Yu Haiyang: Exclamation That "Made In China" Erode The US Arms Is "Nothing New".

In April 21st, the Wall Street journal published a headline sensational article: "

US media "

It's not surprising that the propaganda of "wolf coming" from the US mainstream media is so new.

Disputes about free trade and trade protection have existed since the beginning of the national economy. They have been arguing for hundreds of years, and it is not easy to bring forth new ideas in their views.

In fact, after searching the world economic history, we can not find a pure free trade fan or a closed economy of one hundred percent.

Almost every country has the tendency to understand the principle of free trade according to its own interests.

The choice to open and force the other party to open is not a hidden rule, but a clear rule.

Therefore, we are not surprised that the US military restrictions on "made in China" procurement, but the United States Manufacturing Association, the military and research institutions pretending to be "very naive, very urgent" appearance.

Is the "made in China" and the US arms closer in recent years? The answer is yes.

In addition to the striking hardware machinery in the military housing construction project of Elson air force base, the military supplies, military boots, goggles, umbrellas and other basic materials required by the US Army have been purchased from China on a large scale.

But the relationship between supply and demand is purely business.

The US army bid for the bidding of suppliers from all over the world. That's how the international market works.

It is the market force that the Chinese win the bid. The Americans have neither suffered anything, nor can they have a sole interest in the "made in China" situation.

The reason why Chinese goods are listed is good quality and low price and good after-sales service.

So, is the relationship between "made in China" and the US arms really antagonistic to the national security of the United States? The answer is No.

The so-called "experts" who accused China of relying on Chinese materials for relying on China were also unprofessional.

Only the monopolistic supply that can not find the substitute will cause the buyer to rely rigidly. And only those countries that are able to produce all their own can not rely on them.

The Chinese goods purchased by the US Army have neither the technical threshold nor the potential of monopoly. If Americans want to produce their own products, they will be able to produce them immediately.

Everyone only produces what he is good at producing. This is the foundation of globalization and the inevitable outcome of the division of labor in the international industrial chain.

Taking a handful of hardware on the market and saying "China threat", the US media committed common sense mistakes.

Secretly operated by the name of patriotism

Since it is absurd to know, what is the point of the "lobby of China" made by the lobby group and the munitions Department of the United States? There are two reasons for this.

First of all, the military sector has always been a strong bastion of conservative sentiment and domestic goods complex.

The pparency of defense spending is also closely related to the operation of political forces.

They do not like public bidding and prefer monopoly purchases under various cheap patriotic names.

This will not only cultivate Pro military forces in the economic circle, but also help to defraud more military funds.

Therefore, the US military is most willing to advocate which hostile forces are strong, and such organizations as the manufacturing association are also happy to accompany them.

In the name of patriotic and patriotic countries, we are engaged in black box operations. We all enjoy fame and wealth, so why not? Therefore, since the Bailey amendment in 1941, the US military and military businessmen have woven a series of obstacles to guarantee their vested interests.

As for the second reason, that is, the "China threat" is too much to say.

It takes a long time to get so many military expenses from Congress every year.

Now the whole world is Chinese products, and it is both vivid and vivid.

Although Chinese goods are not allowed to buy more expensive goods from other countries, the US Army is still in the process of calculating military accounts.

It is a pity that the American soldiers at the front of the army do not buy Chinese goods collectively, and soldiers have to buy light and durable Chinese mountaineering boots at their own expense.

Such scenes are frequently seen in the photographs taken by frontline reporters in Afghanistan and Iraq. They also witness the irresistible nature of market rules.