President Obama promised the American people in the 2008 election that he would be tough on China, especially regarding currency manipulation. However his first two years in office, with a majority in both houses of Congress, Obama responded with negotiations that resulted in fairly little change on foreign policy with China. Just as Obama promised four years ago, Romney now promises change for America. In a stump speech in Ohio, he was quoted: "On Day One, I'll declare China a currency manipulator." Although Romney pledges to "crack down" on China, it is an unlikely promise from someone who invested in China through the private equity firm Bain Capital - a point that Obama has not been shy to point out to the public.
So why do these candidates insist on posing a strong front on U.S.-China relations? Why are their words so strong, yet their actions so weak? Americans know that relationship between the United States and China will play an important role in their economy. And what it comes down to is the candidates appealing to what the American public wants to hear. Keeping China on a tight leash sounds like a sure fire way to help the economy grow - though both candidates know that in reality America can not afford to jeopardize their economic relationship with China. Over the past decade, our economy has become inevitably intertwined with the Chinese economy, creating an unyielding relationship. Sticks and stones may win votes, but this U.S.-China relationship is unlikely to change with the next administration.
Rate this posting:
{[['
']]}
']]}