditions so far are largely a continuation of the momentum from the gradual expansion that began during the Obama administration.

Trump’s most recent policy moves have also rattled financial markets and raised questions about the prospect of an economic slowdown. He slapped hefty tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, though his administration has issued waivers to several countries. And last week, he moved to slap $60 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods, prompting Beijing to promise swift retaliation.

The full scope and impact of Trump’s proposed tariffs won’t be known for some time, but the initial reaction from Americans is decidedly mixed. The AP-NORC poll finds that 38 percent support the steel and aluminum tariffs and 29 percent are opposed.

The poll also finds that just 32 percent of Americans think the tariffs will lead to an increase in jobs, compared with 36 percent who think it will lead to a decrease. Forty percent think it will lead to an increase in consumer prices, while 39 percent think it will lead to a decrease.

———

The AP-NORC poll of 1,122 adults was conducted March 14-19 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.

Respondents were first selected randomly using address-based sampling methods, and later interviewed online or by phone.
…

A growing American economy and passage of a Republican tax overhaul appear to be helping President Donald Trump lift his approval ratings from historic lows, according to a new poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Trump remains unpopular with the majority of Americans, 58 percent. But 42 percent say they now approve of the job he’s doing as president, up seven points from a month ago. That’s a welcome change in trajectory for a White House that has been battered by chaos, controversies and internal upheaval.

The poll suggests that at least some of the president’s improving standing is tied to the economy, which has steadily grown and added jobs, continuing a trajectory that began under President Barack Obama. Nearly half of Americans surveyed — 47 percent — say they approve of how Trump is handling the economy, his highest rating on any issue. When it comes to tax policy, 46 percent of Americans back Trump’s moves.

For Republicans, that offers a glimmer of hope as they stare down a difficult midterm election landscape and a surge of Democratic enthusiasm. With few other legislative victories from Trump’s first 14 months in office, GOP lawmakers have largely pinned their hopes for keeping control of Congress on middle-class voters feeling the impact of the tax law.

‘Fortunes will rise and fall’

“Our fortunes will rise and fall with the economy and specifically with the middle-class tax cut this fall,” said Corry Bliss, executive director of the Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with House Speaker Paul Ryan. Bliss urged Republican candidates to view the law as “an offensive, not defensive weapon.”

One of the GOP’s challenges, however, will be keeping the economy and tax overhaul in the spotlight through the fall given the crush of other matters roiling the White House and competing for Americans’ attention. At the White House Monday, the daily press briefing was dominated by questions about the president’s alleged affair with adult film star Stormy Daniels, a relationship he denies. Each week has seemed to bring a new departure among the president’s closest advisers. And many days, Trump is more inclined to use his Twitter megaphone to try to discredit the investigation into possible campaign contacts with Russia than promote the tax overhaul. 

Republican operatives acknowledge that even if they can break through the clutter, they still have a ways to go when it comes to explaining the $1.5 trillion tax plan to Americans. Democrats have aggressively cast the measure, which permanently slashes the tax rate for corporations and reduces taxes for the wealthiest Americans, as a boon for the rich that offers comparatively little for the middle class.

The Democratic message does appear to be breaking through with voters. Among those Americans who are familiar with the new law, 77 percent believe it helps large corporations and 73 percent say it benefits the wealthy, while 53 percent say it helps small businesses. Americans are evenly divided on whether the measure helps the middle class.

Republicans argue Democrats risk overreaching by downplaying the impact that even a small windfall from the tax bill can have for a family and individual. According to the AP-NORC poll, nearly half of those who receive a paycheck — 46 percent — say they’ve seen an increase in their take-home pay as a result of the tax law.

Heather Dilios, a 46-year-old social worker from Topsham, Maine, is among them. Dilios, a Republican, estimates she’s now taking home between $100 to $200 more per paycheck as a result of the new tax law, more than she expected when Trump signed the legislation.

Dilios said it’s more than the dollar amount that’s driving her support for the law.

“It’s more about being able to keep what is rightfully mine rather than giving it to the government,” she said.

Overall, taxes and the economy are the brightest spots for Trump, who gets lower numbers from voters on a range of other issues, including his handling of North Korea (42 percent), trade (41 percent), gun control (39 percent) and the budget deficit (35 percent).

Trump has benefited from an increasingly healthy economy that has boosted consumer and business sentiment. The 4.1 percent unemployment rate is the lowest since 2000 without the same kinds of excesses that fueled that era’s tech bubble.

Continuation of momentum

While Trump attributes the gains to his tax cuts and deregulation efforts, many economists say conditions so far are largely a continuation of the momentum from the gradual expansion that began during the Obama administration.

Trump’s most recent policy moves have also rattled financial markets and raised questions about the prospect of an economic slowdown. He slapped hefty tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, though his administration has issued waivers to several countries. And last week, he moved to slap $60 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods, prompting Beijing to promise swift retaliation.

The full scope and impact of Trump’s proposed tariffs won’t be known for some time, but the initial reaction from Americans is decidedly mixed. The AP-NORC poll finds that 38 percent support the steel and aluminum tariffs and 29 percent are opposed.

The poll also finds that just 32 percent of Americans think the tariffs will lead to an increase in jobs, compared with 36 percent who think it will lead to a decrease. Forty percent think it will lead to an increase in consumer prices, while 39 percent think it will lead to a decrease.

———

The AP-NORC poll of 1,122 adults was conducted March 14-19 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.

Respondents were first selected randomly using address-based sampling methods, and later interviewed online or by phone.
…

Uber Technologies has agreed to sell its Southeast Asian business to bigger regional rival Grab, the ride-hailing firms said on Monday, marking the U.S. company’s second retreat from an Asian market.

The industry’s first big consolidation in Southeast Asia, home to about 640 million people, puts pressure on Indonesia’s Go-Jek, which is backed by Alphabet’s Google and China’s Tencent Holdings Ltd.

A shake-up in Asia’s fiercely competitive ride-hailing industry became likely earlier this year when Japan-based SoftBank Group Corp’s Vision Fund made a multibillion-dollar investment in Uber. SoftBank owns stakes in most major global ride services companies, and executives have indicated they favored consolidation.

SoftBank already had investments in Grab and India’s Ola, and Vision Fund Chief Executive Rajeev Misra had urged Uber to focus less on Asia and more on profitable markets such as Latin America, a person familiar with the matter said.

Grab President Ming Maa told Reuters that SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son was “highly supportive” of the deal, which he called “a very independent decision by both” Grab and Uber.

Uber will take a 27.5 percent stake in Singapore-based Grab and Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi will join Grab’s board. Grab was last valued at $6 billion after a financing round in July.

“It will help us double down on our plans for growth as we invest heavily in our products and technology,” Khosrowshahi said in a statement.

The Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) said it has the mandate to review whether any mergers will result in a “substantial lessening of competition” and take any action to intervene in the deal, but it has yet to receive notice from the companies.

The deal will help bolster Grab’s meal-delivery service, which will merge with Uber Eats, compete with Go-Jek. Go-Jek has become a dominant player and powerful rival in Indonesia, the region’s biggest economy, and it has rapidly expanded beyond ride hailing to digital payments, food delivery and on-demand cleaning and massage.

Ride-hailing companies throughout Asia have relied heavily on discounts and promotions, driving down profit margins and increasing pressure for consolidation.

Uber, which is preparing for a potential initial public offering in 2019, lost $4.5 billion last year and is facing fierce competition at home in the United States and across Asia, as well as a regulatory crackdown in Europe.

Uber invested $700 million in its Southeast Asia business.

Uber previously sold operations in China and Russia to local rivals under former CEO Travis Kalanick. The deal with Grab is the first operations sale by Khosrowshahi, who started in September.

More consolidation

But Uber’s CEO does not want to make these mergers a pattern, and said he has no plans to do another sale in which it consolidates its operations in exchange for a minority stake in a rival.

“It is fair to ask whether consolidation is now the strategy of the day, given this is the third deal of its kind…The answer is no,” Khosrowshahi said in a note to employees that was shared with Reuters. “One of the potential dangers of our global strategy is that we take on too many battles across too many fronts and with too many competitors.”

SoftBank is also an investor in India’s Ola, another competitive and costly market where rivals have heavily subsidized rides in an effort to gain market share. But a source familiar with Uber’s strategy said the company was going to step up its battle with Ola in India, where Uber has close to 60 percent of the market, by some estimates, but is losing money.

SoftBank’s Misra sees opportunities for mergers and joint ventures between SoftBank-backed ride-hailing companies, particularly for collaborating on research and development, but the investor would never get actively involved with management decisions, the person familiar with the matter said.

Uber includes the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Latin America among its core markets — regions where it has more than 50 percent market share and is profitable or sees a path to profitability.
…

Uber Technologies has agreed to sell its Southeast Asian business to bigger regional rival Grab, the ride-hailing firms said on Monday, marking the U.S. company’s second retreat from an Asian market.

The industry’s first big consolidation in Southeast Asia, home to about 640 million people, puts pressure on Indonesia’s Go-Jek, which is backed by Alphabet’s Google and China’s Tencent Holdings Ltd.

A shake-up in Asia’s fiercely competitive ride-hailing industry became likely earlier this year when Japan-based SoftBank Group Corp’s Vision Fund made a multibillion-dollar investment in Uber. SoftBank owns stakes in most major global ride services companies, and executives have indicated they favored consolidation.

SoftBank already had investments in Grab and India’s Ola, and Vision Fund Chief Executive Rajeev Misra had urged Uber to focus less on Asia and more on profitable markets such as Latin America, a person familiar with the matter said.

Grab President Ming Maa told Reuters that SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son was “highly supportive” of the deal, which he called “a very independent decision by both” Grab and Uber.

Uber will take a 27.5 percent stake in Singapore-based Grab and Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi will join Grab’s board. Grab was last valued at $6 billion after a financing round in July.

“It will help us double down on our plans for growth as we invest heavily in our products and technology,” Khosrowshahi said in a statement.

The Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) said it has the mandate to review whether any mergers will result in a “substantial lessening of competition” and take any action to intervene in the deal, but it has yet to receive notice from the companies.

The deal will help bolster Grab’s meal-delivery service, which will merge with Uber Eats, compete with Go-Jek. Go-Jek has become a dominant player and powerful rival in Indonesia, the region’s biggest economy, and it has rapidly expanded beyond ride hailing to digital payments, food delivery and on-demand cleaning and massage.

Ride-hailing companies throughout Asia have relied heavily on discounts and promotions, driving down profit margins and increasing pressure for consolidation.

Uber, which is preparing for a potential initial public offering in 2019, lost $4.5 billion last year and is facing fierce competition at home in the United States and across Asia, as well as a regulatory crackdown in Europe.

Uber invested $700 million in its Southeast Asia business.

Uber previously sold operations in China and Russia to local rivals under former CEO Travis Kalanick. The deal with Grab is the first operations sale by Khosrowshahi, who started in September.

More consolidation

But Uber’s CEO does not want to make these mergers a pattern, and said he has no plans to do another sale in which it consolidates its operations in exchange for a minority stake in a rival.

“It is fair to ask whether consolidation is now the strategy of the day, given this is the third deal of its kind…The answer is no,” Khosrowshahi said in a note to employees that was shared with Reuters. “One of the potential dangers of our global strategy is that we take on too many battles across too many fronts and with too many competitors.”

SoftBank is also an investor in India’s Ola, another competitive and costly market where rivals have heavily subsidized rides in an effort to gain market share. But a source familiar with Uber’s strategy said the company was going to step up its battle with Ola in India, where Uber has close to 60 percent of the market, by some estimates, but is losing money.

SoftBank’s Misra sees opportunities for mergers and joint ventures between SoftBank-backed ride-hailing companies, particularly for collaborating on research and development, but the investor would never get actively involved with management decisions, the person familiar with the matter said.

Uber includes the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Latin America among its core markets — regions where it has more than 50 percent market share and is profitable or sees a path to profitability.
…

Indonesia’s strict crackdown on illegal foreign fishing boats is paying off, according to new research.

Kicking out interlopers has relieved pressure on the country’s overtaxed fisheries at no cost to its domestic industry, the study says, and may point the way for other countries to make their fisheries more sustainable.

About a third of the world’s commercial fish populations are overfished, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. 

One study estimated that restoring depleted fisheries would ultimately generate $53 billion in additional annual profits. 

But reducing overfishing usually means putting unpopular restrictions on local fishers to allow populations to recover.

“Telling fishers to stop fishing for a few months or years would be something that’s not that realistic,” said study lead author Ren Cabral at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Violators will be sunk

But in Indonesia, as in many developing countries, locals are only part of the equation. Many foreign vessels fished the country’s waters, often illegally.

The study notes that the country lost an estimated $4 billion per year to illegal fishing before 2014, when the government banned foreign fishing vessels in its waters.

Since then, more than 300 ships found violating the ban were evacuated and sunk.

Cabral and colleagues wanted to see what the impact had been.

Using government registries, vessel tracking data and satellite imagery, they saw a drop of more than 90 percent in the time foreign vessels spent in Indonesian waters. That meant at least a quarter less fishing activity overall.

“That’s huge,” Cabral said.

The study is published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. 

“You have a large benefit, but the cost to local people is zero,” said marine biologist Boris Worm at Dalhousie University, who was not involved with this research.

Do this first

“This paper argues, I think convincingly, that this is the first thing you should do: if you want to fix fisheries in your country, first, kick out the fishers that don’t need to be there,” he added.

Worm notes that the study could only account for large vessels that are required to carry tracking equipment. It could not assess what smaller vessels are doing.

“You’re really only seeing the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “The tip of the iceberg is getting smaller, which is good in this case. But there are a whole lot of problems below.”

With foreign fishing boats out of the way, local fishers are filling in the gap. If not managed properly, they could undo the benefits of fighting illegal fishing, Cabral said.

If Indonesia continues to ban illegal fishing and also manages local fishing sustainably, the study estimates profits would be 12 percent higher in 2035 compared to today.

On the other hand, if local fishing remains unchanged, 2035 profits would drop by half as fish populations declined.

“The next step would be Indonesia managing their local fishing effort,” Cabral added. “If they do that, they can definitely get the benefit from their policies.”

 
…

Indonesia’s strict crackdown on illegal foreign fishing boats is paying off, according to new research.

Kicking out interlopers has relieved pressure on the country’s overtaxed fisheries at no cost to its domestic industry, the study says, and may point the way for other countries to make their fisheries more sustainable.

About a third of the world’s commercial fish populations are overfished, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. 

One study estimated that restoring depleted fisheries would ultimately generate $53 billion in additional annual profits. 

But reducing overfishing usually means putting unpopular restrictions on local fishers to allow populations to recover.

“Telling fishers to stop fishing for a few months or years would be something that’s not that realistic,” said study lead author Ren Cabral at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Violators will be sunk

But in Indonesia, as in many developing countries, locals are only part of the equation. Many foreign vessels fished the country’s waters, often illegally.

The study notes that the country lost an estimated $4 billion per year to illegal fishing before 2014, when the government banned foreign fishing vessels in its waters.

Since then, more than 300 ships found violating the ban were evacuated and sunk.

Cabral and colleagues wanted to see what the impact had been.

Using government registries, vessel tracking data and satellite imagery, they saw a drop of more than 90 percent in the time foreign vessels spent in Indonesian waters. That meant at least a quarter less fishing activity overall.

“That’s huge,” Cabral said.

The study is published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. 

“You have a large benefit, but the cost to local people is zero,” said marine biologist Boris Worm at Dalhousie University, who was not involved with this research.

Do this first

“This paper argues, I think convincingly, that this is the first thing you should do: if you want to fix fisheries in your country, first, kick out the fishers that don’t need to be there,” he added.

Worm notes that the study could only account for large vessels that are required to carry tracking equipment. It could not assess what smaller vessels are doing.

“You’re really only seeing the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “The tip of the iceberg is getting smaller, which is good in this case. But there are a whole lot of problems below.”

With foreign fishing boats out of the way, local fishers are filling in the gap. If not managed properly, they could undo the benefits of fighting illegal fishing, Cabral said.

If Indonesia continues to ban illegal fishing and also manages local fishing sustainably, the study estimates profits would be 12 percent higher in 2035 compared to today.

On the other hand, if local fishing remains unchanged, 2035 profits would drop by half as fish populations declined.

“The next step would be Indonesia managing their local fishing effort,” Cabral added. “If they do that, they can definitely get the benefit from their policies.”

 
…

A delegation of Indian CEOs visiting Myanmar and the launch of a new India-Myanmar business chamber in Yangon have sought to inject life into stagnant economic ties between the two neighboring countries.

Since 2011, when the military junta launched political and economic reforms, Myanmar’s future prosperity has been predicated on its strategic location between India and China, two giant economies and population centers.

Yet, while China has poured billions into mega infrastructure and energy projects and continues to dominate trade with Myanmar, flagship Indian infrastructure projects in western Myanmar have run behind schedule and over budget.

Bilateral trade — topped by beans and pulses from Myanmar and sugar and medicines from India — has hovered around the $2 billion mark since 2011, less than a fifth of the trade volume with China and falling well below targets set by a Joint Trade Committee. Though Myanmar’s fourth largest trade partner, India is only its eleventh largest investor.

At an India-Myanmar Business Conclave on March 22 in Yangon, Myanmar’s commercial capital, Indian company directors mingled with Myanmar business leaders while senior government officials mixed frank acknowledgements of underperformance with affirmations of Myanmar’s potential.

India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry C.R. Chaudhary said, “Myanmar is our gateway to Southeast Asia,” recalling two pillars of India’s foreign policy, Act East and Neighborhood First, and stressed the need to “remove trade barriers.”

Next at the podium, Myanmar’s Deputy Minister for Commerce Aung Htoo, talked of boosting India-Myanmar trade to 5 billion over the next three years, as part of a Myanmar government plan made in 2016 to triple all exports by 2020.

Taking time

Speaking to VOA on the sidelines, Gaurav Manghnani, the Myanmar country head of Credera, a trading and investment company with roots in Myanmar’s Indian diaspora, said he didn’t share in the growing pessimism of other foreign investors over the slow pace of economic reform in Myanmar.

“If they’re taking time to get the reforms underway and making sure these reforms are here to stay and forward looking, they won’t make the mistakes other countries have,” he said, citing the lengthy delay in the implementation of the new Companies Act, a law that allows for larger foreign stakes in local companies, as “the best thing that could happen.”

He acknowledged that India-Myanmar trade “has been stagnant at this level for a while now. To push it beyond the current volume of 2 billion requires something different to be done.”

Yet, beyond the formal launching of the new India-Myanmar Chamber of Commerce — aimed at speeding up interaction between Indian and Myanmar businessmen and advising on tie-ups — the March 22 conclave did not feature announcements of new investments or major breakthroughs in deepening ties.

Indian Ambassador to Myanmar Vikram Misri said that work was nearing the “final stage” in two separate infrastructure projects being built on Indian government grants.

These are a section of the Trilateral Highway, running from northeast India across Myanmar to Thailand, and the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project, linking India’s eastern seaport of Kolkata to its landlocked northeastern states via ports, inland water terminals and roads in Myanmar’s Rakhine and Chin states.

Speaking separately to VOA, the ambassador said he expected both projects, conceived respectively in 2002 and 2008, to be finished in 2021. Meanwhile, agreements on the legal movement of people and vehicles across the land border are still under negotiation.

Protectionism

One obstacle to closer ties is the measures taken by India to prop up its own market. In August last year, when monsoon rains produced a bumper harvest in India, causing local prices to plummet, the government imposed quotas on Myanmar beans and pulses, which account for more than 75 percent of Myanmar’s exports to India.

Myanmar’s Deputy Commerce Minister said at the conclave, “Due to recent restrictions by quota from India, Myanmar farmers have suffered a lot this year. I’d like to ask the Government of India to increase the quotas for Myanmar pulses and beans.”

Ambassador Misri defended the move to VOA, saying, “It’s not protectionism for the sake of being protectionist. It is something that is in fact foreseen under the WTO mechanisms in terms of protecting against surges and adverse market conditions.”

“It would have been a calamitous situation for imports to have continued and for the market price to fall even further,” he said, adding, “The longer term answer to this is a diversification of the trade basket that Myanmar has with regard to India.”

Vikram Nehru, a professor​ at the John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, told VOA he was skeptical Indian investment in Myanmar would take off.

“India is an inward looking economy. It’s one of the most protected markets in the world. India​ is not part of the global or regional value chain, unlike China or Japan​,” he said.

Most Indian investments abroad, he explained, “are designed to tap into their host ​markets,” and the Myanmar market remains comparatively small and risky.

“Why would Indian firms be interested? They’d much rather set up in the Indian market of 1.3 billion people, with a per capita income that is higher than Myanmar’s,” he said.
…

A delegation of Indian CEOs visiting Myanmar and the launch of a new India-Myanmar business chamber in Yangon have sought to inject life into stagnant economic ties between the two neighboring countries.

Since 2011, when the military junta launched political and economic reforms, Myanmar’s future prosperity has been predicated on its strategic location between India and China, two giant economies and population centers.

Yet, while China has poured billions into mega infrastructure and energy projects and continues to dominate trade with Myanmar, flagship Indian infrastructure projects in western Myanmar have run behind schedule and over budget.

Bilateral trade — topped by beans and pulses from Myanmar and sugar and medicines from India — has hovered around the $2 billion mark since 2011, less than a fifth of the trade volume with China and falling well below targets set by a Joint Trade Committee. Though Myanmar’s fourth largest trade partner, India is only its eleventh largest investor.

At an India-Myanmar Business Conclave on March 22 in Yangon, Myanmar’s commercial capital, Indian company directors mingled with Myanmar business leaders while senior government officials mixed frank acknowledgements of underperformance with affirmations of Myanmar’s potential.

India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry C.R. Chaudhary said, “Myanmar is our gateway to Southeast Asia,” recalling two pillars of India’s foreign policy, Act East and Neighborhood First, and stressed the need to “remove trade barriers.”

Next at the podium, Myanmar’s Deputy Minister for Commerce Aung Htoo, talked of boosting India-Myanmar trade to 5 billion over the next three years, as part of a Myanmar government plan made in 2016 to triple all exports by 2020.

Taking time

Speaking to VOA on the sidelines, Gaurav Manghnani, the Myanmar country head of Credera, a trading and investment company with roots in Myanmar’s Indian diaspora, said he didn’t share in the growing pessimism of other foreign investors over the slow pace of economic reform in Myanmar.

“If they’re taking time to get the reforms underway and making sure these reforms are here to stay and forward looking, they won’t make the mistakes other countries have,” he said, citing the lengthy delay in the implementation of the new Companies Act, a law that allows for larger foreign stakes in local companies, as “the best thing that could happen.”

He acknowledged that India-Myanmar trade “has been stagnant at this level for a while now. To push it beyond the current volume of 2 billion requires something different to be done.”

Yet, beyond the formal launching of the new India-Myanmar Chamber of Commerce — aimed at speeding up interaction between Indian and Myanmar businessmen and advising on tie-ups — the March 22 conclave did not feature announcements of new investments or major breakthroughs in deepening ties.

Indian Ambassador to Myanmar Vikram Misri said that work was nearing the “final stage” in two separate infrastructure projects being built on Indian government grants.

These are a section of the Trilateral Highway, running from northeast India across Myanmar to Thailand, and the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project, linking India’s eastern seaport of Kolkata to its landlocked northeastern states via ports, inland water terminals and roads in Myanmar’s Rakhine and Chin states.

Speaking separately to VOA, the ambassador said he expected both projects, conceived respectively in 2002 and 2008, to be finished in 2021. Meanwhile, agreements on the legal movement of people and vehicles across the land border are still under negotiation.

Protectionism

One obstacle to closer ties is the measures taken by India to prop up its own market. In August last year, when monsoon rains produced a bumper harvest in India, causing local prices to plummet, the government imposed quotas on Myanmar beans and pulses, which account for more than 75 percent of Myanmar’s exports to India.

Myanmar’s Deputy Commerce Minister said at the conclave, “Due to recent restrictions by quota from India, Myanmar farmers have suffered a lot this year. I’d like to ask the Government of India to increase the quotas for Myanmar pulses and beans.”

Ambassador Misri defended the move to VOA, saying, “It’s not protectionism for the sake of being protectionist. It is something that is in fact foreseen under the WTO mechanisms in terms of protecting against surges and adverse market conditions.”

“It would have been a calamitous situation for imports to have continued and for the market price to fall even further,” he said, adding, “The longer term answer to this is a diversification of the trade basket that Myanmar has with regard to India.”

Vikram Nehru, a professor​ at the John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, told VOA he was skeptical Indian investment in Myanmar would take off.

“India is an inward looking economy. It’s one of the most protected markets in the world. India​ is not part of the global or regional value chain, unlike China or Japan​,” he said.

Most Indian investments abroad, he explained, “are designed to tap into their host ​markets,” and the Myanmar market remains comparatively small and risky.

“Why would Indian firms be interested? They’d much rather set up in the Indian market of 1.3 billion people, with a per capita income that is higher than Myanmar’s,” he said.
…

U.S. stocks surged Monday as fears eased about the possibility of an all-out trade war with China over competing tariff increases.

The closely watched Dow Jones Industrial Average of 30 key stocks jumped by more than 1.5 percentage point in New York in early-day trading and other indexes were also advancing sharply. Earlier, Asian stocks were mixed, while European indexes edged down for the day.

Global markets plummeted last week after U.S. President Donald Trump announced tariffs on $60 billion worth of Chinese imports in an effort to trim $100 billion off the $375 billion trade deficit the U.S. recorded last year with China. Beijing immediately vowed to retaliate with higher import duties on U.S. goods.

But there were signs Monday of easing of tensions between the world’s two biggest economies.

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro told CNBC that U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer are talking with Chinese officials about trade issues between the two countries. Mnuchin told Fox News he was “cautiously hopeful” that the U.S. would reach a deal to keep China from imposing tariffs on $50 billion worth of U.S. exports.

The Trump administration is asking China to lower tariffs on U.S. car exports and open its markets to U.S. financial service companies. Bloomberg News reported that Mnuchin called China’s Liu He to congratulate him on his appointment as China’s vice premier for economic policy and that the two officials discussed ways the two countries could mutually agree to close the wide trading gap between the two countries.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said China would be willing to meet with U.S. officials to work out the two countries’ trade issues, while China’s foreign ministry urged the U.S. to “stop economic intimidation” over tariffs.

While avoiding mention of the tariff dispute and last week’s sharp drop in stock prices, Trump boasted about the performance of the U.S. economy.

“The economy is looking really good,” he said in a Twitter comment. “It has been many years that we have seen these kind of numbers. The underlying strength of companies has perhaps never been better.”
…

U.S. stocks surged Monday as fears eased about the possibility of an all-out trade war with China over competing tariff increases.

The closely watched Dow Jones Industrial Average of 30 key stocks jumped by more than 1.5 percentage point in New York in early-day trading and other indexes were also advancing sharply. Earlier, Asian stocks were mixed, while European indexes edged down for the day.

Global markets plummeted last week after U.S. President Donald Trump announced tariffs on $60 billion worth of Chinese imports in an effort to trim $100 billion off the $375 billion trade deficit the U.S. recorded last year with China. Beijing immediately vowed to retaliate with higher import duties on U.S. goods.

But there were signs Monday of easing of tensions between the world’s two biggest economies.

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro told CNBC that U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer are talking with Chinese officials about trade issues between the two countries. Mnuchin told Fox News he was “cautiously hopeful” that the U.S. would reach a deal to keep China from imposing tariffs on $50 billion worth of U.S. exports.

The Trump administration is asking China to lower tariffs on U.S. car exports and open its markets to U.S. financial service companies. Bloomberg News reported that Mnuchin called China’s Liu He to congratulate him on his appointment as China’s vice premier for economic policy and that the two officials discussed ways the two countries could mutually agree to close the wide trading gap between the two countries.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said China would be willing to meet with U.S. officials to work out the two countries’ trade issues, while China’s foreign ministry urged the U.S. to “stop economic intimidation” over tariffs.

While avoiding mention of the tariff dispute and last week’s sharp drop in stock prices, Trump boasted about the performance of the U.S. economy.

“The economy is looking really good,” he said in a Twitter comment. “It has been many years that we have seen these kind of numbers. The underlying strength of companies has perhaps never been better.”
…

A senior Chinese official is warning that a trade war would hurt all sides and set off a “greater conflict.”

“A trade war serves the interests of none. It will only lead to serious consequences and negative impact,” Vice Premier Han Zheng said at a development forum in Beijing Sunday. “We believe trade protectionism, against the trend, will lead to nowhere.”

Han did not mention the United States or President Donald Trump by name, whose announcement of stiff tariffs on imported Chinese steel and aluminum was answered with tariffs and duties on a list of U.S. imports.

Han appealed to all global trading partners to “cooperate with each other like passengers in the same boat … make economic globalization more open, inclusive, balanced and beneficial for all.”

Fears of a trade war between the world’s two largest economies have sent world markets tumbling.

The United States has accused China of unfair trade practices, including intellectual property theft and dumping Chinese goods on the global marketplace to make U.S. goods appear more expensive.

China has denied the U.S. charges, and Vice Premier Liu He told U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin in a telephone call Saturday that China is ready to defend its interests.
…

A senior Chinese official is warning that a trade war would hurt all sides and set off a “greater conflict.”

“A trade war serves the interests of none. It will only lead to serious consequences and negative impact,” Vice Premier Han Zheng said at a development forum in Beijing Sunday. “We believe trade protectionism, against the trend, will lead to nowhere.”

Han did not mention the United States or President Donald Trump by name, whose announcement of stiff tariffs on imported Chinese steel and aluminum was answered with tariffs and duties on a list of U.S. imports.

Han appealed to all global trading partners to “cooperate with each other like passengers in the same boat … make economic globalization more open, inclusive, balanced and beneficial for all.”

Fears of a trade war between the world’s two largest economies have sent world markets tumbling.

The United States has accused China of unfair trade practices, including intellectual property theft and dumping Chinese goods on the global marketplace to make U.S. goods appear more expensive.

China has denied the U.S. charges, and Vice Premier Liu He told U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin in a telephone call Saturday that China is ready to defend its interests.
…

In Russia’s far north, the city of Vorkuta is slowly being reclaimed by the Arctic tundra. Its population has plummeted as the local coal mines have closed, and the very future of the city is in doubt. As Henry Ridgwell reports for VOA, Vorkuta’s fate reflects a wider population crisis across Russia’s far north as old Soviet industries have crumbled.
…

Tourist numbers in Indonesia swelled last year on the back of overseas advertising and infrastructure development. President Joko Widodo has said he wants to “create 10 tourist destinations like the island of Bali.” But the pleasing economic numbers also come with a social and environmental cost as rampant development threatens ecosystems and traditional livelihoods. Jack Hewson has this report.
…

Tourist numbers in Indonesia swelled last year on the back of overseas advertising and infrastructure development. President Joko Widodo has said he wants to “create 10 tourist destinations like the island of Bali.” But the pleasing economic numbers also come with a social and environmental cost as rampant development threatens ecosystems and traditional livelihoods. Jack Hewson has this report.
…

German business leaders are expressing concerns that President Donald Trump’s 25 percent tariff on imported steel could affect the auto industry in the South.

WABE Radio reports Mercedes-Benz USA this month opened its new North American headquarters in Sandy Springs, Georgia, for 1,000 employees.

The luxury car manufacturer is owned by Germany-based Daimler, but Mercedes-Benz USA CEO Dietmar Exler used the grand opening to remind the crowd of the brand’s U.S. presence.

German automakers in US 

That includes operations in South Carolina and in Alabama.

“We are now in the midst of construction of our own factory here, which will open doors in the fall in Charleston, South Carolina, and we’ll make all of the Sprinter vans for North America right here,” Exler said at the grand opening of its headquarters in Sandy Springs, Georgia, just north of Atlanta.

“Right next to me you have a member of the most successful SUV family, a GLE Coupe,” Exler said. “As you know, the GLE and the GLS are produced in Alabama. Last year, 280,000 cars were produced here not just for the U.S. market, but for markets all over the world.”

German car factories in the U.S. made more than 800,000 vehicles last year, and about half were sold overseas, according to the German Association of the Automotive Industry.

This month, Volkswagen of America Inc. announced plans to build a new five-passenger SUV at its factory in Chattanooga, Tennessee, where it manufactures other vehicles. Volkswagen AG is based in Wolfsburg, Germany.

“During my time as governor, I’ve watched Volkswagen Chattanooga flourish from a single vehicle producer, starting with the Passat, into what it is today — a thriving U.S. manufacturing operation that can produce three models, and counting,” said Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam said in a statement Monday, when plans were announced.

“We value Volkswagen as a committed partner, whose investments in the state have not only created new jobs, but have helped us build a skilled Tennessee workforce,” Haslam said.

Volkswagen Chattanooga also manufactures the Passat and the Atlas.

​Trump proclamation, industry concern

Trump signed a proclamation last week to impose a 25 percent tariff on steel from every country except Canada and Mexico. The hope is to boost steel manufacturing in the U.S.

The concern among some industry experts is that tariffs on steel could hurt companies like Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen and Porsche, all of which have significant operations in the South, said Stefan Mair of the Federation of German Industries in Berlin.

“Do you see the cars outside? There’s a lot of steel in there,” Mair said at the grand opening of the Georgia headquarters complex. “We think there will be some additional percentage points on the prices of cars.”

That price increase could be enough to stop people from buying new cars, said Lisa Cook, who teaches economics and international relations at Michigan State University.

“If consumers are price sensitive, and they are for many types of cars, this could cause people to postpone their decision to purchase a car,” Cook said.

US steel in cars

A little more than a quarter of all U.S. steel is used to make cars in this country, according to the German American Chamber of Commerce for the southern U.S.

“Approximately 25 percent of all steel is used in automotive manufacturing and 10 percent in machinery and equipment; both industries that German companies have heavily invested in the U.S. over the years,” said Stefanie Ziska, president of GACC South.

Making cars more expensive to build and export could hurt U.S. jobs, said Jeffrey Rosensweig, who teaches international business at Georgia’s Emory University.

“That would not only cost us jobs, it would hurt the U.S. and could potentially harm the U.S. trade balance,” Rosensweig said. “Just the opposite of what President Trump thinks he’s trying to achieve.”

He said the steel tariffs could trigger a trade war that would go beyond the auto industry.

“These foreign nations that we’re going to put these import taxes on, these tariffs, are not stupid,” Rosensweig said. “They’re going to retaliate against our exports, and they’re going to hit us where it hurts, which is often our farm exports.”
…

German business leaders are expressing concerns that President Donald Trump’s 25 percent tariff on imported steel could affect the auto industry in the South.

WABE Radio reports Mercedes-Benz USA this month opened its new North American headquarters in Sandy Springs, Georgia, for 1,000 employees.

The luxury car manufacturer is owned by Germany-based Daimler, but Mercedes-Benz USA CEO Dietmar Exler used the grand opening to remind the crowd of the brand’s U.S. presence.

German automakers in US 

That includes operations in South Carolina and in Alabama.

“We are now in the midst of construction of our own factory here, which will open doors in the fall in Charleston, South Carolina, and we’ll make all of the Sprinter vans for North America right here,” Exler said at the grand opening of its headquarters in Sandy Springs, Georgia, just north of Atlanta.

“Right next to me you have a member of the most successful SUV family, a GLE Coupe,” Exler said. “As you know, the GLE and the GLS are produced in Alabama. Last year, 280,000 cars were produced here not just for the U.S. market, but for markets all over the world.”

German car factories in the U.S. made more than 800,000 vehicles last year, and about half were sold overseas, according to the German Association of the Automotive Industry.

This month, Volkswagen of America Inc. announced plans to build a new five-passenger SUV at its factory in Chattanooga, Tennessee, where it manufactures other vehicles. Volkswagen AG is based in Wolfsburg, Germany.

“During my time as governor, I’ve watched Volkswagen Chattanooga flourish from a single vehicle producer, starting with the Passat, into what it is today — a thriving U.S. manufacturing operation that can produce three models, and counting,” said Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam said in a statement Monday, when plans were announced.

“We value Volkswagen as a committed partner, whose investments in the state have not only created new jobs, but have helped us build a skilled Tennessee workforce,” Haslam said.

Volkswagen Chattanooga also manufactures the Passat and the Atlas.

​Trump proclamation, industry concern

Trump signed a proclamation last week to impose a 25 percent tariff on steel from every country except Canada and Mexico. The hope is to boost steel manufacturing in the U.S.

The concern among some industry experts is that tariffs on steel could hurt companies like Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen and Porsche, all of which have significant operations in the South, said Stefan Mair of the Federation of German Industries in Berlin.

“Do you see the cars outside? There’s a lot of steel in there,” Mair said at the grand opening of the Georgia headquarters complex. “We think there will be some additional percentage points on the prices of cars.”

That price increase could be enough to stop people from buying new cars, said Lisa Cook, who teaches economics and international relations at Michigan State University.

“If consumers are price sensitive, and they are for many types of cars, this could cause people to postpone their decision to purchase a car,” Cook said.

US steel in cars

A little more than a quarter of all U.S. steel is used to make cars in this country, according to the German American Chamber of Commerce for the southern U.S.

“Approximately 25 percent of all steel is used in automotive manufacturing and 10 percent in machinery and equipment; both industries that German companies have heavily invested in the U.S. over the years,” said Stefanie Ziska, president of GACC South.

Making cars more expensive to build and export could hurt U.S. jobs, said Jeffrey Rosensweig, who teaches international business at Georgia’s Emory University.

“That would not only cost us jobs, it would hurt the U.S. and could potentially harm the U.S. trade balance,” Rosensweig said. “Just the opposite of what President Trump thinks he’s trying to achieve.”

He said the steel tariffs could trigger a trade war that would go beyond the auto industry.

“These foreign nations that we’re going to put these import taxes on, these tariffs, are not stupid,” Rosensweig said. “They’re going to retaliate against our exports, and they’re going to hit us where it hurts, which is often our farm exports.”
…

The United States has flouted trade rules with an inquiry into intellectual property and China will defend its interests, Vice Premier Liu He told U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin in a telephone call on Saturday, Chinese state media reported.

The call between Mnuchin and Liu, a confidante of President Xi Jinping, was the highest-level contact between the two governments since U.S. President Donald Trump announced plans for tariffs on up to $60 billion of Chinese goods on Thursday.

The deepening rift has sent a chill through financial markets and the corporate world as investors predicted dire consequences for the global economy should trade barriers start going up.

Several U.S. chief executives attending a high-profile forum in Beijing on Saturday, including BlackRock Inc’s Larry Fink and Apple Inc’s Tim Cook, urged restraint.

In his call with Mnuchin, Liu, a Harvard-trained economist, said China still hoped both sides would remain “rational” and work together to keep trade relations stable, the official Xinhua news agency reported.

U.S. officials say an eight-month probe under the 1974 U.S. Trade Act has found that China engages in unfair trade practices by forcing American investors to turn over key technologies to Chinese firms.

However, Liu said the investigation report “violates international trade rules and is beneficial to neither Chinese interests, U.S. interests nor global interests”, Xinhua cited him as saying.

In a statement on its website, the office of the U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said it had filed a request – at the direction of Trump – for consultations with China at the World Trade Organization to address “discriminatory technology licensing agreements.”

China’s commerce ministry expressed regret at the filing on Saturday, and said China had taken strong measures to protect the legal rights and interests of both domestic and foreign owners of intellectual property.

Counter moves

During a visit to Washington in early March, Liu had requested Washington set up a new economic dialogue mechanism, identify a point person on China issues, and deliver a list of demands.

The Trump administration responded by telling China to immediately shave $100 billion off its record $375 billion trade surplus with the United States. Beijing told Washington that U.S. export restrictions on some high-tech products are to blame.

“China has already prepared, and has the strength, to defend its national interests,” Liu said on Saturday.

According to an editorial by China’s state-run Global Times, it was Mnuchin who called Liu.

Firing off a warning shot, China on Friday declared plans to levy additional duties on up to $3 billion of U.S. imports in response to U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminium, imposed after a separate U.S. probe.

Zhang Zhaoxiang, senior vice president of China Minmetals Corp, said that while the state-owned mining group’s steel exports to the U.S. are tiny, the impact could come indirectly.

“China’s direct exports to the U.S. are not big. But there will be some impact due to our exports via the United States or indirect exports,” Zhang told reporters on the sidelines of the China Development Forum in Beijing on Saturday.

Global Times said Beijing was only just beginning to look at means to retaliate.

“We believe it is only part of China’s countermeasures, and soybeans and other U.S. farm products will be targeted,” the widely-read tabloid said in a Saturday editorial.

Wei Jianguo, vice chairman of Beijing-based think tank China Centre for International Economic Exchanges, told China Daily that Beijing could impose tariffs on more U.S. products, and is considering a second and even third list of targets.

Possible items include aircraft and chips, Wei, a former vice commerce minister, told the newspaper, adding that tourism could be a possible target.

Soybeans, autos, planes

The commerce ministry’s response had so far been “relatively weak,” respected former Chinese finance minister Lou Jiwei said at the forum.

“If I were in the government, I would probably hit soybeans first, then hit autos and airplanes,” said Lou, currently chairman of the National Council for Social Security Fund.

U.S. farm groups have long feared that China, which imports more than third of all U.S. soybeans, could slow purchases of agricultural products, heaping more pain on the struggling U.S. farm sector.

U.S. agricultural exports to China stood at $19.6 billion last year, with soybean shipments accounting for $12.4 billion.

Chinese penalties on U.S. soybeans will especially hurt Iowa, a state that backed Trump in the 2016 presidential elections.

Boeing jets have also been often cited as a potential target by China.

China and the U.S. had benefitted by globalization, Blackrock’s Larry Fink said at the forum.

“I believe that a dialogue and maybe some adjustments in trade and trade policy can be in order. It does not need to be done publicly; it can be done privately,” he said.

Apple’s Tim Cook called for “calm heads” amid the dispute.

The sparring has cast a spotlight on hardware makers such as Apple, which assemble the majority of their products in China for export to other countries.

Electrical goods and tech are the largest U.S. import item from China.

Some economists say higher U.S. tariffs will lead to higher costs and ultimately hurt U.S. consumers, while restrictions on Chinese investments could take away jobs in America.

“I don’t think local governments in the United States and President Trump hope to see U.S. workers losing their jobs,” Sun Yongcai, general manager at Chinese railway firm CRRS Corp, which has two U.S. production plants, said at the forum.

 
…

H. Wayne Huizenga, a college dropout who built a business empire that included Blockbuster Entertainment, AutoNation and three professional sports franchises, has died. He was 80.

Huizenga died Thursday night at his home, said Valerie Hinkell, a longtime assistant. The cause was cancer, said Bob Henninger, executive vice president of Huizenga Holdings.

Starting with a single garbage truck in 1968, Huizenga built Waste Management Inc. into a Fortune 500 company. He purchased independent sanitation engineering companies, and by the time he took the company public in 1972, he had completed the acquisition of 133 small-time haulers. By 1983, Waste Management was the largest waste disposal company in the United States.

The business model worked again with Blockbuster Video, which he started in 1985 and built into the leading movie rental chain nine years later. In 1996, he formed AutoNation and built it into a Fortune 500 company.

Sports team owner

Huizenga was founding owner of baseball’s Florida Marlins and the NHL’s Florida Panthers — expansion teams that played their first games in 1993. He bought the NFL’s Miami Dolphins and their stadium for $168 million in 1994 from the children of founder Joe Robbie but had sold all three teams by 2009.

“Wayne Huizenga was a seminal figure in the cultural history of South Florida,” current Dolphins owner Stephen Ross said in a statement. “He completely changed the landscape of the region’s sports scene. … Sports fans throughout the region owe him a debt of thanks.”

The Marlins won the 1997 World Series, and the Panthers reached the Stanley Cup Finals in 1996, but Huizenga’s beloved Dolphins never reached a Super Bowl while he owned the team.

“If I have one disappointment, the disappointment would be that we did not bring a championship home,” Huizenga said shortly after he sold the Dolphins to Ross. “It’s something we failed to do.”

Fan favorite — for a time

Huizenga earned an almost cultlike following among business investors who watched him build Blockbuster Entertainment into the leading video rental chain by snapping up competitors. He cracked Forbes’ list of the 100 richest Americans, becoming chairman of Republic Services, one of the nation’s top waste management companies, and AutoNation, the nation’s largest automotive retailer. In 2013, Forbes estimated his wealth at $2.5 billion.

For a time, Huizenga was also a favorite with South Florida sports fans, drawing cheers and autograph seekers in public. The crowd roared when he danced the hokey pokey on the field during an early Marlins game. He went on a spending spree to build a veteran team that won the World Series in the franchise’s fifth year.

But his popularity plummeted when he ordered the roster dismantled after that season. He was frustrated by poor attendance and his failure to swing a deal for a new ballpark built with taxpayer money.

Many South Florida fans never forgave him for breaking up the championship team. Huizenga drew boos when introduced at Dolphins quarterback Dan Marino’s retirement celebration in 2000 and kept a lower public profile after that.

In 2009, Huizenga said he regretted ordering the Marlins’ payroll purge.

“We lost $34 million the year we won the World Series, and I just said, ‘You know what, I’m not going to do that,’” Huizenga said. “If I had it to do over again, I’d say, ‘OK, we’ll go one more year.’”

He sold the Marlins in 1999 to John Henry, and sold the Panthers in 2001, unhappy with rising NHL player salaries and the stock price for the team’s public company.

Dolphins man

Huizenga’s first sports love was the Dolphins; he had been a season-ticket holder since their first season in 1966. But he fared better in the NFL as a businessman than as a sports fan.

He turned a nifty profit by selling the Dolphins and their stadium for $1.1 billion, nearly seven times what he paid to become sole owner. But he knew the bottom line in the NFL is championships, and his Dolphins perennially came up short.

Huizenga earned a reputation as a hands-off owner and won raves from many loyal employees, even though he made six coaching changes. He eased Pro Football Hall of Famer Don Shula into retirement in early 1996, and Jimmy Johnson, Dave Wannstedt, interim coach Jim Bates, Nick Saban, Cam Cameron and Tony Sparano followed as coach.

Johnson tweeted: “A great man, one of the nicest individuals I have ever known, Wayne Huizenga passed away. RIP.”

Garbage business

Harry Wayne Huizenga was born in the Chicago suburbs on Dec. 29, 1937, to a family of garbage haulers. He began his business career in Pompano Beach in 1962, driving a garbage truck from 2 a.m. to noon each day for $500 a month.

Huizenga was a five-time recipient of Financial World magazine’s “CEO of the Year” award, and was the Ernst & Young “2005 World Entrepreneur of the Year.”

Regarding his business acumen, Huizenga said: “You just have to be in the right place at the right time. It can only happen in America.”

In 1960, he married Joyce VanderWagon. Together they had two children, Wayne Jr. and Scott. They divorced in 1966. Wayne married his second wife, Marti Goldsby, in 1972. She died in 2017.
…

H. Wayne Huizenga, a college dropout who built a business empire that included Blockbuster Entertainment, AutoNation and three professional sports franchises, has died. He was 80.

Huizenga died Thursday night at his home, said Valerie Hinkell, a longtime assistant. The cause was cancer, said Bob Henninger, executive vice president of Huizenga Holdings.

Starting with a single garbage truck in 1968, Huizenga built Waste Management Inc. into a Fortune 500 company. He purchased independent sanitation engineering companies, and by the time he took the company public in 1972, he had completed the acquisition of 133 small-time haulers. By 1983, Waste Management was the largest waste disposal company in the United States.

The business model worked again with Blockbuster Video, which he started in 1985 and built into the leading movie rental chain nine years later. In 1996, he formed AutoNation and built it into a Fortune 500 company.

Sports team owner

Huizenga was founding owner of baseball’s Florida Marlins and the NHL’s Florida Panthers — expansion teams that played their first games in 1993. He bought the NFL’s Miami Dolphins and their stadium for $168 million in 1994 from the children of founder Joe Robbie but had sold all three teams by 2009.

“Wayne Huizenga was a seminal figure in the cultural history of South Florida,” current Dolphins owner Stephen Ross said in a statement. “He completely changed the landscape of the region’s sports scene. … Sports fans throughout the region owe him a debt of thanks.”

The Marlins won the 1997 World Series, and the Panthers reached the Stanley Cup Finals in 1996, but Huizenga’s beloved Dolphins never reached a Super Bowl while he owned the team.

“If I have one disappointment, the disappointment would be that we did not bring a championship home,” Huizenga said shortly after he sold the Dolphins to Ross. “It’s something we failed to do.”

Fan favorite — for a time

Huizenga earned an almost cultlike following among business investors who watched him build Blockbuster Entertainment into the leading video rental chain by snapping up competitors. He cracked Forbes’ list of the 100 richest Americans, becoming chairman of Republic Services, one of the nation’s top waste management companies, and AutoNation, the nation’s largest automotive retailer. In 2013, Forbes estimated his wealth at $2.5 billion.

For a time, Huizenga was also a favorite with South Florida sports fans, drawing cheers and autograph seekers in public. The crowd roared when he danced the hokey pokey on the field during an early Marlins game. He went on a spending spree to build a veteran team that won the World Series in the franchise’s fifth year.

But his popularity plummeted when he ordered the roster dismantled after that season. He was frustrated by poor attendance and his failure to swing a deal for a new ballpark built with taxpayer money.

Many South Florida fans never forgave him for breaking up the championship team. Huizenga drew boos when introduced at Dolphins quarterback Dan Marino’s retirement celebration in 2000 and kept a lower public profile after that.

In 2009, Huizenga said he regretted ordering the Marlins’ payroll purge.

“We lost $34 million the year we won the World Series, and I just said, ‘You know what, I’m not going to do that,’” Huizenga said. “If I had it to do over again, I’d say, ‘OK, we’ll go one more year.’”

He sold the Marlins in 1999 to John Henry, and sold the Panthers in 2001, unhappy with rising NHL player salaries and the stock price for the team’s public company.

Dolphins man

Huizenga’s first sports love was the Dolphins; he had been a season-ticket holder since their first season in 1966. But he fared better in the NFL as a businessman than as a sports fan.

He turned a nifty profit by selling the Dolphins and their stadium for $1.1 billion, nearly seven times what he paid to become sole owner. But he knew the bottom line in the NFL is championships, and his Dolphins perennially came up short.

Huizenga earned a reputation as a hands-off owner and won raves from many loyal employees, even though he made six coaching changes. He eased Pro Football Hall of Famer Don Shula into retirement in early 1996, and Jimmy Johnson, Dave Wannstedt, interim coach Jim Bates, Nick Saban, Cam Cameron and Tony Sparano followed as coach.

Johnson tweeted: “A great man, one of the nicest individuals I have ever known, Wayne Huizenga passed away. RIP.”

Garbage business

Harry Wayne Huizenga was born in the Chicago suburbs on Dec. 29, 1937, to a family of garbage haulers. He began his business career in Pompano Beach in 1962, driving a garbage truck from 2 a.m. to noon each day for $500 a month.

Huizenga was a five-time recipient of Financial World magazine’s “CEO of the Year” award, and was the Ernst & Young “2005 World Entrepreneur of the Year.”

Regarding his business acumen, Huizenga said: “You just have to be in the right place at the right time. It can only happen in America.”

In 1960, he married Joyce VanderWagon. Together they had two children, Wayne Jr. and Scott. They divorced in 1966. Wayne married his second wife, Marti Goldsby, in 1972. She died in 2017.
…

Randy Poskin, a soybean farmer in rural Illinois, voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. But ask him now he feels about that decision, and you get a tepid response.

“I’m not sure,” Poskin said.

Like many farmers in the Midwest, Poskin is concerned about getting caught in the middle of a trade war, as Trump ramps up economic pressure on China.

Those fears were heightened after Trump announced plans Thursday to impose tariffs on as much as $60 billion worth of Chinese imports.

“I’m fearful they will retaliate on those tariffs,” Poskin said. “Soybean exports, wheat, poultry, chicken, beef — [there are] any number of products that we export to their country that they could retaliate with.”

The announcement has unnerved many in Trump’s base of supporters in U.S. agriculture. The trade tensions have also rattled global markets, which until recently had performed strongly.

Intellectual property theft

Trump’s tariff decision was meant to punish Chinese companies that benefit from unfair access to U.S. technology.

U.S. businesses have long bristled at Beijing’s requirement that they transfer technology to Chinese companies as a condition of entering the Chinese market. U.S. businesses have also had their technology stolen through cyberattacks.

“We have a tremendous intellectual property theft situation going on,” Trump said during the signing ceremony Thursday.

Some U.S. companies in China cheered the move and suggested that concerns about a trade war were overblown.

William Zarit, chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, dismissed the “hair on fire” concern that Trump’s proposed moves would hurt the global economy.

“That the U.S. is willing to risk these disruptions indicates how serious the U.S. administration finds China’s forced technology transfer, cybertheft and discriminatory industrial policies,” he said in a statement to VOA.

Zarit pointed to a recent survey suggesting members of his organization wanted the White House to “advocate more strongly for a level playing field and for reciprocal treatment to improve market access” in China.

But it’s not yet clear whether Trump’s words will translate into that kind of action. That’s in part because the president’s move on Thursday did not actually implement tariffs.

Delayed move

Instead, Trump gave the U.S. trade representative 15 days to identify specific Chinese goods that will be subject to the penalties. There will then be a 30-day window for public comment. That means any move is at least 45 days away.

Trump took a similar approach to steel and aluminum tariffs earlier this month. Although the White House initially leaked news that there would be a universal tax on all steel and aluminum imports, at least six countries and the European Union have since received exemptions.

“You have announcements with a lot of big, very aggressive, very dramatic rhetoric, but when it comes time to actually implement the policy, it’s much more toned down, much more in line with historical U.S. trade enforcement policy,” said Geoffrey Gertz of the Brookings Institution.

Such a negotiating tactic often gets Trump the “tough on trade” headlines that he desires, even while reducing the immediate risk of starting a trade war.

But there are still uncertainties. For instance, it still isn’t clear how China will respond to Trump’s protectionist measures.

China’s response

On Friday, China blasted Trump’s move but did little in the way of countermeasures.

“If somebody imposes a trade war on China, we’ll fight to the end,” Cui Tiankai, the Chinese ambassador to Washington, said on state TV.

China also released a list of potential tariffs on $3 billion worth of U.S. goods, including pork, fruit, wine, steel pipes and other products.

“China responded strong verbally but soft in actual countermeasures,” said Allan Von Mehren, a China analyst at the Copenhagen-based Danske Bank.

“This is a very measured reaction, as $3 billion is a drop in the ocean out of the $131 billion the U.S. exports to China every year,” he said.

However, China has signaled it may impose more significant measures should Trump follow through with his tariffs.

Should China retaliate further, a prime target is soybean farmers like Poskin, who are uniquely vulnerable to Chinese retaliation.

One in every three rows of U.S. soybeans is exported to China, according to the American Soybean Association.

That vulnerability is leaving Poskin to wonder whether he did the right thing in supporting Trump.

“I mean, I do like the regulation side of things, the way he’s backing things off,” Poskin said. “But just the same, these areas of trade are very important to agriculture. We can’t interrupt this.”
…

Randy Poskin, a soybean farmer in rural Illinois, voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. But ask him now he feels about that decision, and you get a tepid response.

“I’m not sure,” Poskin said.

Like many farmers in the Midwest, Poskin is concerned about getting caught in the middle of a trade war, as Trump ramps up economic pressure on China.

Those fears were heightened after Trump announced plans Thursday to impose tariffs on as much as $60 billion worth of Chinese imports.

“I’m fearful they will retaliate on those tariffs,” Poskin said. “Soybean exports, wheat, poultry, chicken, beef — [there are] any number of products that we export to their country that they could retaliate with.”

The announcement has unnerved many in Trump’s base of supporters in U.S. agriculture. The trade tensions have also rattled global markets, which until recently had performed strongly.

Intellectual property theft

Trump’s tariff decision was meant to punish Chinese companies that benefit from unfair access to U.S. technology.

U.S. businesses have long bristled at Beijing’s requirement that they transfer technology to Chinese companies as a condition of entering the Chinese market. U.S. businesses have also had their technology stolen through cyberattacks.

“We have a tremendous intellectual property theft situation going on,” Trump said during the signing ceremony Thursday.

Some U.S. companies in China cheered the move and suggested that concerns about a trade war were overblown.

William Zarit, chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, dismissed the “hair on fire” concern that Trump’s proposed moves would hurt the global economy.

“That the U.S. is willing to risk these disruptions indicates how serious the U.S. administration finds China’s forced technology transfer, cybertheft and discriminatory industrial policies,” he said in a statement to VOA.

Zarit pointed to a recent survey suggesting members of his organization wanted the White House to “advocate more strongly for a level playing field and for reciprocal treatment to improve market access” in China.

But it’s not yet clear whether Trump’s words will translate into that kind of action. That’s in part because the president’s move on Thursday did not actually implement tariffs.

Delayed move

Instead, Trump gave the U.S. trade representative 15 days to identify specific Chinese goods that will be subject to the penalties. There will then be a 30-day window for public comment. That means any move is at least 45 days away.

Trump took a similar approach to steel and aluminum tariffs earlier this month. Although the White House initially leaked news that there would be a universal tax on all steel and aluminum imports, at least six countries and the European Union have since received exemptions.

“You have announcements with a lot of big, very aggressive, very dramatic rhetoric, but when it comes time to actually implement the policy, it’s much more toned down, much more in line with historical U.S. trade enforcement policy,” said Geoffrey Gertz of the Brookings Institution.

Such a negotiating tactic often gets Trump the “tough on trade” headlines that he desires, even while reducing the immediate risk of starting a trade war.

But there are still uncertainties. For instance, it still isn’t clear how China will respond to Trump’s protectionist measures.

China’s response

On Friday, China blasted Trump’s move but did little in the way of countermeasures.

“If somebody imposes a trade war on China, we’ll fight to the end,” Cui Tiankai, the Chinese ambassador to Washington, said on state TV.

China also released a list of potential tariffs on $3 billion worth of U.S. goods, including pork, fruit, wine, steel pipes and other products.

“China responded strong verbally but soft in actual countermeasures,” said Allan Von Mehren, a China analyst at the Copenhagen-based Danske Bank.

“This is a very measured reaction, as $3 billion is a drop in the ocean out of the $131 billion the U.S. exports to China every year,” he said.

However, China has signaled it may impose more significant measures should Trump follow through with his tariffs.

Should China retaliate further, a prime target is soybean farmers like Poskin, who are uniquely vulnerable to Chinese retaliation.

One in every three rows of U.S. soybeans is exported to China, according to the American Soybean Association.

That vulnerability is leaving Poskin to wonder whether he did the right thing in supporting Trump.

“I mean, I do like the regulation side of things, the way he’s backing things off,” Poskin said. “But just the same, these areas of trade are very important to agriculture. We can’t interrupt this.”
…