Be fair to State enterprises
Updated: 2012-04-12 13:25
Some developed countries are seeking to exclude "Made in China".
A group called the Alliance for American Manufacturing has asked Congress to legislate to keep China out of infrastructure projects in the United States, and Australia recently banned Huawei Technologies from bidding for Australia's national broadband network.
A series of similar incidents show that when it comes to economic and trade frictions, it is China's State-owned enterprises and State-holding companies that are increasingly bearing the brunt of protectionism.
Not so long ago, the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission held a hearing on China's State-owned enterprises, to discuss what the US could do to offset the competitive pressures brought by Chinese enterprises to American manufacturing.
Yet since reform and opening-up, especially the decade after China's accession to the WTO, Chinese State enterprises have undergone a profound transition toward diversification and many went public, some of them are listed in the US.
But Huawei Technologies is a typical Chinese private enterprise while Zhenhua Heavy Industry, a State-holding enterprise, won the bidding of a US bay bridge building via the tendering process.
China does not encourage monopolies and strives to ensure a fair business environment for all market players. China's Anti-Monopoly Law endows no privilege to State-owned enterprises and they must follow market rules.
China's robust growth, to which Chinese State-owned enterprises have made undeniable contributions, has helped the world economy recover from the aftershocks of the international financial crisis.
Statistics show that more than 70 percent of the world's oil resources are controlled by State-owned enterprises in various countries. It is clearly untenable to reject Chinese State enterprises under the color of the alleged "non-market" nature.
State-owned enterprises' access to other countries is in fact a practice of investment and trade, blocking it is not only inconsistent with the principle of free trade, but also contrary to the general trend of economic globalization.