China's economic strategy is characterized by a persistent 'economics of denial,' prioritizing massive state-directed investment in advanced technology over addressing weak domestic consumption. This approach is rooted in a flawed belief that controlling physical capital will automatically generate productivity and wage growth, ignoring the structural imbalance where domestic demand consistently falls short of supply. This overinvestment and underconsumption model is unsustainable. Consequently, Beijing's policies will continue to generate global deflationary pressures and escalating trade friction, necessitating a fundamental pivot toward consumption-led growth for long-term stability.
Competition policy conference 2026
English Summary
Competition policy is undergoing radical transformation due to geopolitical fragmentation, forcing regulators in major economies to integrate market governance with national security concerns. Key jurisdictions are tightening FDI screening and merger controls based on alliance politics, while also deploying new tools to regulate AI-enabled anti-competitive practices. This blurring of lines between industrial strategy and competition law challenges traditional non-discrimination norms. Policymakers must adapt by balancing innovation needs against strategic geopolitical risks in an increasingly fragmented global regulatory landscape.
中文摘要
由於地緣政治的碎片化，競爭政策正在經歷徹底轉型，迫使主要經濟體的監管機構將市場治理與國家安全考量相結合。關鍵司法管轄區正基於聯盟政治收緊對外國直接投資（FDI）篩查和合併管制，同時也部署了新的工具來規範人工智慧賦能的反競爭行為。這種工業戰略與競爭法之間界線的模糊化，挑戰了傳統的非歧視規範。政策制定者必須適應變化，在日益碎片化的全球監管格局中，平衡創新需求與戰略地緣政治風險。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The U.S. is drastically reducing core funding to multilateral institutions, withdrawing from numerous bodies due to perceived misalignment with national interests. While multilateral channels offer critical advantages—such as pooling resources for global public goods and managing risk in fragile settings—the U.S.'s funding remains heavily 'earmarked,' which effectively 'bilateralizes' the system and undermines shared burden-sharing. This practice, coupled with deep cuts, diminishes the multilateral system's effectiveness and efficiency, particularly in humanitarian aid. Policy recommendations suggest the U.S. must adopt a systematic, published strategy for aid channel choice and shift from restrictive project-level earmarking to broader thematic funding to restore global cooperation.
-
3.
The article analyzes the deep ideological split within the Democratic Party regarding the future of U.S. foreign policy, pitting centrists against progressives. Centrists generally advocate for restoring a reformed U.S.-led international order and strengthening alliances, while progressives argue for a multipolar world that prioritizes transnational threats like climate change and AI over geopolitical competition. This division is most pronounced in the Middle East, where centrists push for greater pressure on Israel and a regional settlement, a shift largely welcomed by progressives. The core finding is that these internal debates threaten to consume a future administration with indecision, making it difficult for the U.S. to project a coherent and unified global strategy.
-
4.
The Brookings report argues that the U.S.'s historical 'exorbitant privilege'—its ability to issue debt cheaply—is steadily eroding. Key evidence shows a decline in the U.S. convenience yield relative to G10 peers, a trend linked to rising domestic debt and global fiscal stress. While recent global interest rate hikes have temporarily improved the U.S.'s relative borrowing appeal, the underlying loss of cheap credit suggests potential future higher borrowing costs for the government and poses long-term risks to the dollar's status as a reserve currency.
-
5.
Voter sentiment overwhelmingly rejects the current tariff status quo, viewing tariffs as a significant source of inflation and economic harm. The article argues that Democrats must capitalize on this political momentum by fundamentally reforming or repealing overly broad and anachronistic trade statutes (Sections 232, 301, and 338). Strategically, Congress should repeal outdated provisions and reform remaining authorities to narrow definitions and mandate explicit congressional approval for any future tariff actions. This policy shift aims to curb unilateral presidential power and restore legislative control over U.S. trade policy.