environmental standards

China Might Halt Rare Earth Exports

by Brian McGraw on October 19, 2010

in Trade

The New York Times reports: “China Said to Halt Some Mineral Shipments.”

HONG KONG — China, which has been blocking shipments of crucial minerals to Japan for the last month, has now quietly halted shipments of some of those same materials to the United States and Europe, three industry officials said on Tuesday.

The Chinese action, involving rare earth minerals that are crucial to manufacturing many advanced products, seems certain to further ratchet up already rising trade and currency tensions with the West. Until recently, China typically sought quick and quiet accommodations on trade issues. But the interruption in rare earth supplies is the latest sign from Beijing that Chinese officials are willing to use their growing economic muscle.

China had previously signaled that they were going to be keeping increasing amounts of the rare earths (a misnomer, they are abundant just expensive to refine), though halting exports is quite different. Might this be retaliation for the continued attacks politicians have been making towards China, the currency accusations and more recently the investigation over illegal green-energy subsidies?

The irony is that the United States used to be the largest producer of rare earths in the world, at the Mountain Pass rare earth mine in California. Wikipedia claims that the mine closed due to China’s entrance into the market (and low environmental standards, etc.), though an article featuring the owner of Molycorp Minerals (the company that owns the mine) indicates that the mine closed in 2002 because of little demand for rare earths and environmental concerns. The mine is expected to re-open in 2011.

However this plays out, the U.S. might want to reconsider the ramifications of continually pushing an economy we are interdependent on.

Perspective on trade in the Obama Administration

by Fran Smith on November 6, 2008

in International, Politics as Usual, Trade

During the presidential primaries and in the campaigns, there was a lot of rhetoric about the need for “fair” trade instead of free trade. Candidates were in a populist mode, catering to critical manufacturing states that have lost jobs and serving up trade as the villain.

Now that Senator Barack Obama is the President-elect, there is renewed speculation on what path his administration will take on international trade. Will he make good on his campaign rhetoric that echoed the Democratic platform’s call for renegotiation of trade agreements to include even more stringent labor and environmental standards? Will he continue to hold up pending trade agreements with close U.S. allies? Will he embrace isolationism and protectionism or adapt to geopolitical realities?

In a new C:\Spin publication, I provide some perspective on the outlook for trade in the Obama Administration. I opine that President Obama will face enormous pressure to make good on some of his campaign promises on trade.  But, with his top-notch economic advisers, he may pull back from drastic anti-trade actions that would harm the fragile economy and alienate U.S. allies and trading partners.

O’Grady hits Obama’s trade policy

by Fran Smith on October 29, 2008

in Agriculture, Environment, International, Trade

More good reads in the WSJ today.  Mary Anastasia O’Grady in her column in the Wall Street Journal provides a sharp contrast between the two presidential candidates in their approach to international trade.

As O’Grady notes, Senator Obama views trade — not as an economic artivity — but as a tool to pursue other social goals, such as labor and environmental standards.

Mr. Obama says he would change the way the U.S. negotiates trade agreements. Instead of focusing mainly on removing barriers to the movement of goods and services, he would use the agreements “to spread good labor and environmental standards” to the rest of the world. He voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement (Cafta) in 2006 and says he will oppose others that do not have strong-enough labor and environmental provisions.

On cutting agricultural support, O’Grady also points out that Obama co-signed a letter to President Bush asking him not to “cut farm subsidies as part of Doha.” That, as many know, was a major contentious issue that helped doom progress on the Doha Round agenda.

Here and here are some articles and op-eds that CEI has published about the value of more open trade. Fred Smith just this week debated a senior advisor to the Obama campaign, where trade was a major issue. Here’s where you can listen to an audio recording: “SAIS Hosted Debate on Economic Policy Agenda for New U.S. President on October 27.”